![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
same_differenceFor a few different reasons I've been thinking about games, why I play them and what I enjoy. I suppose I pretty much have four big hobbies larping, gaming, M:tG and reading. Of them three are games you play, and all four will easily eat up several hours at a time. Now as a result of my tendency to read M:tG articles I've read a fair amount of game theory* some very specific, some much more general, as well as the odd article on game theory on the net when they've linked to (typically off forums relating to games I play). Specifically and as inspired by a few sources about the obsession with numbers, and in a related way completion.
The primary thing that got me thinking about this is a website (ThotMarket), which was the set up with the aim of becoming something like digg where by websites get ranked by popularity, except this was based on a stock market model. You created a thot for your website using your given starting virtual capital to allocate shares, as people buy shares in your thot (presumably because they have an interest in, or link to, your website) it increases in value and is displayed higher up with the lists. You then earn more money (to increase the number of share in your thot, make a new thot or buy shares in other thots) as a combination of interest on your cash reserves, dividends from shares you own, and dividends on sales of shares of thots you control. Your value as a total of the value of your thots and capital is displayed.
The thing is people have been playing it like a game, and more importantly gaming the system. When your 'score' is your net worth, and even successfully performing a hostile take over has been referred to 'levelling up'. It's entirely possible with clever choices to raise a thot from a value of $0.01 to $800 a share in a day, and once you have broken a certain capital value, the simple act of creating several thousand or several million $0.01 shares on a thot will guarantee an enormous return in investment. There are people with net worth's in the trillions, there is balancing force on the site where capital is taxed down to $1000000001, which merely results in people creating more thots to protect their capital (earning yet more money). There are unsurprisingly a fair amount of thots for websites like 'asdfgl' or 'www.' as people are literally gaming a website ranking page to create bigger numbers, while complaining about the enormous windfall taxes and the like.
The developers response on his blog:
"One guy was complaining about the unfairness of the ‘Massive Windfall Tax’ and how such a function defeated the whole purpose of the game. Presumably the purpose of the game is to make as much fake money as possible. This is absolutely fascinating to me because I had never thought of ThotMarket as a game. I wonder how many users see it that way. Is it a game? That’s kind of like asking ‘Is this painting really art?’ I’m sure there is no answer, it’s just something interesting to think about."
The responses to this on the forums I've seen, can be roughly summed up as 'Of course it is, you start with a small number and through actions can have a bigger one'. It's that fascination of generating big numbers that underpins so many games from bored school children playing calculator wars***** to almost all games up to a certain era having a score feature, to even all those RPG's where you can do thousands of damage to monsters with millions of hit points. Really what is levelling up after all than an increase in numbers.
Then there's completion the need to do everything, find everything, kill everything. I spent an hour and a half last night killing a monster will nearly 9 million hit points on FF12 (I've got back into actually playing it as a result of![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
ailsa_chan), in terms of the gameplay mechanics I was able to do so while roughly holding a conversation with someone else. It was clear after about the first 5-10% that victory was inevitable it was merely a matter of time, so the boss health didn't matter. Why did it I do it? Completion. Did I enjoy it? I felt the pleasure of achievement yes. Yet it's big numbers are there purely because big numbers are clearly fun to a lot of people. Now in all fairness I've seen a lot of monsters in games, where the huge hit points matters, where the challenge is as much about endurance and consistently correct planning, and the difficulty corresponds to the duration you must survive, which is of course purely based on the enemy health.
So why completion, why big numbers, ultimately it's about competition, whether the competition is via an opponent, the game designer or the random number generator. A great deal of game theory deals with the motivations of people who play games about the demographics of players and what appeals. It's why people will endless repeat an activity for hours for a reward that has no consequences outside it's context, and rarely matter in comparison to everything else in the context too. ultimately numbers and completion are an easy system of measuring competition. Is it fun, well for me it is. I read somewhere (I forget where) that part of the enjoyment in games is the brain's desire to learn regardless of how inane the knowledge. So I sink my time into playing with large numbers, and so do millions of other people.
What's interesting though is that while we who game get enjoyment for succeeding at something challenging or besting someone else, the stories we tell aren't the ones where we say we achieved the huge score (with exceptions like the person who has the perfect score on Pacman with a single credit), but the silly or unexpected things we achieved along the way. Does it matter I won a game? No. Is the amusing story where I did something, by unusual strategy or by sheer random chance interesting? Well, yes, assuming the context has a meaning to you.
Hmm not sure I entirely knew where I was going with this, or even if I got there. Still making the journey was entertaining none the less, and ultimately entertainment is all this is about.
*Well it's generally theory, strategy, play stories and slang** because what else is there to discuss.
**Oh and magic slang is special even for a geek aligned hobby, thankfully I almost never use it: "Mise well, whirlwind slam the top decked bomb, bounce and play the 187 creature, then swing with it, the bomb and boomerang on a stick into the redzone to win."***
***"Luckily draw from the top of your deck a card capable of winning the game by itself, play it by not looking at it at all from when you draw it from your deck until you place it forceably on the table in a showy manoeuvre so you and your opponent both see what it is at the same time. Then resolve the ability on the card that returns a creature card to your hand so you can replay it to use the ability that happens on the returned card being played successfully (as defined by rule 187 in the comprehensive rules). Then attack your opponent in the usual way using the recently played game winning creature card, creature card with the comes into play ability and another creature with an ability that when the cost is paid replicates the effect of the card 'Boomerang'."
****Yes I'm being facetious, as I doubt you'd say all that in one go, even as slang.
*****1 + + 1 then hammer equals first to arbitrary value, last to tire wins.
The primary thing that got me thinking about this is a website (ThotMarket), which was the set up with the aim of becoming something like digg where by websites get ranked by popularity, except this was based on a stock market model. You created a thot for your website using your given starting virtual capital to allocate shares, as people buy shares in your thot (presumably because they have an interest in, or link to, your website) it increases in value and is displayed higher up with the lists. You then earn more money (to increase the number of share in your thot, make a new thot or buy shares in other thots) as a combination of interest on your cash reserves, dividends from shares you own, and dividends on sales of shares of thots you control. Your value as a total of the value of your thots and capital is displayed.
The thing is people have been playing it like a game, and more importantly gaming the system. When your 'score' is your net worth, and even successfully performing a hostile take over has been referred to 'levelling up'. It's entirely possible with clever choices to raise a thot from a value of $0.01 to $800 a share in a day, and once you have broken a certain capital value, the simple act of creating several thousand or several million $0.01 shares on a thot will guarantee an enormous return in investment. There are people with net worth's in the trillions, there is balancing force on the site where capital is taxed down to $1000000001, which merely results in people creating more thots to protect their capital (earning yet more money). There are unsurprisingly a fair amount of thots for websites like 'asdfgl' or 'www.' as people are literally gaming a website ranking page to create bigger numbers, while complaining about the enormous windfall taxes and the like.
The developers response on his blog:
"One guy was complaining about the unfairness of the ‘Massive Windfall Tax’ and how such a function defeated the whole purpose of the game. Presumably the purpose of the game is to make as much fake money as possible. This is absolutely fascinating to me because I had never thought of ThotMarket as a game. I wonder how many users see it that way. Is it a game? That’s kind of like asking ‘Is this painting really art?’ I’m sure there is no answer, it’s just something interesting to think about."
The responses to this on the forums I've seen, can be roughly summed up as 'Of course it is, you start with a small number and through actions can have a bigger one'. It's that fascination of generating big numbers that underpins so many games from bored school children playing calculator wars***** to almost all games up to a certain era having a score feature, to even all those RPG's where you can do thousands of damage to monsters with millions of hit points. Really what is levelling up after all than an increase in numbers.
Then there's completion the need to do everything, find everything, kill everything. I spent an hour and a half last night killing a monster will nearly 9 million hit points on FF12 (I've got back into actually playing it as a result of
ailsa_chan), in terms of the gameplay mechanics I was able to do so while roughly holding a conversation with someone else. It was clear after about the first 5-10% that victory was inevitable it was merely a matter of time, so the boss health didn't matter. Why did it I do it? Completion. Did I enjoy it? I felt the pleasure of achievement yes. Yet it's big numbers are there purely because big numbers are clearly fun to a lot of people. Now in all fairness I've seen a lot of monsters in games, where the huge hit points matters, where the challenge is as much about endurance and consistently correct planning, and the difficulty corresponds to the duration you must survive, which is of course purely based on the enemy health.So why completion, why big numbers, ultimately it's about competition, whether the competition is via an opponent, the game designer or the random number generator. A great deal of game theory deals with the motivations of people who play games about the demographics of players and what appeals. It's why people will endless repeat an activity for hours for a reward that has no consequences outside it's context, and rarely matter in comparison to everything else in the context too. ultimately numbers and completion are an easy system of measuring competition. Is it fun, well for me it is. I read somewhere (I forget where) that part of the enjoyment in games is the brain's desire to learn regardless of how inane the knowledge. So I sink my time into playing with large numbers, and so do millions of other people.
What's interesting though is that while we who game get enjoyment for succeeding at something challenging or besting someone else, the stories we tell aren't the ones where we say we achieved the huge score (with exceptions like the person who has the perfect score on Pacman with a single credit), but the silly or unexpected things we achieved along the way. Does it matter I won a game? No. Is the amusing story where I did something, by unusual strategy or by sheer random chance interesting? Well, yes, assuming the context has a meaning to you.
Hmm not sure I entirely knew where I was going with this, or even if I got there. Still making the journey was entertaining none the less, and ultimately entertainment is all this is about.
*Well it's generally theory, strategy, play stories and slang** because what else is there to discuss.
**Oh and magic slang is special even for a geek aligned hobby, thankfully I almost never use it: "Mise well, whirlwind slam the top decked bomb, bounce and play the 187 creature, then swing with it, the bomb and boomerang on a stick into the redzone to win."***
***"Luckily draw from the top of your deck a card capable of winning the game by itself, play it by not looking at it at all from when you draw it from your deck until you place it forceably on the table in a showy manoeuvre so you and your opponent both see what it is at the same time. Then resolve the ability on the card that returns a creature card to your hand so you can replay it to use the ability that happens on the returned card being played successfully (as defined by rule 187 in the comprehensive rules). Then attack your opponent in the usual way using the recently played game winning creature card, creature card with the comes into play ability and another creature with an ability that when the cost is paid replicates the effect of the card 'Boomerang'."
****Yes I'm being facetious, as I doubt you'd say all that in one go, even as slang.
*****1 + + 1 then hammer equals first to arbitrary value, last to tire wins.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-12 12:36 pm (UTC)I came back to the start of this intending to drop the definition in, then found out just how long and varied the definition is...
Dictionary.com says that a Game is...
Wow. Despite all that, I hold to my own core of definition that there must be a chance of defeat for it to be a game...
I have to prod forward and say that as more time passes, I no longer consider either tabletop rpg or lrp to be a game. Nor do computer games such as Final Fantasy qualify as games to me.
A game has to contain the possibility of failure, the very real action of an opposing force attempting to make you fail.
In Final Fantasy, if you're not quite able to do a particular bit, you go away and level up until you can walk it. As long as there's a save and reload option, you have trouble failing. The exception are games where you can blind alley yourself into failing. FFXII actually included warnings this might be happening so you could avoid the possibility.
In rpgs, the game mechanics are there as a method of interacting with the game world, but how often does the GM or Storyteller actually allow things to fail? How much bad feeling would it generate if after 8 years of play, you lot got to the end of my DnD and found that actually somewhere around level 12 you'd given away the key item, and then ignored the hints to get it back, so couldn't now "win"?
It is my opinion that ultimately you have to have a human opponent who wants to win as badly as you do for it to be a game. This is part of what makes CCGs one of the ultimate games - there's controllable random chance, flexibility in approach to play to fit character of the player, and the opportunity to play the numbers on the table and the opponent on the other side of the table.
To me it's vital for a game to be a game that from the moment you sit down to play, there is the awareness that someone else may win. This almost always precludes computer games, which are just jumped up crosswords or interactive movies.
Thot market sits nicely in that - someone else can always have more points than you, so they're winning and you're losing. Clearly the limit on the game is an arbitrary time limit defined by the site owner's patience for your mucking around with his system. Ergo, game, with all the attached rabid competitiveness associated with such.
Agree/disagree?
(Game Over. Play again? Y/N)
As for why don't we relay stories of the number of points we've gained, rather than stories of humour... on the one hand, who wants to hear about someone else's success in a game they may not have done so well in? By telling those stories, you're proclaiming your dominance over the listener, sometimes not too subtly. Even if the listener accepts that you are higher in the social pecking order of that games community, it will make them uncomfortable to be reminded of it.
And otoh, it's so frightfully unEnglish to brag. Anyone who does brag in a social circle almost invariably will find themselves thought of as a tosser, with the degree varying depending on how loudly they brag. Look at those in the lrp club who brag about how much better their character is in terms of stats - they're mostly viewed as intolerable, and that's within a setting where we're not even meant to be competing.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-12 01:00 pm (UTC)Awesome game. Paper scissors stone on crack. Challenge me sometime! I'm predictably almosthonest.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-12 01:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-12 01:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-12 02:23 pm (UTC)Well, you're right in that most computer RPGs are games for those who have no skill in gaming - learn the system, learn the enemy, beat the game. Though I do believe you can fail, it is immensly hard to fail (and by your definition, any computer game where you can save at any point is not really a game. Such as Half Life 2.)
And LRP too - this last year, I've seen a distinct lack of challenge in LRP compared to the Avant Guard year, and it saddens me a little - the party didn't learn to cooperate properly for a very long time. Even the high level games, which I personally think should be seriously high risk (as in it's a good day when no one dies) saw very little in the way of real challanges to the party.
Now I will stop pretending to have a clue what I'm talking about.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-12 05:06 pm (UTC)Otherwise, they're just awareness, coordination and reflex testers.
As for lrp threats... :)
I'm happy to discuss that, but I'm not sure that's what our author meant this to run to. :P