If I flip a coin, can you tell me if it’ll be heads or tails?
Or is it a mere matter of probability – the essence of the cosmos.
In reality, isn't it a matter of knowledge and processing
power? If you knew the exact angle, and with what force the coin was flipped
along with other variables such as air friction, with sufficient brain power
you in fact could tell me if it’ll land heads or tails. We explored in class
how this concept of probability affects games, gamers, and game developers.
First let’s look at the game everyone’s used to and knows - the game of Life. Life is a game of chance right; you never know what’s going to happen for sure. Even if you’re a genius and can process really well, you rarely have all the information on all the variables that’ll affect an outcome. As a result you can only assess to your abilities the chance for an occurrence. For simplicity sake, one can draw a parallel between life and a card game and say: “Life is a game; you must play with the cards you are being dealt, and make the best of them.” Even while coping with its randomness, people pray for a better fortune in life or hope for better luck tomorrow. They’re not only used to chance, but welcome it into their life. When extrapolating this behavior into gaming, it’s easy to see why chance plays an important part in a game’s shelf life.
First let’s look at the game everyone’s used to and knows - the game of Life. Life is a game of chance right; you never know what’s going to happen for sure. Even if you’re a genius and can process really well, you rarely have all the information on all the variables that’ll affect an outcome. As a result you can only assess to your abilities the chance for an occurrence. For simplicity sake, one can draw a parallel between life and a card game and say: “Life is a game; you must play with the cards you are being dealt, and make the best of them.” Even while coping with its randomness, people pray for a better fortune in life or hope for better luck tomorrow. They’re not only used to chance, but welcome it into their life. When extrapolating this behavior into gaming, it’s easy to see why chance plays an important part in a game’s shelf life.
It is a bit clearer now why as discussed in class, people
are intrigued by randomness and are bored by repetitions. Frankly, beyond the
superficial facets that “chance in a game stops people from mastering it and
makes it less predictable” as well as “it gives newcomers the chance to win”,
there’s a much deeper and more appealing strategic aspect that chance adds to
games in my opinion.
In Mathematical Psychology, Risk, is the probability of an occurrence, times its cost. For example, an elevator ride is risky, but only mildly because although the cost may be your leg, the chance of the ropes and the supportive ropes ripping is so low that the product of the cost and probability yields low risk. So in games, this element of chance allows for a deeper understanding of what is happening. It sets the intelligent and experienced players apart through intuition and calculation. This strongly ties in to the coin flip example: the experience and intuition replaces knowledge, and our intelligence replaces processing power, and the two elements coalesce into a better player.
In Mathematical Psychology, Risk, is the probability of an occurrence, times its cost. For example, an elevator ride is risky, but only mildly because although the cost may be your leg, the chance of the ropes and the supportive ropes ripping is so low that the product of the cost and probability yields low risk. So in games, this element of chance allows for a deeper understanding of what is happening. It sets the intelligent and experienced players apart through intuition and calculation. This strongly ties in to the coin flip example: the experience and intuition replaces knowledge, and our intelligence replaces processing power, and the two elements coalesce into a better player.
Furthermore, it’s a fine line between pure randomness vs.
randomness between well-known possibilities. For example in League of Legends,
there are currently 116 released champions, each with 5 abilities (passive is
an ability for simplicity sake as well are secondaries). So there are 580
abilities to know in this game, but of course during a game one doesn't need to
be aware of all. When the game loads one can tell which the enemy champions are
and therefore the possible abilities, and furthermore one can eliminate more
possibilities for an ability depending on the game situation. This may sound
confusing but as a player attains experience, he or she can move from expecting
pure randomness as would a “fr00b”, to calculated, narrowed down randomness of
a l33t player. Sometimes however, even slight increase in chance changes the
entire game dynamic. Halo 4 implemented a new “weapon drop-down call upon killing
sprees” which changed its competitive scene greatly. Since what the call-down is
was unpredictable, and a team’s play style and positioning varied depending on
the arsenal of the enemy team, this caused much complaint and that element was
removed from competitive play. In regular play though, it’s easy to see how the
element of chance creates tension and excitement which is enjoyable for most
players.
Finally I’d like to explore which in my opinion is the most
important implementation of chance in a game: The AI.
As discussed in class, chances increases the permutation of
possible outcomes, but what exactly does this mean? Well, remember Mario where
the enemies would always scroll by in the same fashion? Technically you could
program a macro that presses a certain button sequence with certain time delays
that would finish you the level every time. The game became a matter of
remembering such patterns – quite monotonous compared to current standards.
Artificial Intelligence was very primitive for that game as it didn't incorporate
chances much. To possess replay value, a game must offer new player experience
each time it is played (one of the main reasons multiplayer is very popular). This
is why in my opinion future games will invest heavily into AI programming as
unpredictability adds flavor. Ultimately, the element of chance blurs preconceived
boundaries and limitations for strategy, and as a result elevates player experience and adds replay value.
I get such a strong feel of nostalgia when looking through
these Runescape classic images (am I the only that remembers party hats going
for 500k??).
It was the first real multiplayer I ever played, and the first game that had me continually on the computer for hours a day.
But what was it that kept me? I've played many games before but why was this classic so appealing?
In class we talked about multiplayer and its important constituents, and one main aspect of multiplayer being competition. I remember how fun it was to try and be the first out of my grade school friends to wield a particular weapon, or to catch up in levels to someone who’s played much longer than I had. Even as my “real life” friends began to play less, I found more competition in friends that I’ve made through the game; especially the ones that started around the same time as I had and we “grew up” and became known entities in our online community.
Thereafter in class we talked about Status and judgement of others in online play. It all sounds familiar. I became #1 fisher in Runescape (through programming macros, which further reflects real life antics done for fame) and was very well known. I was part of a clan for what we talked about, the importance of being a part of a community, which further echoes the social needs satisfied by multiplayer games.
It was the first real multiplayer I ever played, and the first game that had me continually on the computer for hours a day.
But what was it that kept me? I've played many games before but why was this classic so appealing?
In class we talked about multiplayer and its important constituents, and one main aspect of multiplayer being competition. I remember how fun it was to try and be the first out of my grade school friends to wield a particular weapon, or to catch up in levels to someone who’s played much longer than I had. Even as my “real life” friends began to play less, I found more competition in friends that I’ve made through the game; especially the ones that started around the same time as I had and we “grew up” and became known entities in our online community.
Thereafter in class we talked about Status and judgement of others in online play. It all sounds familiar. I became #1 fisher in Runescape (through programming macros, which further reflects real life antics done for fame) and was very well known. I was part of a clan for what we talked about, the importance of being a part of a community, which further echoes the social needs satisfied by multiplayer games.
So this sparks the question: Why would one play a single
player game, when multiplayer games seemingly have all the same elements, in
addition to many more that single players do not offer?
As I got older, I looked for these competitive elements in
other games. I had very hard time playing single players, or rather, finishing
them. Even games as fun and creative as San Andreas couldn't captivate me long
enough to see the ending (darn it – I know I know). I missed the very fun aspect
of problem-solving as a team, and sharing fulfillments and triumphs. Just as
importantly the competitive aspect of beating another human was too satisfying
to be missing for me. Humans were, as we discussed, “worthy opponents” compared
to NPCs. Perhaps I am different. As according to “Kim’s social engagement
verbs” I am more inclined to compete than to collaborate, but either one rather
more than to explore or express. This may explain why I prefer competitive
multiplayer over Luigi’s mansion despite how epic that game is.
May be viewing this from a Game developer’s s standpoint
will shed more light:
Multiplayer games of course lend themselves to much more complex problem solving. Strategies become a lot more in-depth as intelligence of a player is accompanied by their intuition and experience. This is a positive feedback, and self-reinforcing for a competitive multiplayer – having to play more to win, and as you play more you improve but vs. other improving players, and as a result must play even more. This naturally increases the playable hours of a game as it is not just completion based, and the players define what their objectives are. In multiplayer, more complex human psychologies that usually are exposed during tensed team situations are explored through more accessible means, such through game avatars, without having the need for epic circumstances as that of elite athleticism or a war field. Therefore again, why does one play single player games?
Multiplayer games of course lend themselves to much more complex problem solving. Strategies become a lot more in-depth as intelligence of a player is accompanied by their intuition and experience. This is a positive feedback, and self-reinforcing for a competitive multiplayer – having to play more to win, and as you play more you improve but vs. other improving players, and as a result must play even more. This naturally increases the playable hours of a game as it is not just completion based, and the players define what their objectives are. In multiplayer, more complex human psychologies that usually are exposed during tensed team situations are explored through more accessible means, such through game avatars, without having the need for epic circumstances as that of elite athleticism or a war field. Therefore again, why does one play single player games?
I knew the answers all along: the reasons I stopped certain
multiplayers.
For instance, Runescape extended social pressures beyond the
game. I couldn’t stand the thought of losing my #1 status, and this ate into so
much of my regular life. The game was no longer fun, it wasn’t even a choice.
It now became hard work to justify the endless hours that had been put into it
– a vicious cycle. Halo 2 was no longer an enjoyable hang out with my friends
to exchange shots, but was now to exchange shots like “idiot” and who’s to
blame as to why we lost the game and our rank. Starcraft 2 turned from exciting
and creative play, to executing perfect builds and nervous jitters to thrive in
master league – and to smashing keyboards out of frustration.
Then again, I’ve thrown my GameBoy before. It’s not that
these negatives don’t exist in single player, but they’re a lot milder, and
you've nobody to blame but yourself so one’s more forgiving, and as a result
the games are a lot more relaxing. People play single players because they
remember why we play games in the first place – to enjoy and relax, to wind
down, and hf : )