A healthy game culture

[Groth]

For proof that systems can bring the worst out of people, I don't think you have to look any further then the MOBA genre. People quickly get very degenerate when they feel someone else is responsible for them losing in a competitive environment. At the same time, there's countless of competitive environments out there (like most sports) where people get along just fine which I think illustrates how important community/culture/sportsmanship is.

I'm not convinced theme has a direct correlation with poor behavior. If you made a game about kittens where they're all constantly fighting to be the top cat, you'd probably get most of the same issues you see with running Vampire.

[Roz]

@groth said in A healthy game culture:

I'm not convinced theme has a direct correlation with poor behavior. If you made a game about kittens where they're all constantly fighting to be the top cat, you'd probably get most of the same issues you see with running Vampire.

Isn't that example -- totally in support of theme having the potential to encourage certain types of bad behavior? If your game is about kittens competing to be top cat, it is a similar thing people have talked about in regards to themes that are explicitly designed to be competitive bringing out competitive streaks in the players.

[Testament]

The answer is really quite simple.

[Derp]

@testament said in A healthy game culture:

The answer is really quite simple.

Unless it's to the question of cats. And then the answer is still very simple, but differnt:

[Groth]

@roz said in A healthy game culture:

Isn't that example -- totally in support of theme having the potential to encourage certain types of bad behavior? If your game is about kittens competing to be top cat, it is a similar thing people have talked about in regards to themes that are explicitly designed to be competitive bringing out competitive streaks in the players.

I suppose it depends on what you call a theme. I tend to think of themes as aesthetics. I certainly agree with the idea that games that encourage player on player conflict will cause more issues all things being equal. You need to actively work against people getting over-invested and harass other players for in-game benefits in a way you don't in a cooperative game. Not to mention the ways a PvP game gives predatory players a way to leverage other players OOCly with threats to their character.

[Ganymede]

@derp

[Lotherio]

@groth said in A healthy game culture:

If you made a game about kittens where they're all constantly fighting to be the top cat

Cat, the Whiskering?

[Lisse24]

So, we know mega-multi-sphere WoD games tend to have players that are are overly aggressive and PITA's to play with.

We also know that Kingsmouth had a generally positive culture and got there using various larp-like systems, intensive staff-intervention, and restrictive character policies.

We don't know if the Kingsmouth model is the only way to achieve that end, because the vast majority of WoD games that start go the mega-multi-sphere PRP route and there's not a lot that have tried to add in some of Kingsmouth's systems or philosophies.

[Rucket]

@lisse24 said in A healthy game culture:

So, we know mega-multi-sphere WoD games tend to have players that are are overly aggressive and PITA's to play with.

We also know that Kingsmouth had a generally positive culture and got there using various larp-like systems, intensive staff-intervention, and restrictive character policies.

We don't know if the Kingsmouth model is the only way to achieve that end, because the vast majority of WoD games that start go the mega-multi-sphere PRP route and there's not a lot that have tried to add in some of Kingsmouth's systems or philosophies.

There was a period of time when Miami was considering doing some of the Kingsmouth stuff for Vampire, but that was like a year and a half ago or so and I don't know if that is still being discussed.

[Coin]

@rucket said in A healthy game culture:

@lisse24 said in A healthy game culture:

So, we know mega-multi-sphere WoD games tend to have players that are are overly aggressive and PITA's to play with.

We also know that Kingsmouth had a generally positive culture and got there using various larp-like systems, intensive staff-intervention, and restrictive character policies.

We don't know if the Kingsmouth model is the only way to achieve that end, because the vast majority of WoD games that start go the mega-multi-sphere PRP route and there's not a lot that have tried to add in some of Kingsmouth's systems or philosophies.

There was a period of time when Miami was considering doing some of the Kingsmouth stuff for Vampire, but that was like a year and a half ago or so and I don't know if that is still being discussed.

Pretty sure Miami is dead in the water.

[Misadventure]

I'd like to see people be clear about player vs player games, and character vs character games.

PvP uses player skills at conflict to contest results with winners and losers.

CvC is just a story setup. Ideally its with two players who trust one another and collaborate in generating events and story for others they draw in. They are free to express less effective characters and negative consequences of their own actions because they aren't trying to win anything.

[faraday]

@misadventure said in A healthy game culture:

I'd like to see people be clear about player vs player games, and character vs character games.

It's a nice notion, but the overwhelming majority of online RPG players cannot separate themselves from their characters enough to make a practical difference between PVP and CVC.

Among select groups of either good friends or really unique individuals? You could conceivably draw such a distinction. But for the general population of Internet People? It's best to go into it eyes wide open that a CVC game is going to be treated as a PVP game by almost all players.

[Misadventure]

@faraday which gets us back to PvP is just a bad idea for RP.

Sad.

[Warma Sheen]

I understand what people mean when they say that the game Vampire "brings out the worst in people". I just don't necessarily agree.

Again, I think it depends on the perception of whether or not what that person does is okay or not. "That vampire straight up murdered my vampire for the smallest slight. That person is the worst." Did Vampire bring out the worst in that person? Or is that just what one person thought was a completely acceptable response in the bounds of that game world?

Theme is a big deal. But there can be a big difference between a game and a theme on the game. If you throw an established IP like Vampire onto a MU and do not clearly establish your own theme, you leave it up to everyone to join with their own interpretation of it and thus their own standards of acceptable behavior informed on what they have or have not read (because we all know that much of the theme are in parts of the books that many people skip in favor of studying the dice and power rules).

So I throw support behind what various people have said in different forms which is that it is up to staff to maintain the kind of theme and community (game) they want on their MU. And when staff does that it works. And when they don't, it is chaos where some people love the game and others are collateral damage for those first people. Sometimes it just depends on whether you were able to get "in" with the right people, i.e. "cliques".

P.S. I do believe there are many people who can separate character and player, but it is generally safer to assume that they can't until you know that player well enough to be sure that they can. But even then, sometimes you turn out to have just judged them wrong. So is it possible, yes. Is it likely, probably not.

[Tinuviel]

@roz said in A healthy game culture:

@tinuviel said in A healthy game culture:

I mildly object to the idea that a game can "bring out the worst" in people.

It seems short-sighted to refuse the idea that different structures and environments bring out different behaviors in humans. Yes, the problem is still the people, but insisting on a sort of universal view wherein all game types/settings/etc. are the same and generate the same results and behaviors seems like it would hamper the overall goal of trying to develop a healthy game culture. There are some universals, but the challenges of different games are -- well, different.

The game is run practically the same everywhere. The one time it wasn't is the one time we have been told, in this thread, where the behaviour was different.

So, no. The game is not at fault. The way it is run is at fault.

Don't put words in my mouth.

ETA: Secondly, suggesting that it is the game bringing out the worst in people removes agency and responsibility from the people. That is never an acceptable answer. I would be willing to believe that more assholes play the game because the game allows you to get away with being an asshole. But that is not at all the same thing.

If you're an asshole when you drink, stop fucking drinking and don't blame the booze. You're the asshole.

[faraday]

@tinuviel said in A healthy game culture:

ETA: Secondly, suggesting that it is the game bringing out the worst in people removes agency and responsibility from the people. That is never an acceptable answer.

Nobody is saying it's acceptable or good. Some of us are saying it's reality.

It is naive to deny the fact that people behave differently when they are in competition with their fellow players than when they are on the same team as as their fellow players, working towards a common goal. That is just human nature, plain and simple. You see it in sports, in playgrounds, in TTRPGs, in board games, in video games... I don't really see why it's such a controversial stance.

Would it be nice to live in a world where you can play with only mature players exhibiting 100% good sportsmanship? Of course. But c'mon, that's just not the world we live in. It's hardly a surprise that you see more jerk-ish behavior in Call of Duty than in Animal Crossing, because the nature of the game is competitive PVP.

[Carma]

This post is deleted!

[Tinuviel]

@faraday said in A healthy game culture:

Nobody is saying it's acceptable or good. Some of us are saying it's reality.

That's not what I said. I said it's not an acceptable answer.

@faraday said in A healthy game culture:

It is naive to deny the fact that people behave differently

People choose to behave differently. Choose. Putting all the blame on the game itself is taking all the blame away from people that act like fuckwads.

If you run a game, any game, on which people feel free to act like assholes? Either you are at fault, or they are. Or likely a combination of the two. Nobody gets to use "the system we're using is designed that way" as an excuse.

ETA: To summarise: Stop taking away the agency of the players when they act like assholes. There's competitive, and then there's assholery. We're talking about the latter.

[faraday]

@carma said in A healthy game culture:

That depends entirely on the community that gets fostered. If you remove people who express poor sportsmanship, then you'll have a game with close to 100% good sportsmanship.

When "sportsmanship" is exhibited outwardly in terms of penalties, rules, etc, then I agree.

But unfortunately most of the "poor sportsmanship" equivalent on MUs is more subtle than that, and is nearly impossible to police in the same way you can in other venues.

[Roz]

@tinuviel said in A healthy game culture:

@faraday said in A healthy game culture:

It is naive to deny the fact that people behave differently

People choose to behave differently. Choose. Putting all the blame on the game itself is taking all the blame away from people that act like fuckwads.

If you run a game, any game, on which people feel free to act like assholes? Either you are at fault, or they are. Or likely a combination of the two. Nobody gets to use "the system we're using is designed that way" as an excuse.

No one is talking about using it as an excuse? It is not about shifting blame. It is about being aware of patterns certain structures can encourage in people so that you can be best prepared to respond and deal with them. Which includes, yes, getting rid of people who are being assholes. Or adjusting how a game is being run. The point is that recognizing certain patterns can allow people to more proactively prepare for more likely possibilities.