Left for Dead Online

I have recently discovered the awesomeness that is Left for Dead online, and have spent the last day and a half watching (and sometimes participating) in the fascinating online aspect of this game. 

I didn't grow up playing MMOG's, so games like World of Warcraft were completely astounding to me when I first discovered them. It still never ceases to amaze me that people from all over the world are now able to connect with and play games with strangers on the other side of the planet. Then I realized that all of my male friends, who are avid players of multiple online games via either computer or gaming console, are completely unfazed by this notion. 

While I giggle with delight because through Wii, I am able to play Mariokart with someone in Japan, someone in Canada, and someone in New York simultaneously, they look at me and roll their eyes. I realized how completely jaded our generation has become by the marvels of modern technology, and this creation of a kind of global "ambient awareness" of people we have never even met, whose avatars we are now interacting with on the screens in our livingrooms. 

Game-playing, which was something once reserved as an activity between friends -or at least acquaintances- is now shared between millions of strangers, who are able to interact competitively and in the spirit of good zombie-killing fun. I watched in awe as a roomful of my friends logged on to Xbox's Left for Dead online and were immediately inserted into the midst of a zombie-killing melee- the in-progress match between two teams from around the world. They would immediately leap into action, talking into their headsets to strangers on their team, setting up tactical formations and gauging the skill of the opposing team. I was amazed at how casually they struck up a conversation with the faceless people at the other ends of their headsets, shooting zombies and calling to each other. You know, something like,

"Hey, are these guys any good?"

"No, they're pretty terrible. But thank god you're here, I finally have team members."

*laughs*

"Okay so go barf on that guy and I'll jump him. After you've called the Horde, '__' will strangle that other guy."

"Alright."

"Oh man these guys SUCK... hahhhahaah this is hilarious oh hey I'm going to add you by the way.."

"Yea sure."'

I don't know about you, but this kind of interaction between complete strangers from hundreds of miles away just blows my mind. My friend even scrolled down his Xbox "friendlist," explaining how he had met each contact, how skilled they were, and how often they played together. 

Through this medium, Left for Dead online players are essentially verbally interacting and working as a team with dozens of random strangers every day, coordinating strategy, watching each other's backs, laughing at the other team, making small talk, and often "friending" each other- knowing each other by little more than the sound of their voices. In the hundreds of hours my friends have logged in to L4D online, who knows who they have talked to, played with, and cooperated with? In this type of medium, nothing matters- not your age, your ethnicity, your looks, your popularity, your socioeconomic status- all that matters is that you're pretty good at being a team-player and killing zombies. People who would never even have dreamt of interacting in real life have probably played together as a team in L4D online, sharing a sense of camaraderie and adrenaline. 

You are not expected to make witty small-talk or have a sexy avatar. There are no social codes that you must abide by- just watch your teammates' backs, and they will chat with you amicably without judgment. It is simply an entire world (or country) of strangers united in the spirit of having fun.

I know that Left for Dead is not the only game offering this kind of no-strings-attached "digital intimacy," but it is certainly one of the most fascinating. And (in my opinion) the most bloody fun. :]

WoW promoting torture and murder?

Thought I would share this interesting review regarding the new "Death Knight" class introduced to World of Warcraft along with the most recent expansion. It's a fairly dated article, but I feel it's still relevant to the sentiments of those concerned with any adverse affects violent games may have on players, as well as the subtle messages that may be promoted through gameplay.

I can't agree or disagree with the reviewer's stance that the forced roleplaying aspect of the Death Knight's initial storyline promotes bloodthirsty and psychopathic virtual behavior because, well, I've never actually played a Death Knight or experienced the gameplay that goes along with it. What I've come to understand from this article, however, is that some players object to Blizzard's decision to force them to torture, maim, and kill. The Death Knight is apparently an extreme form of constricted role play with little beginning options as to where to go and what to do. As opposed to players picking and choosing their quests and objectives within the vast universe of WoW, anyone with a Death Knight is required to advance through a premeditated storyline before stepping out in the freer world of the actual game.

I recently created a Blood Elf character for my class research, and I recall having to complete quests which required that I kill a certain amount of non-hostile animals. The difference being, of course, that I chose to do the quest and I wasn't shuffled right along on a direct storyline path. I also acknowledge that the Blood Elf, as allied with the Horde side of the game, is apparently supposed to be an "evil" class. However, the underlying plot of WoW is obviously war; and in war, there are two sides to every story. I don't necessarily agree that there are good factions and bad factions within WoW, just severe disagreements and misunderstandings.

In any case, players are required to have already played a level 55+ character in order to play a Death Knight, and I'm far from that. As such, I admit to having very little direct experience with the similarities and differences of the Death Knight and Blood Elf classes. However, the article does reveal some fascinating elements of a virtual world's variable gameplay and how even the slightest constrictions create in-game animosity.

Video games good for children~!

I found this article on yahoo and I remembered that there was a group that was doing something about children... but I could not remember if it was a SNS or a gaming genre...

This article talk about a study that shows that video games are good for developing strategy, creativity, memorization of facts and other vital skills. It brought me back to our discussion of how on the internet the young can teach the old and how there is no real sense of age status... meaning.. just because a person is older that that person has to teach the others...

the only part of this article that made me sad was the suggestion that parents limit their children's gaming time...

The last line was also interesting to consider... that the average gamer in Europe is 33

Hope this helps~

Project Group: Social Status in WoW

Hey, our group doesn't really have a name yet, but we are going to be examining social status in World of Warcraft. It's a broad aspect, but each member of our team will be examining a specific in game factor that influences what people think and know about your character online.

Claire will research Guilds (in-game player-made organizations).
Bryan is looking at levels and loot (items and gold).
Rebecca is working with Player vs. Player interactions.
Hank wants to examine roleplaying.

Right now, we're planning to use participant observation (playing the game) and interviewing (chatting with people in game) as our primary methods for collecting datum. Give me a message if you have any questions or suggestions for us!

From EQ to WoW: Expansion Packs in MMORPGs

This is a something I wrote for my own blog (yay marketing) about my experiences with MMORPGs. It may be relevant to those of you interested in how online games evolve gradually over time, or the difference between hardcore and casual gamers but it mostly pertains to a personal interest: how storytelling works in online worlds; how the developers tell a narrative that shapes the world, how players use the world to tell their own stories. For most I suspect it will be TLDR. You've been forewarned.

My first experiences in online gaming were with Sony’s EverQuest just after it had launched Ruins of Kunark, the game’s first expansion pack. I was exhilarated by the rich potential the product represented, but repeatedly heartbroken as I attempted wring it from the world. Despite the title’s implied promise, it was incredibly difficult to find quests. I knew they existed through snippets from the general chat, and high level characters who ran around wearing their rewards, but they always seemed to lay somewhere just beyond the edge of my periphery. Whenever I found a quest giver, the chain was either broken, restricted to a different class/race/deity, or simply not worth the effort. The mechanics of the game were also obnoxiously punitive. I spent the vast majority of my early playtime corpse running; an activity every ounce as unpleasant as it sounds. There was a period where, if you could not retrieve your body within a certain time limit, the game would delete your body and everything you were carrying on it, leading to many tearful nights where I struggled to retrieve my mangled cyber body from some wretched pit. Since you had no armor or items, subsequent deaths were almost inevitable, and each one produced another decoy which would frustrate your search for the original. Amusing in hindsight. In practice? Not so much.

As with most things massive, multiplayer and online, the social component was at the core of my experience. I enjoyed wandering around the tunnel in Eastern Commons where high level characters would gather to barter, and I found a limited sense of belonging in conversation with other introverted kids. Naturally, that all went to hell when Sony launched Shadows of Luclin, the game’s infamous third expansion. The organic barter economy was abandoned in favor of a game run bazaar system which did not work at launch and a graphics ‘upgrade’ that replaced the game’s endearingly blocky avatars with some of the most hideous character models the world will ever witness. The increased hardware requirements caused a lot of players to leave, exacerbating the exodus to other MMO’s of the time; a trend the update was designed to forestall. Perhaps this is the best analogy for Shadows of Luclin's impossible lameness.

Yet nearly a decade later, EverQuest is still soldiering on, having launched its fifteenth expansion pack last November. One thing which has certainly helped the game’s longevity is that Sony learned its lesson with Shadows of Luclin and has not substantially changed the game's hardware requirements since. But one has to wonder who is still playing EQ, to say nothing of why. It is tempting to conclude that after years of abuse and torment, the dark forces at SOE have broken something inside their customers, convincing them that being beaten is a privilege, and that the willingness to withstand such treatment is a desirable trait called “Hardcoredness.” I exaggerate, especially considering how much crueler Ultima Online was, and the game has made some genuine improvements over the years. I tenuously continued to play EQ until the fifth expansion, Legacy of Ykesha, when Sony convinced me to quit in earnest by making Frogloks into a godly playable race. Not only did this break the balance of the game, it dealt a fatal blow to the tone of the game's narrative, according to my fifteen year old sensibilities. For those of you who play WoW, an approximate equivalent would be if Blizzard suddenly decided to make Murlocs into a playable hero-race in the next expansion. Actually, knowing their sense of humor, it’s a prospect which seems frighteningly plausible.

When I started playing World of Warcraft in 2004, I felt like a third world refugee, delighted and mystified by conveniences others took for granted: Quests clearly displayed by bright gold exclamation points hanging over character heads and on an ever present GPS-like minimap, chairs your character could actually sit in, and most importantly of all, dying was not a tremendous ordeal. It was even kind of cool, with the grayed out color pallet and your ghost character’s ability to run on water. The starting zones were very welcoming, abundant with easy tutorial-like quests that yield the necessary equipment for players to progress. Rather than making the game rewarding by building a system so unforgiving that any degree of success feels like an achievement, Blizzard presents players with a steady stream of new items and spells, while making the process as convenient as possible, even to the point of being nonsensical at times (the same size of armor and weapons fit every race of character), yet for some reason, people find this idealized, convenient world more appealing than the alternative. It's almost like they play video games to escape reality's inconveniences.

Yet these are mere trimmings. The greatest appeal of WoW’s gameplay is that each class presents players with a unique, but versatile combat system while remaining relatively balanced in power. Even though EQ’s character creation system gave players more classes to choose from, controlling them felt identical. Worst of all, some race and class combinations will end up being fundamentally weaker than others, considerably stifling one's creativity. In WoW, a character’s race is mostly cosmetic, and any available class/race combination is viable. Also, while each class has distinct gameplay mechanics and a specific role to fulfill in parties, they can be adapted to fit whatever play style you prefer (solo play, PVP, or dungeon raiding). I don’t mean to say WoW is perfectly balanced, but Blizzard constantly tweaks the classes to keep them on even footing.

Yet while the classes are relatively even in power to one another, level-based elitism endures. Since the game's system is based on numerical levels of power, clear stratification and discrimination are inevitable. Even if you’re just in the game for the story, you won’t be able to debate your way into a cool dungeon if you can’t fight its mobs yet. That part of the universe is closed to you until you can pay your dues in the currency of experience, and graduate to a new grade in ass kicking.

Blizzard has done its best to allow average customers to get the most out of a subscription, which I believe is a noble endeavor. Whenever such changes are made however, the elite players will start in with the “When I was your level I had to fight both ways through a dungeon, debuffed and I learned to like it!” speeches. It’s reasonable to want your hard work to amount to something, but it always strikes me as strange when people gauge the value of their leisure activities in terms of quantifiable work. Then again, where the game’s first expansion, The Burning Crusade, was concerned, they had a right to grouse. Epic gear people spent months obtaining in the original game was rendered obsolete by basic equipment found in the expansion. The fairly even correlation between effort and rewards people had come to expect from the game was broken. Most people didn’t complain too bitterly, since they were getting superior gear, and I was surprised by how little bitching actually occurred.

The other shift that occurred during the BC launch was that Blizzard suddenly realized just how marketable their universe was. The resulting ‘growth’ subjected their lore to the same sort of weary dissolution which plagues other serialized bodies of fiction: stories rife with nearly nonsensical alliances and ret-conned deaths. While EQ had to weave its fantasy world from whole cloth, the original trilogy of Warcraft strategy games provided Blizzard with recognizable characters, locations, and a fairly compelling story to build on; yet that considerable advantage had become a liability as fans were left to argue what canonical Warcraft should resemble. One could make a strong argument that this is the inevitable fate of a fiction opened up to its loving public: “the tragedy of the creative commons” so to speak.

I like to think that there is genuine narrative potential for MMOs however, and Wrath of the Lich King has done a lot to keep my optimism alive. The earliest teaser had a strong narrative vibe, which only grew stronger in CGI movie, but I was skeptical until I heard about the pre-launch event. Capital cities, thought of as safe havens, were over-run with throngs of undead that would infect players and force them to turn against other players, even on non-pvp servers. It was a ballsy move met with a harsh outcry and more than a couple canceled subscriptions, but it also showed that Blizzard is serious about telling a story in their world. I must confess I don’t know how bad the zombiefest was, since I was taking a break from the game. Such rest periods are vital, lest you be drawn too deeply into the virtual world and lost to the real one. The quest chain which introduces the much talked about Death Knight “hero class,” is also decidedly story driven. Arthas also frequently pops up throughout Northrend, establishing him as a more imminent threat than Illidan (the previous villain) was in The Burning Crusade.

In addition to the buffed storytelling, the increase in item power feels much more natural than it was in the crusade and Blizzard has continued to promote accessibility by giving all dungeons and raids a five-player mode, so you can tackle the really awesome dungeons without finding twenty other people who are free, well-equipped and competent. If you’ve tried WoW, and it didn't tickle you, Lich King won’t change your mind. But if you’ve never played, and you can budget your time responsibly, now would be a good time to try.

Common MMORPG Terms Translated to English

Hi everyone. My name’s Hank and I’ve spent an unhealthy amount of my life playing online games, so I decided to put my experience to good purpose and write up a list of common gaming terms. This list is by no means definitive or comprehensive; I just tried to keep things brief, humorous and easy to understand. If you can’t understand or don’t agree with a definition, let me know and I’ll do my best to clarify. Feel free to add your own definitions in comments.

General Computer and Online Gaming Jargon:

Bots: Bots are essentially programs that fulfill human functions to varying degrees. They can act as automated game masters, artificial opponents. Also see NPC under RPG Slang.

Character: A player’s avatar in the game world.

FPS: In discussions of graphics and animation, FPS refers to Frames Per Second, or the overall smoothness of the games animation. With regards to video game genres, FPS stands for First Person Shooter; the sort of game where you run around with a gun.

GM: Short for Game Masters; the people who monitor the game and respond to player complaints.

Game Engine: A game engine is less like an engine and more like a chasis that provides developers with code for things like graphics and physics.

GPU: Graphics Processing Unit. The chipset that lets you run impressive graphics.

Haxor: A cute way of calling somebody a hacker. Somebody who cheats by hacking the game engine, abusing a bug, or using illegal bots.

Instance: A copy of a zone reserved for a specific group of players, allowing multiple groups to explore the same area without interfering with each other. Most dungeons in MMORPG’s are instanced, and frequently referred to as instances.

Launch: The release of a game or a patch.

MMO: A Massive Multiplayer Online game. Implies a game environment with a large, explorable world and customizable characters. Most (but not all) MMO’s are RPGs.

Noob: A pejorative but not terribly offensive name for inexperienced players.

Patch: A software download that fixes bugs and adjusts the game as necessary.

PVE: Player vs. Enemy combat; players fighting against computer controlled enemies as opposed to other players.

PVP: Player vs. Player combat. Some games restrict PVP to specific servers or zones, while in others PVP is the whole idea.

RPG: A role-playing game, where the player assumes the role a fictional character in a fictional universe. While early role playing games were designed to facilitate actual role-play; speaking like the character and acting out story lines; such theatrics are optional and largely ignored in most MMOs.

RTS: Refers to games in the Real Time Strategy genre, where you build an army and manage resources.

Server: The computers that host the game world. If it crashes, all the characters are disconnected.

Zone: A distinct region or environment in an online game.

RPG Slang: Cyber phrases and colloquialisms specific to role playing games.

AFK: Away from Keyboard.

ASL?: Asking one’s age, sex and location, or “How to look like a creep in just 3 letters.”

Agro: When used as a verb, agro refers to a monster attacking a player. When used as a noun it refers to the monster’s hostile attention. Agro is quantified by Threat.

Armor: Though occasionally used in reference to equipment (see Gear), people usually speak of armor in reference to the protective value assigned to an item.

Balance: Gamese for fair. Balance refers to a equal balance of power between players of the same level.

Build: See Spec.

Buff: An upgrade. Usually it refers to temporary beneficial effects for a character, though positively adjusting a character’s stats through patching are also referred to as buffing.

Boss: A powerful enemy typically encountered in a dungeon or instance.

Botting: Illegally using bots for activities like gold farming.

CC: Crowd control; characters and abilities that stun or incapacitate enemies to make hostile groups easier to manage.

Gold Farmer: A person who harvests money or game items for real world profit.

Class: What your character does in the game’s universe. Classes vary according to genre; fantasy games come in flavors like knight and wizard, while sci-fi games feature hackers, starship captains and the like. Generally, a character’s class is the primary factor in determining a player’s abilities and group role (Healer, Tank, DPS, CC…). Not all MMORPGs have classes.

Chuck Norris: The fall-back topic of conversation in most zones.

Debuff: A temporary effect which harms, weakens, or disables a character.

Ding!: Gamese for “I just leveled up!”

DPS: Short for damage per second, also refers to characters in a damage dealing role.

Dungeon: An especially challenging game environment designed for group play. Dungeons are generally instanced, and more structured than typical zones. The enemies are harder, but they drop better loot.

Gear: A character’s equipment.

Geared: Being well or sufficiently equipped for a given task (usually a dungeon).

GG: Good game.

Grats: Short for congratulations; the polite response to Ding!.

Grinding: Doing a boring task repetitively in an effort to get stronger quickly.

Hax: Short for ‘hacks,’ and used to express dismay or disbelief at another character’s abilities. It is not necessarily an accusation of hacking (see Haxor), but rather suggests that a player (or class of character, or even a specific ability) is too powerful and has broken the balance of the game. Usually leads to cries for nerfing.

Level: How strong your character is. When used as a verb (“I’m gonna go level”), it means I will fight monsters or do quests in an effort to get stronger. Also see grinding and power-leveling.

LFG: Looking for group.

Loot: The money and items dropped by a defeated mob or player.

Macro: A player designed custom command to quickly perform spells or attacks.

Mob: A common computer controlled enemy. The monsters players fight to get stronger.

Nerf: A permanent negative adjustment to a class, item, or ability to balance the game system. The name likens the act to padding something with nerf-foam to make it safer.

Ninja-looter: Somebody who unfairly claims an item from a defeated monster. A serious accusation if it is made in earnest, though it is often used lightly because it sounds funny.

NPC: Non-player character. Every character in a game which is not controlled by a player (quest givers, vendors, town guards, townspeople, etc) is an NPC. Monsters are also technically NPCs but players generally refer to them as mobs.

Nuker: Refers to a damage dealing character, specifically a character that uses abilities with high damage and broad areas of effect.

OOC: Out of character chat. Used to discuss technical aspects of the game in situations where people take traditional role play seriously.

Power Leveling: Having a high level character assist a lower level character with grinding so it can level up faster.

PVP Server: A server where PVP combat is always fair game.

Quest-Giver: An NPC that issues missions to players in exchange for rewards.

QQ: An unsympathetic response to another player’s complaints, similar to calling somebody a crybaby. In fact, double Qs are intended to resemble crying eyes.

Race: Your character’s race in the game. May affect your starting stats, abilities, class or role.

Re-roll: Starting a character over from scratch. A reference to old D&D systems, where character stats were determined by dice rolls.

Role: The function your character fulfills in groups.

RP Server: A game server designed for people who enjoy traditional role playing. Again, even on RP server’s most players don’t put in the effort.

Solo: Playing alone. When used as a verb, as in “I soloed X!” it means the character beat whatever X is without assistance from other players.

Stats: The numerical values given for your character’s strength, agility, intelligence and so forth, determining your effectiveness and power. Stats gradually increase as your character levels up, and are further increased by the gear you are equipped with.

Spec: The role a character has been specialized and customized to fulfill.

Tank: The character responsible for keeping other characters alive by drawing the mobs attention and receiving their attacks. Tanks have lots of health and armor but generally deal a mediocre amount of damage.

Threat: How much a mob wants to kill your character. If multiple characters are attacking the same monster, it fights back against the character with the highest threat.

WTB: “I want to buy…”

WTS: “I want to sell…”

Whew. Hope this helps somebody!

Does the internet bolster cultural circularity?

Just an example of "viral" internet trends growing outside their birth-realm of the internet, sparking a bit "IRL" before returning to their very origins.

One wonders if the "inside joke" does more when providing insight into a given culture. Perhaps it is a light sketch of the developmental path of adaptive culture? No doubt the following examples exhibit the "shared" aspect of culture... and the power of societies to dictate their respective trends beginning with nothing more than effective word-of-mouth.

Of course, Leroy Jenkins
It begins with: A.
And finds popularity in its given mode of hilarity.
It travels to: B.
Though I must mention, the pop culture question goes unanswered.
And finishes where it began with: C. D. E.
As a result, Blizzard acknowledging the viral nature of the event has re-established the joke and the story of "Jenkins" continues.

And now, ...
Numa Numa
An obscure Moldovan pop song receives new interpretation through: A.
And the video finds popularity given the quirky humor.
Now, the viral song finds a new following through: B.
One can only speculate what will develop further, but the movement of this particular song to capture the current trends of American pop music is amazing just in itself.

Gaming: What's the Hype?

So, I have to admit that cyberspace and these virtual worlds really are something else. Though I was born and raised in SoCal, my experience with the internet and the computer has been limited by my parents, which is strange seeing that my father is a tech manager for a large company. Instead of being taught the ins and outs of the computer and learning to cruise the internet, I was always encouraged to get out and play, read, or any leisure activity that involves movement.
This kind of mentality is rare in this contemporary world where computers dominate our mainstream culture. With this heavy dependence, the health of the world, especially Americans, is taking a toll. From sitting in front of the computer, numerous health studies have shown that hours spent typing and playing games can be hazardous for one's health. Because of the comotose and lethargic position that is required for using a computer, people are continually becoming obese. Over 30% of the youths in America are overweight and 80% of them will be obese adults. Researchers have found that this correlates with the amount of time spent in front of the T.V. or computer; the more hours spent on the devices, the more likely a child was to be obese. Furthermore, frequent typing and staring at a computer screen can cause vision problems, back problems, wrist problems, and a whole host of physical difficulties.
With these kinds of consequences, I can't understand why people will spend so much time in front of a computer, playing games like World of Warcraft. Wouldn't it be more productive to spend that time doing something else? I think that if people spent less time on these games and more time on their "real" or physical lives they might be more happy and free from needless physical injuries. I'm not saying we should get rid of video games all together, but it might be beneficial to start imposing limits on the amount of time adults and children spend playing them.