Help Wanted: Any Ideas?
-
Hello all,
I’ve never posted here before, but after hearing good things about FD from a few of you, I figure this is the best way to reach as many intelligent online gamers as I can. I have an assignment of sorts that I think would benefit from hearing the opinions of people like you guys.
As some of you may know (hi Court, Dan, and Jedd), this summer I have a lucrative government position that’s paying me to research how people use software interfaces to collaborate in an online environment. In other words, I’m supposed to design a video game and record how people play it so that I can write a report on ways to improve software used by visual analysts.
The two questions I’m supposed to be focusing on are:
1- What effect does synchronous (in-game voice or text chat) and asynchronous (forums or email) communication have on players’ ability to collaborate? Which form of collaboration (synchronous or asynchronous) is more useful in what situation?
2- What effect do roles have on players’ ability to collaborate? Do players perform better when roles are assigned (player 1 is the leader) or when they are free to do whatever they want?
I’m supposed to answer those questions by setting up a game, recording a group of volunteers playing it, and then changing some parameters (in game 1 there was no leader, in game 2 there is) and watching a different group of volunteers play. The game has to have some kind of a goal or score system so that I can show which teams and parameters were more effective.
Anyway, the reason I’m posting is this: I’m not much of an online gamer. But somehow I’m in charge of designing an online game, or at least creating a set of rules that can be played in a preexisting online game (they wanted me to use Second Life, I want to program my own). I have a couple ideas typed out, but I’m extremely open to suggestions, and this was the first (and only) place I thought about asking.
For example, one game I'm thinking about is some kind of a scavenger hunt (I know it sounds gay, don't judge me) where teams compete to find pieces to a puzzle or something. Each player knows the location of a couple pieces, but to assemble the whole thing they have to work together. They could communicate via voice chat only if they were near each other in the game, otherwise they'd have to use a forum to get information to their team mates. That's just an idea though. Another idea is having them play hide and seek (I know it sounds gay again, keep not judging me) in a game, same communication rules apply. I don't know.
So, what I’m asking for are ideas for a game or set of rules that will encourage both in-game chat and the use of a forum. The game has to be played in teams with and without roles assigned. The teams can either work together, against one another, or completely independently. Each team should consist of around 4 players, and I’m thinking that it would be easiest to keep each game to a max of 2 teams, so 8 people total. The game has to last between one and two hours.
Any ideas? I appreciate anything you can throw at me. Also, let me know if I didn’t explain myself well enough.. It’s still a bit early for me and I haven’t had my ceremonial 3 cans of soda yet.
PS- Nice to meet everybody
-
Dan, I hope you know how much I hate you. Anyway, for the abridged version, just start reading at "So, what I'm asking for are..." I know reading is hard, so that should pretty much sum it up without having to deal with those pesky words and explanations.
-
QUOTEfigure this is the best way to reach as many intelligent online gamers as I can.
Ha! Haahhahaha!
Synchronous communication is an absolute must if your going to be able to immerse yourself in the game environment. It's like using IM versus email. I could check my email every 30 seconds and interrupt my day, or somebody can shoot me an instant message and it gets pushed in my face. It's a lot less disruptive.
Asynchronous stuff is great for keeping shit organized. Having a trail of emails or a forum thread to refer to provides a really centralized place to get common information.
Leaders emerge on their own in most circumstances. Roles will be filled as the need arises as long as the necessary skills exist within the community.
That in mind, I like the scavenger hunt. some suggestions:
Team A hides a set of objects. Team B hides another.
Both teams search for the others objects.
Each team is allowed an amount of time (maybe 24 hours) without the objects to explore the game environment and find good hiding spots.
The team members perform the recon on their own time but can communicate out of game in a forum or whatever. During this time they fill the roles however they see fit come up with a strategy blah blah.
The winners would be the team that finishes first, or has the most objects after an hour. W/E
The game begins with 30 minutes to hide the objects, after which the teams immediately begin searching for their items. This is where people talk in game. Offering both text and voice chat would provide interesting metrics about people's preferences.
This sounds more like psych research using video games as a tool than video game interface research, IMO. -
QUOTESynchronous communication is an absolute must if your going to be able to immerse yourself in the game environment.
Yeah, one of their original ideas was to have one game where ONLY synchronous communication was permitted and another where ONLY asynchronous communication was permitted. I pointed out that it’s obvious that synchronous communication was going to be the “preferred” choice since the game takes place in a synchronous environment. Now we’re not restricting the communication at all, offering both forms of communication, and looking for a game that’s more neutral. By neutral I mean that there are some times in the game when asynchronous communication is preferred. That’s probably the hardest part for me to get my head around. How do you encourage asynchronous communication in a synchronous environment?QUOTEAsynchronous stuff is great for keeping shit organized. Having a trail of emails or a forum thread to refer to provides a really centralized place to get common information.
That’s why I was thinking about placing some kind of a distance-related restriction on voice chat in game so that players could only talk synchronously when they were located close to each other. That way to communicate globally or to relay information in a reviewable way the players would have to go to the forum. That’s just a first thought though, and I’m still looking or a better way to encourage both.QUOTELeaders emerge on their own in most circumstances. Roles will be filled as the need arises as long as the necessary skills exist within the community.
I agree entirely. The division I’m doing this for did a similar, albeit less advanced version of this experiment last year. The focus was a bit different, and no leaders were assigned. However, de facto leaders did pop up, which the people in charge were really interested in. This year they want to explore that a bit further. They know that roles pop up and that collaboration helps players achieve goals (the admittedly simple conclusions from last year’s experiment), but do assigned roles help or hinder the process? And how do different kinds of communication help in different situations?
It’s really interesting how something that seems completely obvious to people like us (they call us digital natives) can be obscure and worthy of big meetings and papers to “figure out” how it all works. I suppose that’s the point though.QUOTETeam A hides a set of objects. Team B hides another.
Both teams search for the others objects.
I absolutely love that idea. That’s exactly the kind of suggestion I was hoping for when I registered this morning! Thank you! If there is ever another LanBQ or something, I owe you a beer.QUOTEThis sounds more like psych research using video games as a tool than video game interface research, IMO.
You aren’t wrong. This post is already too long (shut up, Dan) so I won’t get into the details here. But yeah, it’s some really interesting stuff that has me looking at the internet and online games in a way I never have before. I'll save that for later though.
More more more! -
Also, tie in deadwood references in every written part of this project you can.
"Messages from invisible sources, Dan. Bad news."
"I don't see how the telegraph is any different from sending a letter, Al."
"What was the last message you received from a stranger, Dan?"
"Pa died."
"Bad. Fucking. News." -
QUOTE (dan @ Jun 18 2008, 10:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>First!
-dan
p.s. tl;dr
p.p.s. I'll respond after work, when I actually get a chance to read it.
Everytime I read your post now I picture you yelling them as you type. I don't understand why I have this problem but it's pretty rough I'm thinking of cutting myself, I've heard that works for people./blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blink:" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />
-
ANunes hit the nail on the head, but I'll add my thoughts. The only real experience I have with this stuff comes from Counter-Strike.
Synchronous communication is great for making strategy as things occur ingame, while asynchronous communication is good for organizing when to get together to play (forum posting or emailing your teammates when you are planning to practice or play a game).
In terms of assigned roles, if the players do not know each other to begin with, then immediately assigning a leader can get things going. But soon the players will figure out who the best players and natural leaders may be, and if the players already know each other, then they will probably already have a leader they follow.
In order to encourage asynchronous communication in the scavenger hunt, I think there should be 4 sections on each team's side and the other team should hide like 4 objects in each one. The players within sections could talk to each other synchronously and would have to use asynchronous methods to talk to the rest of their teammates. Perhaps a few players could find all objects in their section, go to a forum and post they did so and hope to look at the same thread to see which section they should head to next. Like maybe the other teammates made posts saying they found 2/4 in one section and 0/4 in another and so they go to the 0/4 section. ummmmm yeah -
QUOTEIn terms of assigned roles, if the players do not know each other to begin with, then immediately assigning a leader can get things going.
That’s a great point that I hadn’t really considered before right now. Similar to de facto leaders popping up – if no teams were assigned, and players each had their own personal goals that might overlap or come in conflict with other players’ goals, do you think de facto teams would emerge? I suppose it depends on the environment in which the players are located, but do the emergence of leaders and the emergence of teams share a common origin or purpose?QUOTEThe players within sections could talk to each other synchronously and would have to use asynchronous methods to talk to the rest of their teammates.
I like that a lot actually. I have a meeting later today where I finally find out what gaming platform I’ll be using, so hopefully I’ll be able to do something like that.
Just exchanging ideas with the couple people who posted here has helped me clarify my thoughts and gave me some new ideas already, keep them coming!
-
QUOTEGod damnit Workman, die already.
The way I see it, you've tried to kill me on several occasions already. If I'm not dead yet, I'm never dying. Reminds me of the time I said "if I didn't puke on my birthday, I'm never puking"...QUOTEThere should also be dicks. In game. Everywhere.
If I'm forced into Second Life, I'm pretty sure that's already taken care of. -
QUOTE (KevinWorkman @ Jun 18 2008, 10:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>(they wanted me to use Second Life, I want to program my own).
I hate Second Life -
QUOTE (ANunes @ Jun 18 2008, 11:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...
Asynchronous stuff is great for keeping shit organized. Having a trail of emails or a forum thread to refer to provides a really centralized place to get common information.
...
That in mind, I like the scavenger hunt. some suggestions:
Team A hides a set of objects. Team B hides another.
Both teams search for the others objects.
Each team is allowed an amount of time (maybe 24 hours) without the objects to explore the game environment and find good hiding spots.
The team members perform the recon on their own time but can communicate out of game in a forum or whatever. During this time they fill the roles however they see fit come up with a strategy blah blah.
The winners would be the team that finishes first, or has the most objects after an hour. W/E
...
I was thinking on this. If each team is allowed to explore the game environment before hand, you could disallow the synchronous communication until the competition actually starts. The way I see it, this is actually preferable. This will allow the people to map out the world and record it. In either example (HnS or scavenger hunt), I imagine the forum mentioning a nice hiding spot between these obstacles and obtrusions. At that point, there is a reference to it. Everyone on the team would have access to this record. Where in asynchronous communication, there is generally no indexing outside of when it occurred (time stamp for text and nothing for voice).
I was also considering how big the map would be and if there will be some sort of location coordinates to ease players into finding things. If you are interested you could even test the benefits of it. It be quicker to say I'm at xx:yy, than I'm between the giant tree and the three bushes. Just a thought.QUOTE (KevinWorkman @ Jun 19 2008, 12:06 PM)That’s a great point that I hadn’t really considered before right now. Similar to de facto leaders popping up – if no teams were assigned, and players each had their own personal goals that might overlap or come in conflict with other players’ goals, do you think de facto teams would emerge? I suppose it depends on the environment in which the players are located, but do the emergence of leaders and the emergence of teams share a common origin or purpose?
If you could invent a world that encourages that, I'd love to see it. The other option would be to have one group of friends against another group of friends, but the two groups do not know each other. Naturally, people will side with the familiar to combat the unknown.
-
Hi Jedd! Glad to see you're alive. Hope real person land is going well.
Anyway, I'm not using Second Life. I'm using OLIVE (Online Interactive Virtual Environment), which is more geared towards training and modeling serious situations than entertainment. However, we can get a private server (no worry about random furries like in SL) and modify it enough to host a scavenger-hunt like game in the world. It has been suggested to me to use an item already implemented, a screen that can portray an image, word, or power point presentation. The idea is to have a bunch of these screens each displaying a different word, and the players would collect and arrange these screens to form a coherent sentence, poem, or something like that. Think online magnetic poetry, in game form.QUOTEI was thinking on this. If each team is allowed to explore the game environment before hand, you could disallow the synchronous communication until the competition actually starts. The way I see it, this is actually preferable. This will allow the people to map out the world and record it. In either example (HnS or scavenger hunt), I imagine the forum mentioning a nice hiding spot between these obstacles and obtrusions. At that point, there is a reference to it. Everyone on the team would have access to this record. Where in asynchronous communication, there is generally no indexing outside of when it occurred (time stamp for text and nothing for voice).
That's not a bad idea, but I'm working with a time constraint here. I'll only have the players for an hour or two, and it's a one-time deal (although we'll probably run multiple sessions with different users). This limits what I can have them do before the game starts. They already need to go through a tutorial and fill out questionnaires before and after the experiment.
I'm juggling a few ideas now. One is to have a two part game like ANunes suggested. If I stick with the magnetic poetry idea, Team A would have a set of words to hide, Team B would have another. After hiding their respective pieces, the goal is to find the other team's hidden words and assemble them into some kind of poem, or the longest sentence, or something like that.
Some options I'm considering: Do the teams interact, or are they in two completely different areas? Can they see interfere by moving pieces or killing each other? I'm afraid that it would turn into an unorganized 3PS instead of a scavenger hunt game.QUOTEI was also considering how big the map would be and if there will be some sort of location coordinates to ease players into finding things. If you are interested you could even test the benefits of it. It be quicker to say I'm at xx:yy, than I'm between the giant tree and the three bushes. Just a thought.
The map is pretty big. It's supposed to model a small city, with different buildings and areas that can be used for meetings, simulations (military, fire police, hospital, etc). I don't think there is a coordinate system, but different areas are labeled. Players can teleport to any of the areas from a list, although we might disable that for the game to encourage walking and exploration. So players could say "meet me at the hospital" and then teleport to the hospital from the list.QUOTEIf you could invent a world that encourages that, I'd love to see it. The other option would be to have one group of friends against another group of friends, but the two groups do not know each other. Naturally, people will side with the familiar to combat the unknown.
I'm selecting from a finite list of people (other students in my program in different labs), so everybody is pretty much at the same level of familiarity with each other. However, you just got me thinking: I do have a different group of people that the students have never met who were going to serve as GMs or other played NPC's (if that makes sense). I could have them pose as another team, and then the students would be in a group against people they haven't met before. That could be interesting.
So, I'm still ridiculously unorganized, but I'm getting a lot of good ideas that I just need to work out. Any more suggestions or points to consider? -
Two words: Zombie Survival
Given the size of the environment you're describing, I think this would be feasible. One team starts out with the majority of the participants while the other starts out with only a couple or few. The bigger team would have to hide in the environment and try to avoid the smaller team using synchronous communication; however, if one of them is tagged by someone in the smaller group, they join that group, which does not have access to synchronous communication (zombies don't know how to work fancy mics). Game continues to last man standing.
I've played a variation of this on Zombie Panic and it works wonders; whereas most people who first play the game are utter scrubs and try to be the hero by themselves, the only way to really win is by working together and helping each other out to an extent I haven't seen even in games like Counter-strike. -
Well, I don't know how advanced this virtual environment engine thing is Workman is going to be working with so I don't know if some of the ideas I've stolen from Zombie Panic would be feasible, but basically the larger (human) group has these advantages to help each other out:
Voice communication - tell each other where the zombies are, where is safe to run, etc.
Speed - Humans are not dead, so they can run faster.
Guns - However, depending on how much guns and ammo a human is carrying, it slows them down. For example, if someone is carrying a shotgun with 12 shells and a rifle with 60 bullets, that human will be slower than even a zombie. Thus, it is smarter to distribute all available weapons as equally as possible among all the humans and it is doubly important to watch each other's backs, etc.
So as you can imagine, an average game consists of people who haven't gotten used to the team-based aspect of the game hoarding all the weapons for themselves and attempting to outlast the other group on their own; this inevitably leads to them being unable to run away because of the amount of shit they are carrying or they are overwhelmed when everyone who doesn't have protection dies and turns on them.
Once again, I'm not sure if this would work on the kind of engine/game Workman is planning on using, it might be too complicated, but I'm sure you could come up with other ways to substitute these variables
This discussion has been closed.
← All Discussions Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!