Tip.It Times Tip.It Times - 30th September 2012

[tripsis]

Time for a new release of the: >>>Tip.It Times!<<<

 

 

 

WRITE FOR THE TIMES - SUBMIT A GUEST ARTICLE:

Remember, YOU can write an article for the Tip.It Times! You can apply to write full time, or just submit a "one-off" guest article any time you want! Our editors will work with you to ensure that your article is ready for publication. All guest articles can be submitted to @tripsis or any other Editorial Panel member. For more information, including details on how to apply full time, read this forum thread: http://forum.tip.it/topic/209138-how-to-write-for-the-tipit-times/

 

I'd like to remind people of the rules pertaining to Times threads:

 

[hide=Read these rules before posting in this thread]

Rampant flame wars have taken control of virtually every week's times discussion topics. The following guidelines must be followed when posting on this topic. Posts that ignore these guidelines will be removed.

 

1. You are invited and welcome to express like or dislike on articles and a particular author's writing style. It is not acceptable, however, to flame or personally insult an author. Posts that aren't anything but an attack will be removed from the topic.

 

2. Spelling and grammar errors can be reported to tripsis by PMing her and they will be fixed promptly. It is not necessary to post them on the discussion topic.

 

3. Off topic posts that do not discuss the content of that week's articles will be removed. This is not the place to discuss the direction of the times, how much you love or hate the times, etc. Off topic posts will be removed.

 

By keeping within these guidelines, Times discussion topics will mean more for the Panel and Administration than just a place for flame wars. Flame wars do not provide any useful feedback to the Times, which is mainly what we're aiming for with these topics: feedback.

 

This policy is effective as of now, November 17, 2010. Any posts prior to the creation of this policy may or may not be removed according to the new guidelines.

[/hide]

 

When replying please make sure to clarify the article you are replying to! Thanks!

 

If you spot any typos or mistakes in an article then please PM them to @tripsis. :)

 

Enjoy the articles!

[RU_Insane]

Some additional commentary for You Don't Speak For Me:

 

My point isn't to say that there isn't a threshold at which we cease playing the game. It's merely that packing your things and leaving isn't an appropriate response to every negatively received update. This is defeatism, what I'm arguing against. Quality of game experience is subjective and reliant on the particular user interacting with the game. It follows that each player threshold is subjective, though there are clear common threads strung through each one. If an update or set of updates greatly interrupts your normal playing experience, by all means, pack up and leave. But don't criticize the others who decide to ride out the rocky road; their grievances are no less legitimate than yours. They simply have different ways of resolving them (i.e. constructive criticism). Just in case this wasn't clear in the article.

[Ciabelle]

WRT Jagex reworking game mechanics to influence player behavior; I believe they got it mostly right with the new challenges system. By offering a proverbial carrot (extra XP) to encourage players to try different training methods, it helps break up the pure grind that trying to train either in the fastest, cost-efficient, and/or profitable ways can lead to. I doubt it can breathe life back into moribund content such as Trouble Brewing--There needs to be a critical mass of players willing and able to be pursue these activities at any time of the day or night in order for them to have a chance of becoming viable. But for a player grinding their way around Ape Atoll to be encouraged to check out the agility pyramid or arena, may introduce them to content they've never explored due to "poor efficiency" and find they're enjoying the activity and meeting new friends.

 

The problems I do see is that too many of the challenges remain fairly mundane. Smith 200 adamant bars or burn 30 magic logs or whatnot--Pretty much the same thing we've done (using other materials) since the day we completed the initial Runescape tutorial. Secondly, this is an update I think should have been extended to F2P as well. Why not encourage them to also explore the Great Orb Project or Dungeoneering or other content available to them that they may have overlooked while fishing lobs on Karamja for days on end?

[RU_Insane]

In response to the Meddling article:

 

Players self-organize in particular ways, given that the material conditions to do so exist. I think it's pretty explicit when Jagex intends to influence player behavior in a meaningful way. Look at the recent attempts to strangle third-party gambling; that didn't go over well. Can't it be said that most updates are, in the grand scheme, a protracted effort to influence game-play and hence user behavior? In what direction isn't always clear, though. Sometimes the updates don't function as intended, because the target group finds new, creative uses for them (i.e. emergent gaming and dicing).

 

The problem, I agree, is with Jagex fixing things that aren't broken, or failing when they are. Both outcomes can be seen as attempts to influence behavior. Though for the first outcome, it could also be filler content offered as an alternative to mainstream gameplay. In this case, it's not so much "influencing" as it is trying to spice up game-experience, but being too out of touch with the population to do it effectively. This is the probably the reason why social Slayer didn't have as large an impact as it could've.

[Extragorey]

Some great articles this week.

"House or Home?" really drove home how the "good ol' days" weren't necessarily good because of the game, but because of player circumstance.

"You Don't Speak For Me" had some well-researched figures and statistical inference, explaining the mentality behind Jagex's perpetual downhill tumble... But really, it's not necessary to reference Google Calculator, lol.

And the "Meddling with out minds?" article raised an interesting point about player communities... Though I would argue that Jagex are actually incapable of directly intervening with player behaviour. Because as a developer, the players are a rather enigmatic bunch. How individual updates will be received is usually unpredictable, with players sometimes creating emergent gameplay out of content intended for an entirely different purpose. Or, as the article describes, simply exploiting social structures to reach their chosen goal and then ditching the content.

So with player behaviour being so unpredictable, Jagex ultimately have little control over it. They might want to increase player interactions, and implement a system designed to do so (see: Social Slayer). Or conversely, they might want to limit player interactions (for minors or muted players), giving us Quick Chat worlds, for example.

But these systems won't necessarily be used as intended - they live or die by the playerbase's reception.

Thus Jagex can implement whatever system or content they wish, but it still gives them no control over player behaviour.

[RU_Insane]

Thanks for the feedback! :D

[Jonanananas]

WRT Jagex reworking game mechanics to influence player behavior; I believe they got it mostly right with the new challenges system. By offering a proverbial carrot (extra XP) to encourage players to try different training methods, it helps break up the pure grind that trying to train either in the fastest, cost-efficient, and/or profitable ways can lead to. I doubt it can breathe life back into moribund content such as Trouble Brewing--There needs to be a critical mass of players willing and able to be pursue these activities at any time of the day or night in order for them to have a chance of becoming viable. But for a player grinding their way around Ape Atoll to be encouraged to check out the agility pyramid or arena, may introduce them to content they've never explored due to "poor efficiency" and find they're enjoying the activity and meeting new friends.

 

The problems I do see is that too many of the challenges remain fairly mundane. Smith 200 adamant bars or burn 30 magic logs or whatnot--Pretty much the same thing we've done (using other materials) since the day we completed the initial Runescape tutorial. Secondly, this is an update I think should have been extended to F2P as well. Why not encourage them to also explore the Great Orb Project or Dungeoneering or other content available to them that they may have overlooked while fishing lobs on Karamja for days on end?

 

Yeah it's a step into the right direction, but imo, it should have a more lasting effect than breaking up training for a few minutes daily. Players will see new training methods, but I doubt many of them will use those who are simply less efficient.

 

Some great articles this week.

"House or Home?" really drove home how the "good ol' days" weren't necessarily good because of the game, but because of player circumstance.

"You Don't Speak For Me" had some well-researched figures and statistical inference, explaining the mentality behind Jagex's perpetual downhill tumble... But really, it's not necessary to reference Google Calculator, lol.

And the "Meddling with out minds?" article raised an interesting point about player communities... Though I would argue that Jagex are actually incapable of directly intervening with player behaviour. Because as a developer, the players are a rather enigmatic bunch. How individual updates will be received is usually unpredictable, with players sometimes creating emergent gameplay out of content intended for an entirely different purpose. Or, as the article describes, simply exploiting social structures to reach their chosen goal and then ditching the content.

So with player behaviour being so unpredictable, Jagex ultimately have little control over it. They might want to increase player interactions, and implement a system designed to do so (see: Social Slayer). Or conversely, they might want to limit player interactions (for minors or muted players), giving us Quick Chat worlds, for example.

But these systems won't necessarily be used as intended - they live or die by the playerbase's reception.

Thus Jagex can implement whatever system or content they wish, but it still gives them no control over player behaviour.

 

I wouldn't say they have no control whatsoever. They have few control, but that could still be used to push players into one direction a bit. There would have to be put a lot more thought into the design though.