Filtering player temperament through game design

[Gashlycrumb]

@Kestrel said:

Lastly, and this may be controversial because I know the hobby loves this genre, but I think I would personally avoid horror as a central theme, based on this metastudy. And again, going back to the big fat disclaimer, this isn’t a criticism of individual tastes

I want to pick at the metastudy, though. It seems like most of the studies it references had fewer than 200 participants. No study that includes ‘The Unholy Trinity’ (Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), and The Omen (1976)) should be generalised because the cultural response to those was just too damn weird. They don’t seem to consider horror sub-genres or the places where horror becomes ‘thriller’ and that bloodiest of genres, ‘action.’

From the MU angle, it may not track well because horror movie lovers and horror readers may not be the same group. Also, superficially horror themes might really be something else – WoD MUs are, like Twilight, romances with superheroes.

They did suggest that it’s a superhero-like power-fantasy + bloodshed that’s appealing to the younger and lower empathy sorts.

I do say no PC antagonists of the sort who are just going to rush into to-the-death PvP. No “I am a murderous murderer who likes to murder” character concepts, and I absolutely will GM-engineer terrible consequences to the careless murder of NPC goons.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

Just one thing springs to mind that I don’t think anyone else already mentioned (although I’m pre-coffee, so don’t kill me if I’m wrong): Competitiveness.

A pure PVE environment where there is little to be gained from competing against other player characters does a lot to weed out some of the more toxic aspects of PVP and competitive games. Of course, it also takes away some of the excitement, so you need to decide whether the trade-off is worth it.

[Roadspike]

@L.-B.-Heuschkel Yes, but…

A pure PvE environment without titles to gain or any “real” PvP… will still have people competing over something, even if it’s just “having the most-referenced posts in the community journal” or “getting in the pants of the new hottie” or “winning the quarterly basketball game.”

But you’re very right that designing away from PvP and toward PvE will limit some of the toxic aspects of PvP and competitiveness.

[MisterBoring]

@Roadspike Agreed. In my experience, I’ve witnessed plenty of people get competitive over who gets to resolve the big plots and stuff, and get just as toxic as direct PVP can get. Some people live in a permanent state of “If I’m not winning, I’m not having fun, and if I’m not having fun, nobody else can.”

[Pavel]

@Roadspike said:

But you’re very right that designing away from PvP and toward PvE will limit some of the toxic aspects of PvP and competitiveness.

It also has the added benefit that one can more easily establish and enforce rules against the more insidious PVP and competitiveness toxicity, and will build the kind of community (ideally) where such things are more likely to be reported or commented upon.

[KDraygo]

@MisterBoring said:

@Roadspike Agreed. In my experience, I’ve witnessed plenty of people get competitive over who gets to resolve the big plots and stuff, and get just as toxic as direct PVP can get. Some people live in a permanent state of “If I’m not winning, I’m not having fun, and if I’m not having fun, nobody else can.”

Main character syndrome.

[MisterBoring]

Yep. Main character syndrome all the way.

[Faraday]

@Roadspike said:

But you’re very right that designing away from PvP and toward PvE will limit some of the toxic aspects of PvP and competitiveness.

Yeah, it’s true that you can’t prevent people from being competitive, but discouraging it works pretty well.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

Fighting main character syndrome seems like another kettle of fish entirely – one that cannot be solved by limiting competition. People like that will indeed find something to compete over because that’s what they’re looking for, and to hell with what anyone else thinks.

[Pavel]

@L.-B.-Heuschkel Is there a way to filter these people out purely through game design or community design, or is it a case of finding them and plucking them out like stray hairs with the tweezers of fuckoffitude?

[Kestrel]

I think the “I need to be winning” mindset isn’t discouraged by PvE at all, tbh.

There are toxic reasons why some players prefer PvP, but I also think there are toxic reasons why some players prefer PvE. Like, is it because they want to collaborate with other players? Or is it because their persistently obnoxious behaviour tends to invite challenge, and they’d prefer an environment where they won’t be, and the person doing that is the bad guy?

The type of toxic player I see on a PvP game is someone who needs to prove they can take out other players.

The type of toxic player I see on PvE games is a self-insert power fantasy who acts like if you don’t agree with everything their character says/does, and stroke their ego, you’re being rude.

The chill type of player I see on a PvP game is someone who separates themselves from their character, intentionally wrote in flaws and exploitable secrets, and looks forward to other players using those pressure points to drive the story forward.

The chill type of player I see on a PvE game is someone who enjoys being part of an ensemble cast working together to solve the main story’s problem.

But I just don’t really buy into the idea that PvP/PvE inherently inspires a higher calibre of players.

[Faraday]

@Kestrel said:

But I just don’t really buy into the idea that PvP/PvE inherently inspires a higher calibre of players.

I wouldn’t say it inspires a higher calibre of players, but it absolutely creates a different type of drama. I personally would much rather deal with some nitwit who gets pissy because someone else got a medal / got promoted / got more “kills” in the last battle / etc. than deal with players trying to directly kill / ruin / impose their will upon other PCs.