My Experience: An Open Letter to CCP

[Siegfried_Tahl]

@siegfried_tahl

Player types

I heard many times in Talking in Stations, INN, CCP twitch videos how they oppose “fighter” and “builder” player types. That is pretty narrow view on player motivation. CCP_Hellmar often brings up Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, a theory which has been falsified. At least in that the “hierarchy” part is based on the assumption that the lower needs must be satisfied before a person can achieve their potential and self-actualize, which is demonstrably false.

PLEASURE AND MOTIVATION IN VIDEO GAMES

Game Reward Systems: Gaming Experiences and Social Meanings
Many researchers have tried to clarify why people play video games. LeBlanc (2004) has proposed an MDA (mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics) model for game design analysis that includes a list of eight kinds of fun: sensation, fantasy, narrative, challenge, fellowship, discovery, expression, and submission (see also Hunicke, 2004). Lazzaro (2004) has listed four keys to creating emotion in video games as hard fun, easy fun, altered state, and a people factor. Bartle’s (1996) four player categories, based on multi- user dungeon (MUD) games, are achievers, killers, socializers, and explorers—a taxonomy that corresponds to player activities. Based on player responses to massively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPGs), Yee (2007) has extended Bartle’s taxonomy to propose three major MMORPG gaming components: achievement, mmersion, and social interaction. According to Ryan et al. (2006), the pull of a game is sometimes associated with out-of-game effects. Using self-determination theory (SDT), they posit that the pull of games largely results from their ability to generate (at least in the short term) three key feelings of well-being: autonomy (sense of willingness), competence (challenge and feeling of effectance), and relatedness (feeling of connection with other people). Koster (2005) views game fun in terms of four categories: fun, aesthetic appreciation, visceral reactions, and social status maneuvers. In that taxonomy, un focuses on mastering a problem mentally—that is, recognizing new patterns based on our brain’s desire for stimuli. Thus, Koster’s definition of a good game is one that teaches a player all aspects of the game before the player stops playing. In the following sections, we analyze how reward systems provide pleasure and satisfying experiences by classifying rewards and playing activities, and relate reward mechanics to psychological theories.

Famous Bartle taxonomy of player types , which divides players into Killers, Achievers, Explorers, and Socializers according to their interest in acting/interacting with world/players.

Famous Self-determination theory claims that Autonomy, Competence and Relatedness are innate and universal psychological needs.

I highly recommend watching Ubisoft’s Jason VandenBerghe GDC2016 talk Engines of Play: How Player Motivation Changes Over Time (1:02:12) where he connects O.C.E.A.N. personality model with SDT theory and Bartle’s taxonomy.

By taking away sand from the sandbox CCP is taking a lot of autonomy, competence and relatedness away from players, thus destroying intrinsic motivation, player trust, long term planning, ability to establish dominance hierarchies, which supported serotonin reward system. Scarcity also crippled extrinsic motivation of players, which supported @CCP_Dopamine reward system.