Extra Credits: TransGaming

This week, we try (and fail) to contain our excitement about connected gaming experiences.

Show Notes:

Details about the PAX East meet-up available here! http://extra-credits.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1839

Audio Version:
Download

Recent Comments:

  • I think I wasn't quite as clear as I meant to be. I'm talking about gamification first. Gamify a classroom, gamify a social media site, gamify... taxes, I dont know, whatever. Could be anything. But that's just step #1.

    Step #2 is using transgaming to pair traditional, social, casual, console gaming up with other things which you gamified! Sure, this is useful on a base level for turning a profit, but you also allow kids to assist their classmates by hopping on to call of duty for an hour, and allow a roommate to assist in a 3rd world with me while I'm on an MMO. If properly implemented, you could vamp up Gamification's appeal by like 40% by pairing it with transgaming options as well.


    I understood what you wrote. The topic of this thread is Transgaming, and I'd prefer staying on that. Gamification is related, but not significantly. Suffice it to say, Transgaming in any way, using any media, is a precarious subject. Tying transgaming to competitive advantage means that it will, in all likelihood, become a necessity, either by design or by player min-maxing.

    L5R has been doing a fine job of transgaming already, using the results of regional card game tournaments, the involved deck compositions thereof, and polls of their fanbase to sculpt the continuing epic. While the experiences of the players DO shape the world, it does not, generally, affect the competitive advantages therein. Tying somebody's performance in one game to the performance of one or more players in a completely different game is disheartening. Directly tying somebody's academic performance in any way to performance in a video game is perverting the academic process in a frightening way. To tie somebody's academic performance to somebody else's performance in a video game is simply atrocious.

    We already see this in social media, in facebook games specifically. You want to run a successful farm, or mafia family, or clothing store? Well, you're never able to compete with that person who has 20 friends backing them, unless you want to spend 20 dollars a week. Imagine that problem in every other game you play. That interesting character in Final Fantasy is out of your reach because you don't have enough friends who also play that game, and he comes with some SWEET gear! That sniper rifle you've been looking for in the latest Call of Duty needs 5 more friends to buy the game and credit you with convincing them to purchase it. How about doing okay in the algebra test, but because somebody living in a country you never heard of couldn't win at Capture the Flag, your grade dropped have to retake the entire course. Last example a bit extreme? Then what if it was somebody you knew? Care to lose friendships because games were tied to other games, or your academic performance? That's what it'll lead to.

    Transgaming is an interesting idea, but at its core there's far too much possibility of corrupting it. Until we have more solid and widely-used applications that WON'T ruin our lives or our gaming experiences, we should view it with an unhealthy amount of skepticism. My advice for it is, shape the narrative, not the playing field.

  • Was I the only only one who thought of people playing opposite their gender identities when they read the title? :?

    Okay, this is all very intriguing stuff. However I can foresee how it may be abused and lead to some dark future. There can possibly be tremendous pressure to branch out onto other titles just to keep up with one profile on one game.

    As for Dust 514 being set in the EVE Universe and affecting the lore, it's a really smart move, and possibly and evil one. I am amongst many of the countless people who think that EVE appears to be the most tedious chore one could ever call a game. I have friends who spend all their free time playing it and who have tried to get me into it, but I've always been too turned off by what it does to them. (I don't care what James calls it, it's an addiction.)

    This strategy is akin to some drug dealer selling you marijuana, but lacing it with crack. A strategy to make casual gamers more hardcore, or compel action gamers into grinding. This could be a gateway drug to the hardcore heroin known as EVE Online.

  • By the sound of it, Peter Molyneux's newly created company 22cans will be bringing in some more transgaming experiences over the next few years.
    Their first game, Curiosity, is an experiment in psychology and monetisation, but their next games will apparently be played across Facebook and Twitter accounts.

  • Its interesting, I've been working on a game which involves many of these ideas,

    For Many years I've been a Gamesmaster, I worked a long time on my world ideas, and my friends who wanted to gamesmaster too wanted to play in the same 'world' so I would have to publish things.. But my world is dynamic, players influence the world around them, so I put the game into a 'turn based' world, which each Player has control of some aspects of 1 Country, but GM's have access to the insides of each location because it influences the availability of equipment their players can acquire.

    E.g. The City of Hodenstrike, is Based on the edge of the Black Spire Mountains, They have a very large trade industry with the Dwarves in the mountain city of KazGazule, they provide troops to the Dwarves to fight in the tunnels against the Orc and Goblin Hordes. As a result, the city has far cheaper standard weapons, and alot of access to some quality Dwarven forged weapons too.

    The players can buy Steal based and Dwarven based Items at Half price, they can choose specialist paths for Careers from within this city, Any Dwarf or Human Fighter starts 2 levels higher, due to Barracks training for All city inhabitants.

    Hodenstrike, KazGazule, the Orcs and the Goblins are all Players in the Civ game, The Alliance between Hodenstrike and KazGazule is played by another player (of which 7 other players participate) and the entire thing is watched over by another player playing a Necromancer Lord, who influences things to increase the dead body count.

    Two GM's in two different countries use the data from the server (and my crappy UI) to understand these events as plots for their D & D campaigns...

    Right now, I'm working on a new addition to the game to allow other players to play a 'Wargame' which will influence the general outcome of the battles that take place. Its called Warlords of Legend. This should create more backstory and more current plot for the realms..

    Eventually, I'd love to make it open to the public, but Warlords is teaching me alot about the perils of open games and public opinion..

    If I could.. I'd mix Minecraft and Dwarf fortress in too.

  • I know what you're getting at as far as connected gaming experiences (transgaming) but I just don't like it....

    Here's the main issue i have...
    Players are going to have advantages over other players (depending how the game is set up) and really, that is fun for nobody when you're ALWAYS the one losing. That is one way to turn around and never play that game ever again.

    I played EVE for 300+ hours. My biggest grief was the pirating system. It rewards bad players, it rewards "douchebags" and the worst of the worst. What made it worse was the "game laws" set in place to enable that. It's been a while, so my memory on the details isn't fresh, someone correct me If I'm wrong here, but i remember the laws being double-standard and set up weird. What they did was steal your items, replace it with theirs, and then when you go to take "your stuff" that gives them free reign to open fire against you.... and the computer "police" did nothing to punish that pirate.

    The whole thing about EVE was that it was player-controlled. The market was up to players economy, and prices were all set depending on the supply/demand. That only meant that the rich got richer, the poorer got poorer.

    There was strength in numbers.

    It became a hive of sheep followers. There's no individual experience with that.... that isn't fun to me at all.

    I also didn't like their "pay to win" scheme that CCP had set up. You could pay real money for PLEX and turn it into game money and upgrade your gear.. so in turn it was a pay to win situation in which the company got rich off people.

    No thanks.

    You're only going to see the same thing happen with DUST. Strength in numbers, and joining whoever is the most "popular" clan/company....

    I will not support Dust 514, nor will I ever support CCP.

Join The Discussion: