SEAK players are usually very interested in the the 'total experience' of a virtual world--meeting other people and finding the unique places within it. They don't care much for PVP or levelling, but meeting up with online friends to see new parts of the world is usually fun and exciting.

Take the MMORPG Bartle Test yourself and copy/paste your results into the comments of this article. =)

The questionnaire is based on a design by Richard Bartle, famous for also creating the world's first MUD in 1978.

Here it is, my first tattoo. A purple Space Invader.

I have a Space Invader on my hand!!

Pain and I spent yesterday at the Vancouver Tattoo Convention. We wandered around, oggling the various punks, goths, bikers and preppies getting tattoos, plus we spent mucho time flipping through sample photos at the various booths. Some were incredibly impressive, others were not. There was a huge amount of variety and some artists from pretty far away (the scrawny gothish/punkish UK tattoo artists were rather cute).

After perusing the floor, we took a break outside to get some fresh air and discuss which artists we'd get to do our tattoos. Both of our designs were simple and small and we agreed that it would be almost silly to take up the time of some of the uber talented artists, so we'd just look for a booth that wasn't too busy and where the artists seemed friendly enough. Most friendly seemed to be a booth from Saskatoon and another from Colorado. Pain liked the idea of getting tats from non-local artists, because this wasn't exactly big followup work. When we went back the Saskatoon booth was busy, so the Colorado folks (Guilty By Association, no website unfortunately) were it.

It was a good choice, the artist (Tia Hughbanks) did a great job on Pain's heart over her heart and gave us a cheap combo deal. When I said I wanted a Space Invader on my hand, Tia got very excited and suggested in the future I get a Sinistar tattoo as well, which made me laugh because of course Sinistar was an option in my head already. She also was very enthusiastic at my plans of getting some Joust artwork done later on down the road, maybe I'll actually visit Colorado to get it done.

The tattoo, like most, isn't absolutely perfect. I'd planned on solid black, but after she outlined the transfer I said that the blue/purple was rather striking. She said I could switch to purple then, although she hadn't been super careful with the outline because she figured with solid black she could touch up. Of course, if I didn't like the purple or the slight variety in the lines I could always get it filled with black later, so I went for it. I'm very pleased with it and Pain says that with one eye slightly wider than the other my Space Invader has character and I'm inclined to agree.

I'm very pleased overall, I'll definitely get more tattoos. This almost feels like not much of one because it's so small and it really doesn't seem permanent at all, even though it is, because it looks like I took a felt marker to myself, heheh.

As for the experience, the pain was almost nothing, nowhere near the amount that my branding was, even though I got the tattoo on a more sensitive skin area. I think I could easily manage a large tattoo, which is good because I have several pieces planned.

I'd like to debunk the current myth and trend that games need to get more and more casual and have less and less barriers.

A game is a challenge within a subset of rules.

Challenge doesn't necessarily mean hard, because it could be anything, even pure luck. Roll the dice and win, or in the best example: A slot machine is still a game. Of course, even a slot machine has rules, you can't just smash it open.

I think most people would define pure luck as poor gameplay, regardless of how compelled they may be to play.

I also think most people would define something that they cannot 'beat' as poor gameplay, but that's more personal, because something extraordinarily difficult for one person could be relatively easy for another. Variety is the best solution.

The problem, I feel, is that the entire games industry is focusing on making things more casual / easy / accessible. It's a natural turn, why wouldn't they want to have a wider base of customers to sell to? So the 'hardcore gamer' as it were, is being vilified, even by people who probably fit the description (key note: If you've ever written a word about games on your blog). The bandwagon is currently praising elements that aren't really gameplay.

The easiest way to become more accessible is to reduce gameplay. Reduce the challenge. It's the biggest barrier, right?

The easiest way to reduce barriers is to lax and widen the ruleset. Rules are barriers.

After reducing challenge and rules, the next step to more inclusion is to increase the rewards. Dangle the carrot, maybe even drop it more often. Human beings have complex and numerous subtle incentives that they'll react to.

In the hunt for reaching a wider, more casual market, developers have to be careful they aren't gutting their games in the process.

Let's just please not end up playing nothing but slot machines.

Dan Ariely has some insights on the likelyhood of people to 'cheat' in any given situation. Note: He is not a game developer, this is about human behaviour.

Most of his talk goes against established game theory, but much of it rings true.

I wonder how much of this could be applied to online gaming.

In one instance, he talks about how people will much more readily steal tokens or items than cash, even if they have the same intrinsic value. Is there some possible way to give weight to game items by making them more like real money or something else we would apply the sort of psychological guilt he refers to?

And what about signing some sort of 'moral code' document, as he exampled, to significantly reduce cheating? Self-policing methods like this are probably a lot more effective than trying to convince players they're being watched, or having players report player abuse / exploits (which I suspect psychologically speaking, isn't much deterrent at all).

We've got a competitive culture of money. Oddly as I complain about nickel and dime schemes, someone else comes out to defend the peddlers. Because taking people's money is so damn respected.

Pay-to-Pee.

Now here's an airline proposing that they charge patrons to use the toilet. It's funny at first, but then someone is bound to realize that if they're there, on that plane, they'll pay it. And then they'll say it wasn't so bad, the airline has to make money after all.

What's so fun about spending in small increments for things that should be included? Especially when the increments add up to large numbers quickly. Maybe that's even more respected: Stealthily taking as much money as possible. That's clever right? They're great for being so clever and taking our money so much. Love the con man for the artistry of his con.

Why do we put up with this? Isn't it theft to be charged again for part of something you've already purchased? And shouldn't we expect maintenance, updates and improvements on services we're paying subscription fees for? We're already paying.

What's next, paying for the barf bag, or the lifejacket or oxygen mask? They'll call it insurance of course. Hell, isn't there already insurance for losing your luggage? Shouldn't that be a responsible part of the service in the first place? A little disclaimer takes that out, so you don't have much recourse when they lose something valuable. It was your fault, even though they lost it, you should have known better than to trust people you paid to transport you and your things. So get the insurance. More nickels. More dimes.

Pay for a Service twice?

Services within other services are treated like the new revenue stream. Is this really the future, whether we like it or not?

Why am I charged a system access fee for my cell phone? I already paid a startup fee, a connection fee and I pay for each and every individual feature my phone uses. What the hell is the system access fee for exactly? That's not a real actual thing, it's mumbo jumbo for let's charge you something extra so your $40 plan comes as a $50 billing.

Have we just gotten used to being double-dipped?

Why should MMOs start micro-charging for individual in-game features and items? Because it's the quickest way to bigger profits? Seriously, are they struggling? We pay a monthly fee for a game that's updated and maintained, including features and content that we patiently wait for that should have been in the release. Charging more should be a breach of trust, so why does it seem like players are ready to take that in stride? Taking more of our money is respected. Too damn respected.

Except I don't.

I don't respect it.

It pisses me off. I end up using the same product, paying more, but looking for a competitor that doesn't piss me off. If all of the competitors do it, I get pissed at that entire industry, for being corrupt. I'm not the only one.

The carrot and the bait-and-switch. The handling fees but no guarantees for how it's handled. The micro-you-won't-notice-if-its-in-small-payments-transactions on top of a subscription I'm already paying.

Charge me up front or charge me per service, but don't recurse and reiterate those charges.

Game Payment Models.

Microtransactions? Maybe if that's the only revenue you're tapping, but I'm probably not your market because I expect I'd get overcharged that way. Even the name for it: 'Free 2 Play' is a bit of a marketing scam. You pay as you go, it's not really free. You may start with a small trial at first, but should we label every game that has a corresponding demo as 'Free'?

Boxed? Great. I almost referred to it as the old-fashioned way. Pay for a game, there you go.

Boxed + Subscription? Fine, I'll even gladly pay for expansions if they're significant. I'm happy to pay fair prices for good services. I'm even thrilled by ongoing content updates (if they actually include content, after all, I'm paying). But I loathe being tricked into paying more (or getting less) than I expected. Don't bullshit me that my subscription pays for playing online, I can do that without paying monthly. My subscription pays for you to update your game to a reasonable degree. In exchange, you get to launch while still missing a feature or two. I accept that, even though I almost shouldn't.

Boxed + Subscription + Expansions + Microtransactions / DLC + Promotional Extras? C'mon, seriously?

I'm a self-confessed consumer whore. I am happy when you're making an honest buck, but stop ripping me off with all this extra dinging. Pick one revenue model, don't try to sneak all of them in.

I don't want to order a Steak and get charged when the waiter uses the pepper mill, but sadly I expect that'll probably happen eventually too. And someone will happily explain that pepper costs money too. Maybe we'll even get charged for every ingredient in our meal, after paying for the meal itself of course. That's all perfectly reasonable to someone, just so long as it's a clever way to make money.

*sigh*

Games are not Movies.
Games are not Movies.
Games are not Movies.

It's been said thousands of times before, but now it's been said three times again. Perhaps more might be needed.

Games are games.

Even though a variety of developer <-> publisher relationships have been tried, and will continue to evolve, you cannot drop in a production model from another industry. For starters, game development itself isn't broken, many great games have been made. This isn't a small infant industry anymore. Game development isn't even strictly the same as software development, although it's often mistaken as such.

Waaaay too many bad comparisons lately. Games are not Cars, TV Shows, Sports or Comic Books either.

Go over to the Deadly Creatures site, click on videos and watch the clip of them motion-capturing a scorpion. Just do it, trust me. =)