This week, I cancelled my subscription to World of Warcraft; now this could be a typical “Blizzard suks and I haet them” post, or we could go a little deeper into the fundamentals behind the game. While it's arguable the state of the game is on a decline, and Blizzard are slowly losing it's members – I feel there's a much deeper prospect involved in why we play online games, and in particular – World of Warcraft.
Through this post I'll be talking from personal experience, as well as speculating some of the psychology behind the game and it's “drawing point” that allures people in such a Siren like manner.
People start playing World of Warcraft based on it's popularity, it's aesthetics and the marketing tools Blizzard use to portray their game as a godly essence in the MMO industry. Every expansion has had a new, vibrant colour – even the box is designed to look expensive. The game really stands out on the shelves of super markets; take the latest expansion for example. The Cataclysm box has an enormous red dragon on the front, emboldened with special printing techniques, with an enormous yellow, orange & red logo at the top.
The box even opens out into a much larger picture, even though the game could just be sold in a DVD box – that this “outter box” - contains anyway. Other than just being big, bold and bright – it also shows the consumer that this company is willing to put out money even on it's box. I'm sure you've seen ads where they've got an enormous amount of white space. This has that very appeal. It shows people this is a big company, with cash to splash; and when people think big companies, they automatically assume “more expensive, must be better” and conclude that this must be the best MMORPG out there.
The game itself is cartoony; this aesthetic element gives the game a better impression on the surreal than the games that try to look real, but end up looking quite poor graphically. If there's one thing Blizzard do well, it's floating platforms. They appear in just about every zone of the game – it gives the impression to the user that this is beyond the normal confides of reality. This is a place of infinite possibility – heck the ground isn't even obeying one of the first things we learn – gravity (we know for a fact, even from 3 or so years old, things fall from high places to low places).
Every class in the game uses a bright array of colours, in both equipment and abilities. By having enormous fireballs shooting from a mages hand, or a warrior making a huge red splash while swinging an enormous axe, people feel empowered. It's a glorification of strength when you feel like you've swung that axe, and made that enormous red gush come from the enemy – when in truth it's just an animated swing that's going to happen every time.
Speaking of enormous swinging weapons – I'm sure you've all noticed the enormous change in pace in the lower levels of the game. For those of you that remember the early days – Vanilla, the earlier part of the Burning Crusade – the game was actually quite tough and time consuming to get to those higher levels. It was more like working than playing.
This change was significant, the newer players buying the game feel empowered with what they're doing; if you were playing football and you scored a David Beckham-like goal first try, you'd feel pretty good at football already. The earlier people feel empowered and strong, the more inspired they'll be to continue playing. To those of you out there that play a healer – did you do any dungeons between levels 82-84? If so you'll have noticed the enormous leap in difficulty that actually came with levelling up those last few times.
This right angle of a difficulty curve does not matter – people have already bought the game and felt empowered enough to make it to that point. This is where Blizzard put their foot down and tell us “this is what decides the men from the children”; and of course, people persevere. This kind of leap in difficulty gradually plateaus out as it's balanced with gaining equipment – again this gives people an ideology of improvement and advancement. The game makes people feel powerful.
Now let's take a look at raiding; the raiding prospect in World of Warcraft is a community activity so to speak. A group of people take a chunk of their day, to come together in order to accomplish something that one person alone cannot do – it gives a unification and bonding experience to those involved, especially when that “3 week boss” is finally killed. This is the point I would like to endear on the most – this false idea of satisfaction is not as it would seem.
For most it is a symptom of relief; that much anticipated boss, that your group of people – the group you've been bonding with – have finally succeeded in downing that hurdle. This is the idea of your hard work paying off – the paying off being the 'rewards' (I'll explore that a little further in a minute) – and that you are entitled to these rewards through this hard work. But in all truth there is no physical, and in most cases, no mental division of capability in the game. There is no ultimate division between you and the other players – except the division that you have perceived to exist through the 'accomplishment' of killing that boss.
One of these rewards mentioned earlier is the prestige and honourable mentions for your triumphs (this mainly refers to competitive raiding); when you've killed that 'difficult and time consuming' boss that not a lot of others have – well, that makes you feel prestigious, skilled and capable. It gives you the impression that your ability to function well enough to kill this boss, has set you aside from those that haven't. This can be paraphrased as “feeding your own ego”; it's the division you have created for yourself, amongst a specific group of people.
You can invent a game and be the best at it – but that doesn't mean everyone will acknowledge or care about this. It's only in your own perception that you are the master of that game and therefore the best, honourable and important for that game and it's existence.
Now if you're still not quite following how, it's like this: if I go up to a low level character, they'll see my level is superior to theirs. They'll see my equipment is more aesthetically pleasing than theirs; however, it is more than likely it will go no further than that. You will 'look' impressive to them based on what they have, compared to what you have. The actual killing of a boss means nothing to them – it's not something they've experienced – and only those that have, will understand this 'division' you have set up for yourself.
Example: If you collect sew on buttons, only those that collect sew on buttons will really understand or accept what you've done as being commendable – to everyone else it's pretty much just a pile of buttons.
The point on role models will also be used a little later on – just bear with me.
Another point of these rewards is the Skinner box technique, now there video made about this on “The Escapist Magazine” and can be found here (The Escapist : Video Galleries : Extra Credits : The Skinner Box) but this shortens to the fact:
If we are provided an incentive, with a chance of getting said incentive, we will be more likely to continue doing the action.
Imagine if you killed a boss once, and got everything you needed from it. It would feel less rewarding than persevering and killing it until you got it; on the flip-side, if you kill it once and 'that thing you like' drops, you feel lucky – favoured by the game in some way.
There may be some links between this and the gambling study conducted by Mark Griffiths in the determination of luck involvement when gambling between 'addicted gamblers' and 'non-addicted gamblers'.
In Player vs Player, some of these can still apply; the concept of working, honing your skills and mastering what you do feels rewarding in itself. But I also feel like there might be something that isn't touched on enough – the prospect of dominating others. Even in animals, the need to dominate is seen a lot; lions fight for dominance – in some cases, the weaker lion is then forced to leave that pack.
Ever seen those people playing Call of Duty and getting excited because they get one lucky kill? They got the skill against odds, and beat someone that statistically is superior to them? This has the some baseline; people enjoy beating other people in the most spectacular way possible – why do you think killing someone with a knife is so much more rewarding than shooting them point blank with a sniper rifle?
It all draws down to the humiliation of your opponent, signifying your strength against them in any way possible – and while some might say “nah it's just funnier”, that's the point. The sense of dominating and expressing your control over another person can feel good, especially when challenged in 'your arena'.
Another way Blizzard draw you in is through the exposure to some of these high levels; nothing prevents a high levelled character intervening with a low level character. On PVP enabled servers, these high level characters can freely kill you regardless - this adds one of two psychological aspects around egocentrism: the desire to overpower your foes, or the desire to attain the prestige of a higher level. This strong incentive acts as a driving force for newer players: they've seen a higher level wipe out things they would be annihilated by; they've been murdered by higher levels and want vengeance on them.
It's all about the construct of power and prestige of a higher level that drives people towards it; if levels didn't exist, people would play a lot less. It's not merely a system of progression, but a ranking system not-to-dissimilar from military ranks: they hold prestige, they hold "wealth" so to speak, they hold the greener grass on the other side.
TL;DR
At the end of the day it's fairly conclusive that Blizzard's game uses a set of psychologically brilliant appeals – aesthetics, incentives, false sensations; in the end it dawned on me that I was caught in a psychological trap – all that lied beneath the colours was a set of spreadsheets that I contributed numbers to, in order to get better numbers. People get paid £50,000 a year for managing a spreadsheet, but Blizzard makes £108 a year because you're paying them to manage your own.
I'll let you decide where to go from here – on one hand it's still a hobby – on the other taking everything into moderation and realising enough is enough is perhaps one of the most important lessons you can take home.
Edit
I have not mentioned ethics, morals, manipulation or anything of the sorts. Those that have interpreted this post in such a way may be projecting their own feelings onto this post; I ask you to refrain from doing so. It's merely an admittance and acknowledgement of what's written with a frustrated response.