How NCSoft and Nexon Intend to Play With Your Head

[Illusionss]

"Yes, because your in-game experiences are worth SO much more than mine."

Whoa whoa! Let's not be sniping at each other now, hmm? NCSoft is target enough for all of us.

I was annoyed because my experiences were dismissed as irrelevant by someone who does not even know me, and the person responding to me went so far as to announce "don't trust her." That kind of riled me, especially as a bolt out of the blue. I think it would rile anyone. I see what I see, and I'm always honest about it.

Tim: I think NCsoft may give more of a crap about what happens to GW though. Guild Wars is the stereotypical 'favorite child' of the dysfunctional NCsoft family.

Could well be, I still have lost all trust in NCStupid's long-term maintenance of any game. If a profitable game can get the axe, I can IMAGINE what might happen to one not performing to their expectations.

I am in GW2 because I had purchased it prior to CoX dying, and I use it to distract myself from the very real grief I feel over CoX. Its much more player-friendly than CO, and its eye-blindingly beautiful. It does have faults though, and I'm not going to pretend it does not.

[Feycat]

I was annoyed because my experiences were dismissed as irrelevant by someone who does not even know me, and the person responding to me went so far as to announce "don't trust her." That kind of riled me, especially as a bolt out of the blue. I think it would rile anyone. I see what I see, and I'm always honest about it.

Because what you said was: "If addiction is their intended goal, why is GuildWars2 so..... MAN. Trust me.

Eighty levels. And xp gain there is moderate at best, CoX leveled like lightning compared to this game. It would take me a year of serious solo time to hit level 80."

When you say "trust me" and then say something so hyperbolic that it's mathematically untrue (COH's xp gains ramped up exponentially per level - GW2 does not) then yes, I would in fact urge people not to trust your opinion when deciding to try the game or not.

I played COH from launch to the last day. It DID take a literal YEAR of playing for my first 50 to ding. My first 80 in GW2 happened in under 2 months, and that was spreading time between 9 alts.

I am in GW2 because I had purchased it prior to CoX dying, and I use it to distract myself from the very real grief I feel over CoX. Its much more player-friendly than CO, and its eye-blindingly beautiful. It does have faults though, and I'm not going to pretend it does not.

No one said it has no faults. I disagree with your assessment of those faults, however.

[Septipheran]

Uhm dude..

Video games can, and often are, highly addicting. Mental addictions are less detrimental to your health than most chemical additions, but they are no less real. We develop a compulsion for things. Some people grow addicted easier than others. Some can play games for hours a day, every day, and walk away like it's nothing.. others can't though.

I myself was actually addicted to video games at once point in my life. I'm not any more (well, I like to tell myself that at least). I would get antsy, frustrated, sometimes even aggressive if for whatever reason I couldn't play- and I'd get super pissed if something caused a sudden interruption (like cable crapping out). You're right, people don't die from video game withdrawal, but you're also most chemical addictions aren't going to kill you from the withdrawals either (might make you wish you were dead, but that's beside the point).

Games like Farmville and other 'simple, casual online games' tend to have a highly addictive quality to them, partly because that's how they're designed... it's not a "lose control" type thing.. it's a very gradual thing, you don't really notice it- you try the game and you're all "hey, this is kinda fun." and so you play it for a little bit. Then you go play it again, and end up playing longer.. then you're playing it again and you figure "What the hell, I enjoy this game, so I'll throw some money at them for this shiny thing to support a game I enjoy." and you give them $5-20, no big deal. You find you really like what that got you though, and so you throw money at them again.. just like $5-10, not big deal..
Before too long it's escalated and without really thinking about it you're throwing $2-10 at them multiple times a week. Each one of those transactions is little and inconsequential on it's own.. but it adds up fast.
After a months to a year or so, you may not have really noticed it, until someone points out what you're doing.

Now, a normal, well adjusted person can just walk away when that happens, yes.. some people though, can't. Just like some people can't stay off cigarettes. For some, seeing their computer sitting there is just as bad as seeing a bottle of beer for an alcoholic.

You're attributing this behavior to a variable instead of attributing it to a personality flaw. That's behavior of irrational and unbalanced individuals. What the variable was- Video games, television, sports, whatever- Is irrelevant. Anyone with that severe of a personality flaw would have found themselves in the same position whether they played video games or not. You could replace video games with anything- Say, playing the drums. These results you mention are the byproduct of poor character, the variable that exposed said character is immaterial.

For what it's worth, I spent a ton of money on COH. I've been throwing money at Champions Online too. I never went without eating and paying my bills, I never shunned my responsibilities because of it. If I had or did do any of those things, it wouldn't be the fault of a game, it would be a character flaw on my part. I really do like gaming and I really am willing to spend money on it. I also like investing in my education and going to work. I also like eating and paying my bills and having a social life outside of the internet. None of these things are mutually exclusive, and anyone who thinks otherwise is seriously deranged.

[corvus1970]

These results you mention are the byproduct of poor character, the variable that exposed said character is immaterial.

Poor character, or perhaps actual mental-illness. Do such distinctions not matter to you?

[Septipheran]

Poor character, or perhaps actual mental-illness. Do such distinctions not matter to you?

I guess. Either way, the point is that you can't blame the variable.

[corvus1970]

I appreciate the clarification.

[Heroette]

I played City for over 8 years.  I only spent money when I had it available.  I wanted Dual Pistols when it first came out but I had to wait two months before I actually had the extra money to spend.  I guess my point is, if you don't set your priorites straight, you can spend way too much on a computer game and eventually over time, it would affect your personal life.  You can't fault any game for mis-management of money.

[JaguarX]

I played City for over 8 years.  I only spent money when I had it available.  I wanted Dual Pistols when it first came out but I had to wait two months before I actually had the extra money to spend.  I guess my point is, if you don't set your priorites straight, you can spend way too much on a computer game and eventually over time, it would affect your personal life.  You can't fault any game for mis-management of money.

exactly

[Zolgar]

I guess. Either way, the point is that you can't blame the variable.

You have a valid point. And You'll notice I'm NOT against video games, and I acknowledged anything can become an addiction. However dismissing the fact that this specific variable has traits that allow it to readily become more addicting to those who, for whatever reason, are predisposed towards it is also irrational. Especially since the gaming industry IS preying on those people. It is actively trying to make games more.. I don't want to say 'addictive', but we'll say 'compulsive'. You 'have to' work a little more each day to achieve the same satisfaction, you 'have to' throw a little more money at them every time to get the same boost...

It's how certain aspects of the game industry work. Sure, we can say all we want that it's "just the people", but it's both. People who are only mildly predisposed to addictions can get addicted to video games easier than some other things, and that does need to be acknowledged.

I'll not say that "OMG VIDEO GAMES ARE ADDICTING AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL RAWR!" but I will say that if we're going to acknowledge sexual addictions, gambling addictions, etc. we need to also acknowledge video game addictions as a real thing and have a system in place to offer help. That's all I's saying. :)

[FatherXmas]

Well most video/computer games are skinner boxes going back to pong and Space Wars (which I remember playing at Shakey's Pizza before the one near me closed  when the chain was bought in 1974), every turn based strategy game I ever played (just a few more turns), rpgs (just until I level/finish this dungeon) and now MMOs (that wasn't an exhaustive list of skinner boxes in video games).  Heck before then there where other coin operated arcade games that were quite addictive not to mention pinball machines.

It's really nothing new and a fundamental aspect of the more popular video/computer games of today.  It's popular because it's addictive.

[Starsman]

Video games like Farmville and Words With Friends are specifically designed to get people hooked, with the industry even hiring psychiatric professionals to help  make them more addictive .
[...]
This is why City was killed.  It didn't do that.

I don't know... the fact that we cant get over the game may be a hint at them actually doing it  :o

Edit to clarify because just noticed this thread is a bit of flamey: I personally still have not gotten over CoH. HELL... I still have the launcher open in my Mac with the Nature set ad in front....  :'(

[Osborn]

You're attributing this behavior to a variable instead of attributing it to a personality flaw. That's behavior of irrational and unbalanced individuals. What the variable was- Video games, television, sports, whatever- Is irrelevant. Anyone with that severe of a personality flaw would have found themselves in the same position whether they played video games or not. You could replace video games with anything- Say, playing the drums. These results you mention are the byproduct of poor character, the variable that exposed said character is immaterial.

Can you stop calling a disease a personality flaw? Your dismissive attitude is pretty sickening.

For what it's worth, I spent a ton of money on COH. I've been throwing money at Champions Online too. I never went without eating and paying my bills, I never shunned my responsibilities because of it. If I had or did do any of those things, it wouldn't be the fault of a game, it would be a character flaw on my part. I really do like gaming and I really am willing to spend money on it. I also like investing in my education and going to work. I also like eating and paying my bills and having a social life outside of the internet. None of these things are mutually exclusive, and anyone who thinks otherwise is seriously deranged.

Uh, good job on not having a disease I guess? What's your point? "Cancer isn't real because I don't have cancer!"? Nobody healthy believes having a hobby and having a life aren't mutually exclusive? Uh, duh?

I'd stated before that I purposefully divided compulsion from addiction because both things are semantically different, but people regardless of that those who have whatever various compulsions (and you're right the medium doesn't matter) have a messed up psychological profile, for various reasons. Often they're that way because of a mix of biology (humans have various levels of susceptibility to compulsion and addictions) and life experiences. It becomes more than a 'personality flaw', it becomes a full out medical condition.

You know what? I did state before that when somebody has a compulsion disorder that I'd rather fix the medical or social problem that brings it out, rather than change and/or punish content creators for exploiting it. And I stick by that, at least the first half of that. But your self important and entirely dismissive posts on the subject have sort of changed my mind.

Because I guarantee that it's your sort of mindset you're displaying here that lets people exploit people with a disease for money, and to make their products in a such a way to bring out that disease in healthy people, for money.

And there does become a sort of point where exploiting or encouraging disease for money crosses the line and does or at least should become unethical.

I tend to err on the side of letting people do what they want with their lives and bodies, because I've been on the receiving end of "I'm gonna run your life because I think you being gay/non-cisgendered/atheist/etc is hurting you sexually/health wise/financially/spiritually/etc". I tend to, as I stated, err on the side of solving a problem in this case by building social and economic conditions where healthy people can flourish, where they can afford therapy or medicine if they need it.

But there comes a point where that's not even enough, and where those gaming companies and other content creators do cross the line and it should be obvious to the common person that hiring psychologists for the explicit purpose of designing games to entrap diseased persons and to cause diseased persons to manifest symptoms is pretty blindingly unethical.

I'm against banning things that are 'fun' based on the idea that somebody with a disease might latch onto it, so, again, my knee-jerk reaction is to side with the video game creators and tell them they have no blame in this. But the more I think about it, the more that these creators are purposefully bringing out this behavior, and that forces them to have blame in this.

And this isn't merely a tragic side effect here of video games being fun, in this case that VV has shown us. They're the intended response as researched by trained professional scientists and doctors hired by the game to make the game design in this way.

This, as I said, isn't a case where a diseased person happens to latch onto and obsess with say, Football just by virtue of football being fun. That would be sad, but I'd have to side with the idea of it not being Football's fault. This is the opposite. This would be like if Football designed all its rules around the idea of entrapping as many people with a disorder as possible.

And you know what? That does make it unethical, completely, and that sort of practice should be banned.

[Starsman]

Can you stop calling a disease a personality flaw? Your dismissive attitude is pretty sickening.

You may as well ask for the moon.

Addiction is not medically recognized as a disease. It has, in the US (as of 2008) been legislatively determined that substance abuse disorders must be treated as chronic physical diseases, but legally and medically, from what I have found, psychological addictions like Gambling Addiction are not considered diseases.

"While the rehabilitation community and most addicts will agree that addiction is a real disease – and a chronic disease as well – the established medical community defers from using the word "disease." In the middle are psychiatrists and some psychologists who use alternative terminology to dodge the controversy – substance abuse disorder, behavioral disorder and others. The fight will not be settled until the drivers of addiction are clearly laid out. Research continues to find the extent of genetic influence and to illuminate the brain chemistry and remodeling that happens during addiction." - Source: myaddiction.com

With that aside, given that the medical and legal community both can't agree even on chemical addiction terminology, and no one taking the side for behavioral addictions to be a "disease", you are better off just agreeing to use psychiatrist terminology and call it a behavioral disorder. Technically it IS a personality flaw, although IMO that is as simple of a term as calling Albino Dwarf Elephants "mammals." True, but nowhere near as descriptive enough (and perhaps a bit too dismissive.)

Mind you, from all I have heard (have a friend psychology grad friends that loves to talk about this stuff) almost everyone is equally susceptible to psychological addictions, although not to the same kinds.

Gambling in question is a fascinating topic. You see, there is a type of brain cell called "dopamine neurons." These are the bits of your gray matter that monitor levels of the pleasure-inducing chemical dopamine in order to regulate behavior and figure out how to get more of a good thing. Basically: it encourages you to seek patterns and seek more of those "good things" or "rewards". It's a long thing to explain, (and I recommend reading this article here) but basically, these things start trying to predict rewards, and they tend to go crazy with certain patterns of randomness. This means that enough of the wrong training (too long playing certain game) may lead for any human to develop gambling or video game addiction. If every human is equally susceptive then it is a bit hard to call it a disease (and that may be the source of the medical controversy.)

Anyways, again, given that it's something the medical community still debates, hoping to win an argument on the web on the topic without extensive education on the matter may be a futile attempt (and even if you win, you may be wrong.)

So maybe we can settle for behavioral disorder?

[corvus1970]

So maybe we can settle for behavioral disorder?

I'm down with that.

See, I agree that there are indeed "personality flaws". For example, my procrastination? Personality flaw. The fact that I don't tell people "no" as often as I should? Personality flaw.

My diagnosed seasonal depression? Mood disorder, NOT a personality flaw.

[dwturducken]

I thought I was solipsistic, but then I realized it was all in my head.

[TonyV]

I used to have kleptomania, but I took something for it.

[corvus1970]

I used to worry that I was paranoid. Turns out they ARE all out to get me!

[Electric-Knight]

I used to have kleptomania, but I took something for it.

https://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k248/ygmypay/EK_facepalm01Ab.jpg

;D

[dwturducken]

Hey, the thread needed to be lightened up, cau it was getting a bit lit up!

https://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k248/ygmypay/EK_facepalm01Ab.jpg

;D

[Electric-Knight]

City Of Heroes was abnormal.
This topic, along with many others that have been (and will be) raised about its abnormality and lack of being an appropriate match for certain corporate philosophies is all due to this game being a product that 1) doesn't fit perfectly into the round holes and 2) proves that things don't need to fit into round holes and/or follow the same formula in order to be successful, enjoyable and loved (obsessively by rabid, money-throwing fans who refuse to give up long after it has been axed).

The easy targets are easy... and efficient. And that's what the majority of money-makers will target. It is the min/max-ing of the real world.
However, just like our beloved game, the real world works in more ways than just min/max-ing, FotM, specific archetypes, et cetera and so on and so forth...  :P

There are people who don't want pop up ads in front of their faces, people who don't want to sit in front of one-armed-bandits, people who enjoy smelling the roses, people who enjoy taking it slow, people who just love to fly, people who want to spend more time playing make believe and many, many, many more variances of people with a multitude of expansive interests, likes and dislikes... and, they all have money and are potential customers.
It's just a lot harder for some people to accept that, for people to market to all of that and for people to pinpoint their narrow focus upon it with their over-thought and over-paid expertise.  ;)

That's why it often comes back to saying that CoH satisfied a niche market.
Truth be told, that niche contained a wide variety of interests and there are vast amounts of so called niche customers in this world who quietly sit aghast at the majority of things people are trying to sell them.

It's just too big a hurdle for most people/companies to bother with... so, they follow the formulas for what they know works... except for when it doesn't... and then they carry on, trimming more variety off of the formula and/or tacking on bits from past formulas that had some success in their day.