Login to vote in this poll.
I believe that provided links to relevant and entertaining information would be an aspect that is unique and original within a video game. This would create an interesting environment that connects the video game to real life situations occurring across the globe. Would become an intriguing educational tool for the user. Part of the fun for the game definitely revolves around meeting new people and becoming competitive with the new users you encounter. These massive online multiplayer games appeal to large audiences because regular users can transcend the average player and become a house hold name within the game. To be recognized and known for your skills and hard work within the world is satisfying and very entertaining.
I voted that meeting other people will be the most fun when playing this game due to the nature that this game is based upon. This game is based on political thought and imagination of the players, which in turn means that most of the fun and adventure will come from people interacting and sharing their ideas and beliefs with other players in the game and conversing about them. The game will only be as fun as the other people who chose to play the game with you. The competition is a good thing and will draw others in, but what will keep people playing will be the community that the game builds and the people they meet.
For my personal opinion, this is a question that would get different answers based on different players. Based on the argument from Richard Bartle, who talks about different types and labels of players in his article" Hearts, clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players Who Suit MUDS", the socilaizers which refers to the interaction-player would definitely vote "meet with other players" as the most fun they can get from the game because they are tohse guys who love to communicate with other players. However on the other hand, the killers, which refers to the action-players would value the reputation most, trying to take anyone they can and to make others fear abou them. I believe that I am one of the socializers, so for my answer I vote to meet other players that gives me most fun from the game. Recently I am playing the FPS game BattleField 3 on my xbox 360, though ti's a shooting game, but what I care about most is not the number of how many kills I get, I care about to do something to help my teammates from my side, for instance, repair the tank which get disabled, throw the medic kit to my teammates who get hurt and give them the ammo they need. At least that I know I help my teammates, I contribute to the victory, that's where my happiness comes from this game.
In a lot of things that I do in life, I try to stand out and be the best. And as a reward, I gain respect from others and that strives me to work harder. It is the same with video games, its just something else that I do. Like playing basketball at Rimac Gym, I play well, people will respect me and know of me. Then that can potentially spread to other people and my name gets known. It is actually very straight forward and simple. Who would play a game simply just to be mediocre at it. I don't really know anyone who plays a game and does not want to be good, or to improve every time he/she plays it. You do not have to be the best right off the bat, immediately. I enjoy playing and love playing the game every time I get a better score. It pushes me to work harder and I find joy in that. Being able to dominate other players feels good and I want to be able to keep doing that. It's that simple. Being the best at a game.
This is from my standpoint and why I play games, I play games almost solely on the aspect of being good at the game, as being good at the game paves the way to the upper echelons of the game where everybody is good and skill determines who wins and loses, and thats where any game in my opinion gets fun. Challenge is what makes people keep going at it, nobody would play an incredibly easy game aside from the roleplayers etc. I'll use WoW as an example, as I play/played WoW solely for the PvP aspect of the game. Sure I would go PvE instances as well to experience content once or twice, but in any case what kept me playing as the competitve aspect of battling others at the top and trying to get the highest rated you can. This would award a title, and with that title, anybody else who saw you in the world knew you were good at PvP...achieving the "gaining a reputation among the other players as being super good at the game." But another really important aspect of what kept me playing is my team that I fought with, as we would win and lose together and almost developed a sort of brotherhood even though it was an online game. I rated this as #1 because I feel that this is the #1 in most other peoples eyes, the social atmosphere of a game makes or breaks it in the end.
I think that tung makes a good point. I play games because they are competitive. Almost all the games that I play are because I want to be better than someone else/ everyone else. As tung mentioned above, without challenge, the game wouldn't be as fun, at least in my eyes. When other people know who you are based on your reputation, that is a rewarding feeling. The social aspect of the game is probably a very important aspect of the game as well. Interaction with other players and users creates a feeling of an actual "alternate reality" which adds yet another dimension to the game.
I cast my votes based on how I enjoy games, which may not be how the majority of players enjoy games. I'm not really a gamer, but when I do play games, I mostly enjoy single player games, where I can have some set objectives/goals and work to achieve those goals. This isn't really one of the choices, though. The closest is "gaining a reputation among the other players as being super good at the game." However, since I'm not a huge gamer, I probably wouldn't set my goal for the game to become one of the best players -- I know realistically that won't happen because I probably won't spend enough time playing it to become one of those players. I rarely play games to socialize with people, so meeting people through the game isn't important to me. Learning about global politics through this game and linking it to real-world society can be fun, but I don't think it would really be the most fun part of a game for me. However, since this game is supposed to simulate a political alternative to our current world, if people that play this game with the intent of seeing and analyzing political alternatives, then those aspects would be the most fun for them. Ultimately, the fun of a game depends on what the player wants in the game, which can vary from player to player.
I could be wrong but i ranked "gaining reputation and being super good at the game" 4th fun and " meeting other people" 5th basing on how I imagine myself would feel towards the game. I am not normally a gamer but I've always appreciated the intellectual effort that i must put into the game in order to move the game forward. But most of all, I feel that games are very personal. Personal as in the people i would meet may as well be predesigned responses and or autogenerated options in the game that serves with a purpose towards the completion of the game's goal. Even though the people could be actual players i feel that because i am facing a computer screen probably in a room alone i am more focused on the game and its rules and guidlines. I'd think that I play a game as a way of leisure and perhaps to get away from the rest of the world. Sure, the competition part of the game can be the first of the game's charactor's qualities that keeps me playing. However, if there lacks the depth in what i'm doing, i would not be able to held on the interest must longer. To understand the (real ) world through simple game playing is like memorizing a hard scientific formula with a song. i ranked "visualizing political alternatives to present practices by game play.
" as first because of the challenges it puts forward provides the greatest reward that will allow me grow as a person (not just a player) and resume to the real world with a little bit more understanding.
The first point I would like to make is that this question is subjective. People enjoy playing games for different reasons and experiences. I based my rating on what I personally would have the most fun doing. Meeting other players I ranked as 5th because although it is interesting to interact with other players online via games, it is definitely not the most exciting aspect of it because of all the games that already allow you to do so. I think that with a game like this, the more I can relate the game to the real world, the more interesting and fun it would be for me. Therefore, 4th I ranked ‘visualizing political alternatives to present practices by game play’ because you can somewhat relate that to real life. I ranked ‘learning about global politics from playing the game as 3rd because I think it would be interesting to relate real-world issues to a video game. And 2nd I ranked ‘finding links with interesting entertainment and political content.’ My 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices are ultimately on the same level because they all include how I would relate the game world issues to real life. I ranked ‘gaining a reputation among the other players as being super good at the game’ 1st because personally, that is the object of most games for me. To be the best, and I don’t think this game differs in that aspect because ultimately, the majority of the people will play this game with ‘being the best’ as their main goal.
this is simple, why do you play a game? to win and to be the best. being able to conquer in a game, to dominate is the totally best feeling. does anyone ever play the game saying they want to just be okay and just middle of the road? that doesn't make any sense. why wouldn't you want to be at the top of your game and the game at that. bottom line is if you're a monster at this game, then you have the rights to be on top and for your peers to commend you.
I dont agree with this statement. Though trying to " win and be the best" may be true for a lot of games, its not true for all games. Its not that people say they want to be "okay and just in the middle of the road", its that their goals and what they find important in a game are different. There are plenty of reasons to play an MMO. Some want to make friends, others want money, others want to reach the max level, some aim to be the best like you said. Therefore, since people have different views on whats important, its not accurate to just generally state that winning is most important to everyone. Specifically with this game, there is no clear definition of what it means to actually master this game, so im not entirely sure what that option actually means within the context of this game. i feel that more enjoyment will come from the interactions with others. Whether or not the game is intended to encourage making friends, this game is an MMO and socializing with others is what separates it from a single player game.
I agree, a real gamer is one who plays for the sole purpose of being the best. I know when I play video games I want to win, I hate to lose. Of course when a player is new to a game they are not going to be very good at it. However, if a player is interested in the game they will try to win and create a competitive environment. This competitiveness is what creates excitement in a game. When players are given a challenge they get more into the game especially when players are competing with their friends. This is displayed when groups of friends play games with and against one another to determine who really is the best at that particular game. I can relate a lot to this as I play video games with my roommates. We play video games for bragging rights. Thus, video games are a lot more fun and entertaining when players are competing to see who is the best.
I disagree, I believe that everybody has different objectives when they play a game. Some want to meet as many friends as possible and others may even want to acquire the best gear in the game. By stating that everyone wants to win and be the best is over generalizing. Even though most games' objectives is to win and become on top, other games that encourage teamwork, critical thinking skills and socialization are starting to become very popular nowadays. Furthermore, game designers, who traditionally invent games whose objectives is to become number one, are starting to shift into the latter aspect. Thus, being a monster doesn't really mean you are winning the game and the objective in why people play games are subjective.
I think visualizing political alternatives should be the primary focus in this game because making political decisions is basically this game about. It is the unique part of this game, which differentiate this games from others. We can play any online games and interact freely with others, or gain reputations based on how good or bad we do in the game, however, here is different. This game is centered by political issues that have certain relations to our reality. Though playing this game, we are able to learn more international politics, and personally, what I expect the most from this game is to visualize political alternatives, which may be helpful for me to gain more knowledge of international politics, and provide me more information that enable me to conduct great conversations to impress others.
As i was reading your response i was nodding my head and agreeing with you...until the very last sentence. I agree that you can do all the other options such as " play any online games and interact freely with others, or gain reputations based on how good or bad we do in the game ." and because this game is designed differently we must have a different expectation of what we get as a result from partaking this game, However, when you explained that you expect "to visualize political alternatives, which may be helpful for me to gain more knowledge of international politics, and provide me more information that enable me to conduct great conversations to impress others." you lost me. I don't see much difference between this and " gaining reputation among other players as being super good at the game." except that one is in the real world and one is in the world the game created. The competition factor of the game may have extended further than just within the game for you that ultimately gaining knowledge of the world is only to impress (and in many ways, to compete with) others outside of the game.
I think meeting other players would be the most entertaining aspect of this game. Although competition might draw some players in, but there are better mediums for players seeking competition. The primary focus of this game should be player interaction in which users get to customize their avatars into how they always imagined themselves to be and interact with other users in a realistic setting to get a sense of satisfaction from temporarily living as someone else.
I agree, I feel that meeting other players should be most entertaining while the other aspects sort of play their part in the overall sense of the game. Of course competition will always be there to attract more players, but what is competition without those others to compete against? I feel that it should also be an advancement game where you gain experience and acquire skills, like real life. This will be interesting when you meet other people and you find out what skills they have acquired through studying and practicing. Keep it close to a real setting life and the interactions will be crucial.
A game will entice a player if the player sees that the game is able to fulfill a niche of one of his/her interests. A player will choose a game based on his interests. A player that enjoys a fps(shooting) game , whether because of competition, excitement, or other reason, will find one suited for them. If a player enjoys an rpg or mmorpg, then there must be something about them that sparks interests or enjoyment. Since this game includes an alternate, multiplayer world where new political ideas can be implemented, then the players who participate in this game must enjoy one or more of those aspects. And since it is an mmorpg, then being able to communicate with other people, competition, and personal strength and gains should invoke some enjoyment.
I'm not sure if players will join this game purely to meet new people.However, since this is a testing ground for politics, the fun to these players will probably come from visualizing and participating in the political structures of the game. This enjoyment in turn goes to their learning of global politics. I do believe, that with any game, coming on top and being the best will always provide enjoyment to a player. Winning is something humans strive for, and being the best or completing a game is a form. The fun might have already came from an interests in politics. Therefore I believe that finding new information on political topics might not be more fun than participating in the game.
there are thousands of RPG or multi-player games that exist today. i think the factor that makes agoraxchange particularly enticing is the ability of the player to use abstract thinking skills to visualize political alternatives that he or she may wish were implemented in the real world. this game tends to draw people who have more of an interest in politics and policymaking; people who are interested in more traditional multi-player games will probably gravitate towards something different. however this game does have certain elements of the traditional games (competition and socializing) that will help to keep players interested and engaged.
This is game gives room for less traditional fun factors of video games, political thought. The players it draws may be of a different type that is less oriented towards competition and winning but rather creating and visualizing.
meeting other people? this is not Match.Com so why is the object to make connections and friendships?
and getting a reputation among players seems a little more game-like. if point values and scores were kept, players would be able to rise and establish themselves in the game. those amounts could then be viewed on players' profiles showing others their experience and capabilities. if the game really is a "game" then someone would have to be the winner. if not, the game turns into a SIMS type social chat room with no defined goal. i guess trading recipes and political standings would be the object then, huh?
how can you compare a game's social environment to match.com? Lol from a pretty competitive players' standpoint, I do agree that I play games mainly to get a "reputation" or rather, just to be good at the game and show my superiority by beating others. However, what makes me play games is not what makes me stay in the game. Meeting other people and developing a social group is one of the biggest reasons why I stay playing games. I was at the top of the ladder in my respective battlegroup at one point, and I could have just quit right then and there. But what kept me playing was the people I was playing with. Why do people have guilds or clans? Do you think you'd continue playing any sort of game if you only played it alone every single time with no outside interaction? of course not.
I agree that this is not and should not be like Match.com. where you could possibly find the love of your life here. But it will also defeat the purpose to have winners in the traditional game sense in this particular game. As far as I understand, this game is designed to be an alternative reality with slight difference but just as complicated as life can be. There will be so many different aspects of different factors involved to make it a functioning life and not to only consider states and bigger organizations. What do you have to do to "win" life in reality? Is it to win the lottery and have a lot of money? To be in the lime light? To marry someone of your dreams? To discover something great? any of that could be a possible answer but REAL people in these situation will all have to keep "playing the game" because life does not stop at happy endings. The only way to end the story is maybe if you die, but that would not be wining the game, would it?
I think if the game comes off as a nerdy geo political game then MOST people will be turned off and not want to play. Let's face...we love our sex, drugs and violence and this game needs to include that! Now, the awesome part would be to sneak in some geo political concepts and strategies that players would need to understand if they want to really succeed at the game. I mean we have all played The Sims and forced people to fall in love with each other, why not take that concept and create a sort of "government tycoon" game. I think there are many people out there who have entertained the idea of being President, Czar, Kaiser, Shah, Prime Minister, King, Queen, Presidente, etc and what kind of country they would like to create. Why not incorporate an idea like that into the game...I think that would be so much fun!
While it may ne nice to think that some players will have the most fun learning about the state of the world and how it can be better run, realistically this game will draw in players the same way any other game would: competition and a chance to socialize. People won't often play a game for the sole purpose of learning, but if they can socialize with their friends (for example if they had interactive avatars) then they would be drawn into the game several times a week/day/etc. With this in mind it may be wise to engineer the game to make socializing easier between players, in order to draw in more participants and increase the validity of the results of the game.
Good point, also the fact that you need to meet people to compete with in order to get the sense of satisfaction makes socializing a priority of the game.
i definitely think the competition aspect of the game is very important in drawing people in; however, i don't think that competition is the most important factor in this particular game. people play games that mirror their interests. for example, people who like fantasy will probably play some game involving wizards and dragons, people who like spy games will play a spy game, etc. in this fashion, the crowd that agoraxchange will draw is not going to be just a random assortment of people. it's going to be those who have a vested interest in imagining and creating an alternative world with alternative politics. the people who play this game will most likely not be doing so mainly for competition, but for the pleasure they get from pursuit of abstract political thought. this doesn't mean that competition and game results don't matter, i just don't think they are of #1 importance with this game.