Alas, despite my passion for them, games continue to be a leisure-time-only activity for me. When my job keeps me tied to a desk for every hour of sunlight, the holidays approach, I contract food poisoning, and we decide to refinish a room in the week and a half before guests arrive, I find I have little time to play anything.
Coordinating leisure time with other people, a prerequisite for most games, can become downright impossible. I suppose that’s one reason why MMORPGs proudly advertise the ease of soloing. More importantly, it’s one reason why I, who ultimately prefer the creative fervor of collaborative storytelling with rules (that is, tabletop roleplaying games) spend so much more time playing computer games.
When I find myself so crunched for time that I can barely squeeze out a blog post a week, I nonetheless manage to fit in a bit of game-related activities. Here are my top four:
- Reading gaming blogs (much easier than writing posts) and other game-related media
- Poring over my ever-growing list of games I’d like to try
- IMing with friends about their game time (vicarious leisure > no leisure at all)
- Writing up quick descriptions of campaign settings I’d like to run
So what do gamers do when we don’t have time for real gaming? What para-gaming activities to do you enjoy?
Tobold once observed (and recently reiterated) that the true economic unit of MMORPGs is time. It seems it’s almost inherent to computer games (solo games, too) today that their worth is somewhat measured in how long they take to play. This doesn’t seem to be a characteristic of offline games (although replayability is a big issue).
Why is that?
November 14th, 2007
Alec Bings
I haven’t had the opportunity to post nearly as much as I’d like, lately, because I’ve been preparing to audition for a musical. It’s been two decades since I last trod the boards, but with a community theater a ten-minute walk from my house, a good friend who’s an avid participant, and the fact that they’re putting on The Scarlet Pimpernel, inspired by the entertaining novel that basically kick-started the masked super-hero genre . . . well, I really couldn’t resist.
Over the past two weeks, my friend and I repeatedly rehearsed our audition song (”Our Children” from Ragtime, another great musical based on a novel), which cut somewhat severely into my gaming time. Sunday afternoon and last night, though, we finally had our auditions.
I think I did well, and I suspect I’ll be cast. (I’ll know by next Sunday at the latest.) I don’t think I’ll get my dream part (the villain Chauvlin) because some absolutely terrific contenders, active in theater more recently than 1988, tried out for the leads, but I do hope for a fun part with a real chance to act, sing, and dance.
To tie this all to gaming, I will state that I think I’m a much better actor than I was in high school, despite not having performed since then, and I attribute the improvement entirely to tabletop roleplaying games. Having taken on the roles of antagonists, love interests, monsters, and other colorful characters over the years, I’ve gained both confidence and competence in assuming roles whose personality is wildly different from my own (although I admit to having a sort of internal cast, now; I should write about that sometime).
It will be interesting to once again perform from a script instead of winging it. Here’s hoping I can bring whatever character they give me to more vivid life than I do the various inhabitants of my made-up tabletop worlds . . . but I’ll sure miss the excitement of an unfolding storyline with an ending unknown to any participants!
November 6th, 2007
Alec Bings
odanu put up a great post at the Feminist Gamers blog analyzing in detail (and from a feminist perspective, of course) the characters of Donna and William, in World of Warcraft. The obnoxious William has been playing “keep away” with the perpetual victim Donna’s dolly since beta. The post articulated much that’s percolated in the back of mind ever since I first saw those two. Great insights.
The “boys will be boys” flavor that colors William’s behavior disturbs me deeply. When I see parents of young boys treat their male children’s misbehavior this way (and I’ve started to see it a lot, now that my daughter is two and interacts more and more with other children), I feel a bit of creeping despair. “Free to Be You and Me
came out thirty-seven years ago!” I think. “Why do we still have Tender Sweet Young Things? And the very different William on that hopeful (if cheesy) album wanted a doll to nurture and love. Stormwind’s William is a petty sadist who wants a doll only to hurt Donna.”
I’m equally disturbed to see the parents of victimized girls intervene immediately and aggressively while expecting boys to suck it up and deal with their own problems. While the boys are learning impunity for their misbehavior, the girls are taught helplessness in the face of adversity.
I expect gender politics and social challenges at playgroup. But in Stormwind, where I’m pleased to see confident guards of both sexes patrol the streets, you’d think these kids work out their differences constructively . . . even if it might mean a trip to the graveyard for one of them!
November 1st, 2007
Alec Bings
I’ve talked before about how valuable video games could be as a tool for learning new languages. Well, this interesting article
at Educational Games Research points to some real research on the subject, in particular on MMORPGs and language acquisition. Check it out!
October 29th, 2007
Alec Bings
I admit it: I’m a great big cheater. Honestly, I don’t remember the last time I ran a tabletop RPG session without making up a tremendous portion of “what happens” on the spot. Whether I’ve spend two weeks preparing detailed maps and NPC profiles or scribbled a couple of notes in the bathroom while my players are waiting in the den, I have to lie and cheat to give my players the enjoyable adventures they expect.
I always find it fascinating to hear of GMs who can’t wing it, or who feel that there’s something morally irresponsible about winging it. As Ominus says at Game On :: Aleph Gaming blog in a post on Personal Rules for Narrating, the story isn’t the GM’s, nor is it the players’. A GM who lacks the agility to handle the inevitably unpredictable narrative flow that emerges when a group of people get together to create a collaborative story has no business behind the screen.
The trick, though, is not to let the player’s know when you’re winging it and when you’re not. I suspect my players know (certainly my wife does) that I have had to make up NPCs, locations, and events of whole cloth who go on to be central players in a campaign.
I tread upon the rules, too, when the situation merits. I lie about die rolls all the time, make up special rules situations that my players (who generally don’t know the rules very well) know nothing about, and sometimes fail to keep track of NPC health, letting the opponents die mostly when I feel a combat has gone on long enough to be dramatically entertaining.
And I say this as someone who takes some real pleasure in the simulationist elements of our hobby!
As an amateur magician, I’ve learned that my audience genuinely wants to know how magic is performed but will also be sorry if they do find out. Magicians don’t just keep their secrets in order to prevent others from performing the same tricks. Frankly, most people don’t want to do the tricks anyway. No, magicians keep their secrets because when the audience knows the secret, it’s the magic that vanishes, not the Statue of Liberty.
My players want to believe their characters adventure in a living world, full of vibrant NPCs and events that would happen whether or not they take a hand. They know I use narrative sleight-of-hand, mirrors, and invisible thread. But as long as they don’t know when I’m using it, they’ll have a good time.
Of course, we GM magicians must suffer for our art. This post at the Treasure Tables blog discusses the need to retcon, an inevitable consequence of improvisation.
As Sir Walter Scott states: “Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.”
And, that goodness, as J.R. Pope adds: “But when we’ve practiced for a while/How vastly we improve our style!”
October 26th, 2007
Alec Bings
I recently said that asking “what women want” from games is the wrong question.
Sanya Weathers over at Eating Bees says that asking women in the game industry to talk constantly about their role as women instead of gaming professionals is the wrong thing to do to. Go read what she has to say.
Because Soylent Pink is people!
October 17th, 2007
Alec Bings
That wonderful resource and community Board Game Geek is running a board-game Secret Santa program. The rules are simple: You get the contact information of a participant somewhere in the world, and it’s your job to send that person a game, ideally one from his or her wish list, by Christmas. At the same time, someone else will get your name, and you can expect to receive a game-based holiday package of your own.
This sounds grand to me, so I just finished signing up. The only problem: waiting till late November to find out whom I’ll be “spoiling.”
October 17th, 2007
Alec Bings
If we gamers consider ourselves Homo ludens—humans who play—we can’t ignore that we have subspecies. Many call themselves “gamers,” but most mean something more specific. What distinguishes Homo ludens from people who don’t call themselves gamers, what unites us, is the perceived geek-factor of the games we play.
Within our geeky species, though, we’ve got varieties so distinct from one another that they can hardly be considered the same animal.
- Homo ludens sangoculi
Those whose eyes begin to bleed after avoiding blinking for five hours during an important raid. In other words, video gamers.
- Homo ludens terataleae
Those who play with monstrous dice. In other words, tabletop roleplaying gamers.
- Homo ludens con-concilii
Those whose definition of “diplomacy” is almost the exact opposite of Webster’s. In other words, board gamers.
- Homo ludens shovelens
Those who shuffle. In other words, card gamers. This subspecies is broad enough to encompass such infraspecies as homo ludens shovelens economica (trading card gamers).
No taxonomy is perfect. As with life taxonomy, the borders are blurry and subject to change. Unlike life taxonomy, in which separate subspecies rarely mate outside of unusual circumstances, Homo ludens is basically engaged in one enormous, non-stop orgy of crossbreeding. In common with Douglas Adams’s Hagunenonns of Vicissitus Three*, Homo ludens is a super-evolutionary being that morphs from one life form to another several times over lunch.
Despite that, though, most gamers do seem to wind up identifying more as one particular subspecies than any other, at least for a given time. For instance, although many MMO players also play roleplaying games, the vast majority of WoW players seem to be Homo ludens sangoculi, and many have never touched a icosohedron in their lives. A quick survey of gaming blogs supports this hypothesis. There are many video game blogs, many roleplaying game blogs, and so on. But there are very few blogs that embrace both kinds of games.
I enjoy different varieties of games with equal fervor. Surely, I’m not the only Homo ludens ecclecticus, right? Who else is out there? And what other subspecies belong in the taxonomy?
*If you don’t know about the Hagunennons, do get your hands on a copy of the original The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy BBC radio production. It has quite a few gems that didn’t survive to the many later versions of the property that will absolutely tickle a fan of the setting.
October 16th, 2007
Alec Bings
Still enjoying taking my time in LotRO, I did something about a week ago I’ve done once before but didn’t expect to do again: I re-rolled a character to create almost exactly the same one.
I enjoy a certain brand of roleplaying in MMOs, one that’s compatible with actually playing the game and that favors emergent narrative. As such, I tend to create characters and envision their personalities and histories with a few bold strokes. I choose the character’s class based on what I’d like to play, the character’s race based on what can play my class of choice. If I have a choice of races, I’ll choose the one I haven’t played before, since in most MMOs each race gets to experience some different content, at least at the beginning of the game.
When choosing my character’s sex, I generally alternate between male and female. I like playing characters of both sexes. No, I don’t choose female characters because of the appearance of their posteriors, nor for any prurient reason whatsoever.
But as my female hobbit burglar reached level 17 and I began grouping more and more, I realized I just didn’t want to deal with the reaction to my obviously male voice in voice chat. I know most people don’t have a problem with men playing female characters, and I know people actually expect male voices for female characters. And I even know that hobbits of both sexes actually look pretty much identical in LotRO.
But I didn’t want to add another element to the already immersion-shattering effect of voice chat.
That alone wouldn’t have been enough reason, though. I’m somewhat embarrassed to admit that I’m tempted to achieve the “Undying” title available to those who achieve level 20 without once being defeated. With my first burglar, I died rather stupidly in an easily survivable situation at level 13. I got over it pretty quickly, but when I came up with a second reason to re-roll (changing my character’s sex), that was enough justification.
Now I have a bit of a quandary, though. As I said, I enjoy characters of both sexes. Will my concerns about voice chat doom me to creating only male characters henceforth? Will I get over those concerns and freely create female characters in the future? Will I avoid voice chat even when it’s just so useful (such as for dealing with the fellowship maneuvers key to the burglar class)?
Playing cross-sex characters is a big issue in MMOs, an issue that goes way beyond the scope of this blog post. But has anyone out there ever made a similar decision? Has anyone’s choice of character sex—or other character attribute—been influenced by the prospect of voice chat?
October 10th, 2007
Alec Bings
Take a look at this post concerning Ubisoft’s new “Imagine” series of video games targeting girls aged 6 to 14.
Based on Ubisoft’s study, the first games in the line, to be released in October, are “Fashion Designer,” “Master Chef,” “Animal Doctor,” and “Babyz.” [My wife observed that “Babyz” looks a bit like the detestable “Bratz.”] “We did research, and we are studying the market… that’s what the girls actually like, so we should try to fulfill their needs,” Shara Hashemi, Ubisoft’s Brand Manager for the Imagine line, told Multiplayer in an interview last week.
My response: Ugh!
I don’t have special access to the “research” Ubisoft did, but from the descriptions it sounds as if they’ve fallen into the same trap that so much research in general does. However good their data gathering, they’ve asked the wrong question. They claim the main goal of Imagine games is “to have fun.” Then they turn around and say, “The games are built on ideas and concepts that every girl can relate to and they allow girls to expand their creativity while they’re learning real facts and real-life concepts.”
In other words, as with so many girl-targeted products, these games give girls a chance to play at being older girls or women . . . and little else. These games give girls a chance to change diapers, shop for clothes, and cook.
The boy games that the Ubisoft representative said girls aren’t interested in, in contrast, give players a chance to involve themselves in larger-than-life stories and activities. In other words, the results of this “research” confirm industry and cultural expectations that while “boys will be boys,” girls will be women.
The one Imagine game that sounds like it offers something other than a pixelated version of dolls, babysitting, and dress-up is “Figure Skater,” a game in which the player strives for career-life balance in pursuit of an Olympic gold medal. That actually sounds like fun, with a narrative and an opportunity for escapist fantasy.
Okay, Ubisoft just wants to sell games to girls, so they did research that tells them what they can expect will move off the shelves and into girls hands. Unfortunately, such girl-oriented games have performed notoriously poorly, because even though many existing games have elements hostile to female gamers, women wind up playing the fun ones anyway. On the other hand, almost nobody buys the pink boxes.
I bridle at this game line because, as the parent of a two-year-old daughter, I can see the onslaught of cultural expectation coming hard and fast. By the time a girl is “6 to 14,” she’s developed her own tastes, but she’s also been given heavy-handed lessons in what she’s supposed to like.
Remember, Ubisoft began this effort because “A quarter of DS owners are young girls but less than 10% of DS games are aimed specifically at them.”
The point is not that a quarter of DS owners—the girls—are stuck with a toy that doesn’t target them. It’s that a quarter of people who find the DS appealing are girls already! Already, one in four DS owners is female, no doubt mostly playing some of the 90+% games targeted at people.
The most interesting question is: which ones?
October 2nd, 2007
Alec Bings
Next Posts
Previous Posts