Students Blog

It is rather difficult to offer improvement for the Puzzle Pirates without spending a considerable amount of time expanding my friend list, earning experience, and joining successful crews. From a casual standpoint, however, the game seems to have a fairly successful social network. The density of social groups for example, is rather loose, which embraces the casual nature of the game. In other words, a node with many connections, upon leaving the game environment, will hopefully have very little affect on the people left behind. The cliques of the game remain casual enough that each node does not depend on the interconectivity of his friends for success. The main problem I have with the game is its rather confusing new-user content. A new player is unsure, and rather unable to ally with friends and gain assistance when starting the game. I think the overall social network would benefit from some type of mentor system; reward an experienced player by having him show a new user the basic steps of play.

I agree with most of the previous comments made regarding KOL. This system really has limited clique formation in its beginner stages. In other words, there is no cluster coeficient. It is unlikely, for example, that two nodes who are my associates are likewise themselves connected. Despite having a very advanced and humerous chat feature, the game would benefit from embracing some form of co-operative clan quests. Because the game is so simple, they could also embrace user created artwork etc. that allows networks/clans to stand out visibly. And again, possibly because I have not played the game for hours on end, it would be great to include social interaction within the new-user training program. The beginning of the game is a very individual experience, and because I was expecting a social experience, I quickly lost patience.

Both of the casual games I played were from Yahoo games. Pool and Yahoo Graffiti both embraced a similar social system. Chatting is always available, both during gameplay and when waiting for a lobby. However, from what I gathered, to add someone as a friend, you must use the Yahoo! messaging service. I think both games would benefit from some addition to the UI that shows if people you have played in the past are available. For example when finishing a game, if you prefer a player, he will be easy to find in the future. I think this would greatly increase the growth of friendships in the system. Other than that the games succeed as they were intended. There is no heavy clique formation, and rightfully so. The competition is supposed to be casual enough that the player does not have to invest uneccesary time in the experience.

Posted by Ryan Wilk at 10:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A way to improve the social dynamics of Toon Town would be to enable a “speaking” chat feature that allows the kids to talk to each other online, other than having to type. That way the kid can make new friends easier by simply chatting, rather than scrolling through the menu list to see what is available to say and can tell if they are speaking with a REAL kid or some creepy guy online, of course with most things online, parental supervision is encouraged. Another way to improve the social dynamics of Toon Town is to allow a group chat feature, which enables more than two players of a specific group, like members of the same class, to talk to one another and allow them to do “jokes” together, similar to how guilds in World of Warcraft perform quests together.
Kingdom of loathing should have a messaging system which allows one players to talk to one another individually, like how one talks to another using American Online’s Instant Messenger. Another way, would be to enable the players to actually play together and do quests together at the same time, or at the very least, if its too much, let them play a mini game together so that they can share the same social experience.
Bejeweled Two should allow a versus mode so that players could compete with one another which will give them another incentive to play the game, to beat each other. They should also enable a feature that hinders the other player’s game play when the player is succeeding in a particular level. The creators can also add another social dynamic to the game by having a talk feature so that they can simply speak to their opponent and not worry about typing a response by trying to play the game at the same time, not only time will run out , but they may also lose track of the puzzle as well, a talk feature will give both players the opportunity to speak.
Like Bejeweled Two, the creators should also enable a feature which allows players to compete with on another. Or they can make the game so that the players can work together to solve the puzzle rather than against each other. Not only will working together form stronger bongs, it will also feed the player’s interests in the game and will give them a reason to play it again, because they will want to find something that they can do together. Another way Poppit! can improve the social dynamic is by having the players hide certain words or phrases in the balloons so that when the other player pops it, they will get the message and that will add another dimension of fun to the game.

Posted by Celeste McWhorter at 6:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Kingdom of Loathing and Toon Town both encouraged social interaction. Toon Town had more interaction communication thank KOL because it aloud players to play the game together and at the same time they could talk to each other. Though KOL had a much more limited interactions, the players could still talk to each other on chat but their game play is pretty much done solo. Bigger groups are more likely to happen in Toon Town due to the design, while in KOL the big groups can still exist in guilds, but the groups would be smaller due to the nature of the game play. My first assumptions about Toon Town was that it was going to be dull and repetitive and only little kids were going to get into it because they like Disney. I was wrong, the game was fun, its fun to do things when you are given tasks or missions to complete so that you can move higher up in the ranks. Like in the book, A Theory of Fun by Ralph Koster people would enjoy doing things if its made into a "game" but when it comes to the real world they won't do it because people in real life are lazy. From the name, Kingdom of Loathing, I was expecting some really dark and gruesome stuff, boy was I wrong! Despite from its border line generic designs, the game is still fun. The game is fun because it makes you use your imagination while playing it while than just doing the imagination for you; this game makes you think and read! Above that, you can't be dumb to chat for it makes you take an English test before you are allowed to even talk to other players. I give the game "props" for making people read and giving them a certain amount of limited play so that they could go outside to play. Both games follow the COPPA - Child Online Privacy Protection Act and DOPA - Deleting Online Predators Act. They follow COPPA in that they make sure that if the child is under 13 years of old, they do this by asking for their birth date (in which case the kid can still lie), and if they are the people of the game will send their parents a letter asking for wriiten consent for their kids to use their game. For Toon Town I am pretty positive that they will do this because it is Disney and Disney has enough money to run such a campaign, for KOL I would assume that they simply wouldn't allow kids under 13 (those who honestly confess to it) to play because it does not look like they could afford such a maneuver and some of the content ( i.e. drunkenness status) would not be appropriate (as if they care). The game social system in KOL does a good job to support, enable , encourage and punishing different social behaviors. The do this by setting certain guidelines such as you have to know English and to not bother people by asking for meat or being excessively rude. Toon Town does a good job of inducting new members into their society by giving them tasks to complete for their "training". This lets the players know the ropes of the game and makes them familiar of the ways of Toon Town. Both games foster a sense of belonging in that in KOL you have group in which you choose guilds to be with and you bond and form relationships with your "compadres". Toon Town is the same way in which they have given their players a feature which enables them to make friends with other players and lets them know when the other player is on so that they could meet up and talk and play with each other. The two games are social game and with social games come social players. There are four types of players; Explorers, Achievers, Killers and Socializers. Due to the nature of the two games the Killers are limited in that they are only limited into only killing the enemies in the game; or by in the case of Toon Town by making the "cogs" laugh. The social experience from these two games compared to the games we played in class are different in that in the games we played in class we get to communicate with the other players face to face, while in the internet you don't know who you are conversing with it may even be the stereotypical middle-aged overweight male living with his mother in a dark basement. Either way, playing these games are fun because it lets you make friends with people from afar and you get to talk to strangers.

Posted by Celeste McWhorter at 1:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

D.I.C.S (Department of Intercampus Security)
Celeste McWhorter (Director of Development)
Dilfer (Programmer)
Vince Malic (Taggie)
Nick Battjes (Writer)
Torin (Tech)
Vincent Ho (TBA)
Aaron Ko (TBA)
Ryan Wilk (overseer)
Jonathan Zabel (Organizer)

USC students are our audience

The number of players varies and is dependant on participation

The overarching story here is going to be a war between two distinct and fairly traditional teams, a rebellion and an empire as it were. The empire is DICS (Department of intercampus security), an evil police organization clothed in the livery of the fake police force of the same name that my friends created for their TV series. The as yet unnamed rebellion will be constantly publicly persecuted in hilarious ways by the DICS officers in the areas in and around campus. The first public event will involved some of us dressing up in the DICS uniforms and chasing hilarious-object-holding members of the rebellion, at this point also us, around campus. We will then place fake wanted posters with the images of the members of the rebellion on them and a website to go to in order to report information about the suspects. There will also be recruitment posters for the rebels that will direct potential players to another website and give them instructions on how to join the group, formally making them a part of the game. Over the ten weeks we will develop more events, facebook groups, websites, posters, daily Trojan articles written by our patsies on the inside, and any other means of causing interest and dissent amongst the populous as we can.

Platform

Work divided into nine positions

Director of Development (D.D) - makes sure deadlines are meant, keeps track of progress, and makes sure work is done
Organizer- Creates the Ideas, the innovator of the project and moves it to the direction it needs to be
Treasurer - keeps track of funding, buys supplies and makes sure that everyone has contributed
Writer- creates the story line and adds and extra creativity to the ARG
Tech- helps run website and works alongside the writer
Programmer- designs the website, posts up fliers
Overseerer- keeps tabs on the "safety of events" keeps an eye out for DPS, posts up fliers
Taggie- Publicity of the events, facebook, organizes fliers and other media forms
Assistant- posts up fliers and available when any of the above needs help

*Everybody participates in the events

*Every week each member contributes 5$ for funding

*Meetings are Sundays at 3:30pm

week 1- website and fliers "@"

week 2- facebook "#" and planning

week 3- @# Event A

week 4- @# planning

week 5- @# Event B

week 6- @# planning

week 7- @# planning

week 8- @# Event C

week 9- @# Daily Trojan

week 10- Major Event

Posted by Celeste McWhorter at 7:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

When I saw this article I knew I had to share it with the class.

Digital Treasure hunt gets winner

Posted by Ryan Dumouche at 6:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yahoo! Graffiti:
Yahoo Graffiti is more or less an online version of Pictionary, or the illustrative mode in Cranium. In the short time period I played, I really encountered a range of player types. Fortunately the game includes a group-ban function, so Killers were quickly kicked out of the game. Overall the gamers were, as intended, casual. It was obvious that although the game is a social experience, its casual nature ultimately directs the entire experience. In other words, players are mostly signed on to pass the time at work, school, etc. Because of this, social interaction outside of the context of the game-play was very limited.

Yahoo! Pool:
This game is even less social than Graffiti. Here the games are limited to two unique players; I was quickly kicked if I attempted to 'observe' an ongoing match. I suppose the most intriguing social aspect of the game is the leader board that is displayed on Yahoo! I imagine the leader board has created some online rivalries or tournaments. Otherwise, the game is geared towards one on one combat, and specifically, the individual agenda to score more points, etc.

Posted by Ryan Wilk at 11:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

After resurrecting my old hotmail account and struggling find an available nickname, I manage to log into MSN Games. I'm greeted with a message box that tells me to switch to Internet Explorer. Okay, fine. After digging for a while, I find MSN's top five multi-player games:

1. Poker
2. Uno
3. Checkers
4. Hearts
5. Backgammon

Wow! Sounds like I'm in for a treat... I decide to go with poker because I have some experience with other poker websites. After installing over five ActiveX Controls, the game finally loads. Six minutes later, MSN finds me enough opponents to start playing. I'm placed in the bottom right corner of the table at an awkward angle, and my cards are only visible when I rollover them. The action buttons (call, fold, etc) are small and scattered.

There is a chat window but no one has said a single word. I decide to break the ice but no one responds. So, I play a few more hands and quit. MSN Games' community is nonexistent and there appears to be no effort to encourage social interaction. Even worse, MSN's games are just poor. It is clear that MSN only created this games section because Yahoo did it first.

On the other hand, Yahoo has twenty multi-player games including some originals. The games are Java applets, so you only need the JRE which most people already have. Initially, when I clicked "Join," nothing happened, so I had to disable my pop-up blockers. While Yahoo's multi-player games aren't flashy, they are consistent and have a thoughtful user interface.

Similar to Sissy Fight, all of Yahoo's multi-player games feature a lobby where you can chat with other players before joining a table. Each of the games I played had a very active lobby with a combination of trash-talking and friendly conversation about the game, or otherwise. I also noticed even more chatting in cooperative games like Spades. Unlike MSN Games, the in-game chat was also lively.

Posted by Torin Kampa at 10:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Kingdom of Loathing is much more of a single player RPG than an MMORPG. The player's social experience is limited to brief, non-immersive PVP battles. These battles might as well be random because there is no social interaction other than a victory or defeat message. There is, however, an active forum and various high score lists where players can compete for the top ten spots.

The most innovate part of Kingdom of Loathing is that it restricts the amount of a time a user can play. Every day, players are given limited number of “adventures” where they can explore a location, battle a monster, or both. Even though players are allowed to earn a limited number of additional adventures, this restriction prevents the game from consuming their life.

Unlike the majority of online games, Kingdom of Loathing is HTML-based and does not rely on technologies such as Flash, Java, or Shockwave. Additionally, the programmers are not pushing the boundaries of HTML with Javascript animation or AJAX. While this may result in less immersive gameplay, it does maximize compatibility. Users can likely play Kingdom of Loathing on older computers and even cell phones where advanced web technology is not available.

The artist's style is plain, two-tone style which is absolutely appropriate for Kingdom of Loathing and its website, but it is the writer's shtick that holds the game together. Overall, Kingdom of Loathing is a solitary yet entertaining gaming experience.

Unlike Kingdom of Loathing, Sissy Fight is completely socially dependent. Three to six players have turn-based interactions on the school yard where they can scratch, grab, and tease other players, or heal themselves, and tattle on the other players.

Sissy Fight reveals quite a bit about human nature in survival situations. For example, players will relentlessly target the weaker player(s) if it increases their own chances of survival. Also, players attempt to ally themselves against others who stand out or do not conform to the group's social dynamic.

Players are allowed to chat with each other as much as they want at any given time in the game. Most of the dialog consists of taunting or insulting of other players, and sometimes attempts to ally against a specific player. The majority of the time, if you are too quiet, you are targeted; likewise, if you talk too much, you may be targeted.

While Sissy Fight does not inspire much camaraderie, it does strongly encourage you to socialize with other players, which held my attention much longer than Kingdom of Loathing.

Posted by Torin Kampa at 10:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Seeing that I already had a worn and trustworthy hotmail account, I figured I'd first go to MSN games, since I would have the luxury of skipping the whole registration part. Nonetheless, MSN Games manage to toss a few administrative obstacles my way, shuttling me from Firefox to IE, and then after that, requiring me to install some ActiveX goodies to get to the gaming. After getting my browser corrected and updated, I then had to figure out where on the page to direct my attention, seeing that "MSN" and "Games" are both impressively broad categories, resulting in a ton of links to choose from. For the sake of convenience, I avoided "PC Downlaod" and for the sake of my wallet I avoided "Play for Cash." Among the remaining options, most of which didn't trigger any significance for me, I went with free games. With the attention span of a typical Counterstrike player, I clicked straight to the first game on the list and overlooked the instructions. I ended on some sort of playing field where I was to put down chips with random Greek characters to do... something, I guess. It was all Greek to me, though. There didn't seem to be any other players involved.

Yahoo Games was a little friendlier to my computer, and thankfully receptive to Firefox. I settled much more quickly into a game, called "Yahoo Graffiti," which in stark contrast to the archaic game on MSN had an intuitive setup (it was pictionary, plain and simple), and, most importantly, other people. I had a good set of chuckles; I was assigned the word "Internet," which was much easier to draw than to sculpt out of clay (kudos to the Cranium team that pulled THAT off), and also Ninja, which I also drew in a recognizable manner but only managed to elicit "ninga (sic)" from the other player. I cheated to win that round by erasing my ninja and writing in big letters "SPELLING!"

Of course, the overall experience with MSN and Yahoo Games was different from the time I spent with Sissy Fight and Puzzle Pirates. With the Games systems, one is operating on a much more abstract level than with the MMOs of last week. I imagine that the players approach the systems with a very targeted goal; to play a game that is more in the category of crossword puzzles, sudoku, or Set for that matter. They're the kind of games that tickle a very specific part of the brain, games that require the entire focus of the player so that the social element is sharpied out - should we view the human mind as pragmatic, a immersive, interactive social element really isn't necessary. Beyond teaching and learning the basics of the game, it wasn't necessary for Set, and MSN and Yahoo Games take the Set/Boggle gaming principle and webify it. I had fun drawing ninjas and the Internet, but the most social investment demanded by the game was the ability to guess the drawing.

The key difference between these gaming forums and the MMOs like Sissy Fight and Puzzle Pirates is the role-playing or representative element. The full gaming experience for the MMOs is contingent on an identity that is tailored and created by the user. Sissy Fight, stripped to the core, is essentially an uber-version of Paper Rock Scissors, and indeed, I'm sure if I looked I could find some sort of Paper Rock Scissors game on MSN or Yahoo. However, on top of this gaming prototype, Sissy Fight has built a cultural and social context that makes it more than just a rehashing of an ancient game; by participating in it a person, together with the people he's playing with partakes in a sophisticated and totally fun satire of the Mean Girls stereotype we all know and love. Similarly, I participated in a Sword Fight on Puzzle Pirates, and that was a familiar variant of Tertris, which, recalling my lamentable middle school days, is a game that can be very isolating and solitary. However, from the delightfully innovative Sword Fight theme built on the Tetris style game to the larger Pirates context users partake in, Puzzle Pirates builds incentives for social interactions and projecting a unique game-based representation, or avatar. In a nutshell, the social element is necessary. And if you want to play the games with the social element, that's what Yahoo and MSN games are for.

I don't want to put the gaming portals and the MMOs in any sort of value hierarchy. It definitely felt to me a to-each-his-own sort of setup. If one wants to play a game of chess, he or she can hop onto the gaming portals, have the internet find a partner for just one game, play it, and move on. If Patricia's sitting next to someone on an airplane and both have a need to be entertained, out comes Set. If you're in the mood for something a little more participatory, something that requires a bit of personal projection to win, the MMOs are there. Similarly, if you're sitting around at a party and there's a warm, let's-get-to-know-ya feeling hanging in the air, Patricia whips out Cranium.

The communities in the two categories are dealt with in the ways one would expect, given their purpose. Yahoo and MSN are about fulfilling that on-the-spot gaming craving, so there's no need for avatars, for elaborate names or profiles, for persistence-over-time (except for a rudimentary badge system in MSN) or for "experience points." MMOs address a different need, a human desire to perform, to interact. In those contexts, then, we have avatar customizations, storyline contexts, and elaborate communication systems. For the former group, social interaction isn't discouraged per se, it's just that social interaction beyond a "quick match" simply isn't what people are looking for there.

Posted by Vincent Malic at 9:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Blog Assignment #1

Set: Set is arguably the least social game we played. It simply consists of individual brains attempting to narrow down possible combos as quickly as possible. There really is no eye-contact or social interaction until Set is yelled.

Boggle: Boggle was really the first game we played that began to make the social aspect enjoyable, if not primary. Although not as clearly a party game as Scattergories or Cranium, the reading of word lists at the end of each round did reveal the logical approach of each individual player. This led to several friendly arguments and plenty of laughter.

Scattergories: Scattergories, like boggle, was very individualistic while the game was being played. However, because the mechanics of forming words was not as rigid as boggle, the post-game activities really began to reveal personal traits, habits, and humor. This is a very classic social game, and is even more enjoyable when you add in teams.

Cranium: As Patricia noted, Cranium is truly the most social of the games we played. The mechanics of the game are really structured to force people into revealing their own personal traits, attitudes, and skill. This leads to very enjoyable and often embarrassing game-play.

Puzzle Pirates: Puzzle Pirates initially appears very similar, regarding its social elements, to the games we played in class during the previous week. The individual player, similar to Set, or Scattergories, is responsible for his/her own ability to solve a puzzle. However, Puzzle Pirates allows this individual agenda to play a part in the effort of the entire team (the ship’s crew). Thus, the social dynamic is built on team expectations. You are expected to succeed at your individual task for the success of the mission. This structure requires a leadership role that can lead to both player hostility and companionship.

The Kingdom of Loathing: This game, although witty and entertaining because of its very simple aesthetic, does not create a very captivating social dynamic. Although the game offers a clan based community system, it lacks a detailed level of teamwork that would really push the social dynamic. The game seems mostly geared towards the single-player experience.

Posted by Ryan Wilk at 7:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The games I played were bejeweled two on www.worldwinner.com and Poppit! on pogo.com.

Unlike Kingdom of Loathing and Toon Town, Bejeweled two did not deal with the community of the players, if anything it did more to discourage social interation among them if anything. The reason I say this is because the entire game play is meant to be solo, considering the game play it is just one player focusing on how to solve the puzzle than to interact with other players playing the same game. In fact, it would be both a distraction and a hindrance if it allowed players to communicate with one another. The reason why is because there is a time factor that limits you the amount of time allowed to play the game and if you are talking to someone else you will lose track of the game. This game is defiantly NOT for the socializers, those who play a game to interact with other players. Not for killers since those no one to kill unless you consider eliminating the three jewels as "killing three at a time" which I highly doubt is the case. Not an Explorer game since there is not much to explore, unless you consider the new screen cap at the next level as a way of exploring, there is no environment available to explore. This is THE ACHIEVER game because that is basically all you can do; to advance to one level to the next.

Poppit! On the other hand did share more of a resemblance to the MMO’s like Toon Town and Kingdom of Loathing concerning social interactions. If reflects more like Kingdom of Loathing when dealing with how the players interact with one another; meaning that there is a side chat bar that players can use to talk with one another while playing the game. Community is divided into “social rooms” meaning that there are a X amount of players in a room playing a specific games, players playing the same game enter one of these rooms and can talk to the players playing the same game. This type of feature enables social interactions among players. Like bejeweled, the Explorers and Killers are limited on what they can do to satisfy their own need to kill and/or explore the many dimensions of what the game has to offer. On the other hand, Socializers now have this new realm that enables them to talk with each other while playing their own game. Poppit! doesn’t have a time frame to rush the player to finish a particular level as well. Like Bejeweled, Achievers can still flourish by advancing to one level to the next. I guess in every game there is always an achiever, even in Solitaire, since there is this goal to finish the game.

The pattern trends of the MMOG population have increased DRAMATICLY over time, special thanks to World of Warcraft with over six and a half million players! Congratulations Blizzard that’s about 15$ a pop per month. The MMOG started with player populations around 10,000 in 1997 to 6,500,000 in the summer of 2006. Concerning the chart player populations are still growing.

Posted by Celeste McWhorter at 6:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Aaron Ko
CTIN-482 #2 Blog Assignment

Yahoo Pool: Even though there are many players who play Yahoo Pool, this game does not require any sort of social interaction. Most of the times, players do not really talk to each other at all. Everyone concentrates on his/her own game, no help or assist is needed throughout the whole game. In comparison to the 'lite' MMOs that I played last week, I would say Yahoo Pool is a similar experience to the Kingdom of Loathing, since both games do not really encourage social interactions. However, overall I feel that Yahoo Pool is better and more fun than Kingdom of Loathing.

Yahoo Graffiti: This game primarily builds on social interactions because players have to talk to one another in order to guess what the other person is drawing. In comparison to the 'lite' MMOs that I played last week, I would think this game is more similar to Toontown in terms of social interactions. This game is identical to one of the parts of Cranium where one has to guess what his/her partner is drawing. This game allows more players to play at once (maximum of 6 players) in comparison to only two people playing in Yahoo Pool. This is more of a game for a party of people.

Posted by Aaron Ko at 3:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Aaron Ko
CTIN-482 #1 Blog Assignment

Toontown: There are lots of interactions between players. You can chat and make various gestures and emotions to other online players. You can make friends inside the game. The game definately encourages social interactions. The game importantly teaches players how to play the game through a training and tutorial session.

Kingdom of Loathing: This game is definately geared towards a single-player experience. When I played it, I feel somewhat isolated and detached from any kinds of interactions. I had a hard time trying to figure out how to play the game. The instructions were not good. I found this game quite boring, in comparison to Toontown.

Bongles + Set: These two are more 'quiet' games. Each player is occupied with his/her own thinking. Social interaction is of a minimal extent.

Cranium + Scattergories: Scattergories is in a way like Bongles. Cranium allows by far the most social interaction. It is definately a game for a big party of people because everyone has to perform/entertain through various methods. There are some embarassing moments in the game. Bongles/Set/Scattergories allow social interaction when players judge on the players' sets/words. However, Scattergories and Cranium are grouped together because these two games are more suitable for a big party of people.

Posted by Aaron Ko at 2:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)