Comments on: Treating players like numbers http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/ Raph Koster's personal website: MMOs, gaming, writing, art, music, books Sun, 12 Feb 2012 06:02:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Pyr0http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1073 Pyr0 Fri, 06 Jan 2006 10:24:35 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1073 This reminds me of <a href="http://www.mturk.com/" rel="nofollow">Amazon Mechanical Turk</a>, which is almost fun. The users complete simple tasks that cannot (yet) be solved by computers, they call it artificial artificial intelligence. Tasks include selecting the picture which best represents a business storefront or rank your Top 3 establishments in a given city. This reminds me of Amazon Mechanical Turk, which is almost fun.

The users complete simple tasks that cannot (yet) be solved by computers, they call it artificial artificial intelligence.

Tasks include selecting the picture which best represents a business storefront or rank your Top 3 establishments in a given city.

]]> By: Raphhttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1046 Raph Thu, 05 Jan 2006 16:32:55 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1046 Actually, Darniaq, the precise process was to get five fragments, combine them, and turn them in at an Imp or Reb recruiter for 500 faction points and a badge. The puzzle was above and beyond that. So everyone who participated at all in gathering clues (whether they shared them or not) did in fact get a reward. There was also a large-scale "the faction that turns in the most gets a boost next month" thing. We probably should not have had a reward for the puzzle solving itself -- all it did was deliver some fiction. Actually, Darniaq, the precise process was to get five fragments, combine them, and turn them in at an Imp or Reb recruiter for 500 faction points and a badge. The puzzle was above and beyond that. So everyone who participated at all in gathering clues (whether they shared them or not) did in fact get a reward.

There was also a large-scale “the faction that turns in the most gets a boost next month” thing.

We probably should not have had a reward for the puzzle solving itself — all it did was deliver some fiction.

]]> By: MMORPG - MMORPG Spieler heilen Krebshttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1045 MMORPG - MMORPG Spieler heilen Krebs Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:00:41 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1045 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Ok, nicht wirklich. Aber Raph Koster macht sich in einem Blog Eintrag auf seiner Webseite Gedanken darüber, was mit der gigantischen Ressource an kreativen Spielern in MMO's alles möglich und auch unmöglich wäre. Er vergleicht das Potenzial mit Projekten wie SETI@Home, nur das es hier keine Computer sind, die parallel an einem Problem arbeiten, sondern Menschen. Er führt das Beispiel von Byron Reeves an, der ein System ähnlich zum Medical Screen in Star Wars Galaxies entwickelte und mit realen Daten zur Krebserkennung fütterte. Im Ergebnis war ein typischer Spieler fähig die Krebsart in 60% der Fälle korrekt zu diagnostizieren. Nimmt man 30 Spieler zusammen, sind die Ergebnisse gleichwertig mit denen eines ausgebildeten Pathologen. Raph überlegt auf rein theoretischer Basis in seinem Blog "Treating players like numbers" wie sich dieses Potenzial, dass den Spielern zudem Spaß macht, weiter genutzt werden könnte. [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%-->

[...] Ok, nicht wirklich. Aber Raph Koster macht sich in einem Blog Eintrag auf seiner Webseite Gedanken darüber, was mit der gigantischen Ressource an kreativen Spielern in MMO’s alles möglich und auch unmöglich wäre. Er vergleicht das Potenzial mit Projekten wie SETI@Home, nur das es hier keine Computer sind, die parallel an einem Problem arbeiten, sondern Menschen.

Er führt das Beispiel von Byron Reeves an, der ein System ähnlich zum Medical Screen in Star Wars Galaxies entwickelte und mit realen Daten zur Krebserkennung fütterte. Im Ergebnis war ein typischer Spieler fähig die Krebsart in 60% der Fälle korrekt zu diagnostizieren. Nimmt man 30 Spieler zusammen, sind die Ergebnisse gleichwertig mit denen eines ausgebildeten Pathologen.

Raph überlegt auf rein theoretischer Basis in seinem Blog “Treating players like numbers” wie sich dieses Potenzial, dass den Spielern zudem Spaß macht, weiter genutzt werden könnte. [...]

]]> By: Darniaqhttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1042 Darniaq Thu, 05 Jan 2006 14:00:10 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1042 Oh, and for some reason, in these sorts of discussions I'm always reminded of Hari Seldon's Psychohistory from the Asimove series (and which was picked up in a Star Trek book series, and I'm sure other places). Oh, and for some reason, in these sorts of discussions I’m always reminded of Hari Seldon’s Psychohistory from the Asimove series (and which was picked up in a Star Trek book series, and I’m sure other places).

]]> By: Darniaqhttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1041 Darniaq Thu, 05 Jan 2006 13:58:56 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1041 <blockquote>The response was mixed, in large part because it was a collaborative puzzle-solving exercise, but the reward was given to the first person to send in a solution. (everyone who participated in the event got a separate reward, which probably would have sufficed). Several folks, including some on the team, disliked having an out-of-game event, which is something that I personally have no hang-ups about. Lastly, the more story-oriented folks felt a bit left out.</blockquote> While the SWG puzzle was far beyond my cognitive abilities, the debate about its merit reminded me of the older UO events from, err, February 2001 I think it was. Every two weeks there was a new event, and one I remember featured a server riddle/puzzle and then a mass mob assault. Very good time that everyone could partake in. The only issue I personally had with the SWG puzzle was that the reward dispensation was counterintuitive. Using people as parallel processors would seem to tie to giving a reward to <i>all</i> participants in some form. What I seemed to get from the SWG puzzle event was that it wasn't so much the first person to figure out (anathema to Wisdom of the Crowds anyway, I feel), it was the first person to <i>report</i> it. Everyone deserved a reward for being part of the machinery. You don't just grease one cog in a clock ;) And as to those who didn't like it because it was an out-of-game event, I can understand that, but I personally don't have a problem with it either. Heck, for all the reading and posting that goes on around these parts, we're <i>already</i> taking the games with us out of the game worlds :) Otherwise, parallel processing of any form has always fascinated me. It seems to counter the assertions of insular American culture (everyone's a hero), but I think that just means people need to recognize where they are an individual and where they <i>can</i> be part of a larger whole on occasion. Maybe it's just in the packaging of it. Few seem to have a problem doing the wave at a stadium.

The response was mixed, in large part because it was a collaborative puzzle-solving exercise, but the reward was given to the first person to send in a solution. (everyone who participated in the event got a separate reward, which probably would have sufficed). Several folks, including some on the team, disliked having an out-of-game event, which is something that I personally have no hang-ups about. Lastly, the more story-oriented folks felt a bit left out.

While the SWG puzzle was far beyond my cognitive abilities, the debate about its merit reminded me of the older UO events from, err, February 2001 I think it was. Every two weeks there was a new event, and one I remember featured a server riddle/puzzle and then a mass mob assault. Very good time that everyone could partake in.

The only issue I personally had with the SWG puzzle was that the reward dispensation was counterintuitive. Using people as parallel processors would seem to tie to giving a reward to all participants in some form. What I seemed to get from the SWG puzzle event was that it wasn’t so much the first person to figure out (anathema to Wisdom of the Crowds anyway, I feel), it was the first person to report it. Everyone deserved a reward for being part of the machinery. You don’t just grease one cog in a clock ;)

And as to those who didn’t like it because it was an out-of-game event, I can understand that, but I personally don’t have a problem with it either. Heck, for all the reading and posting that goes on around these parts, we’re already taking the games with us out of the game worlds :)

Otherwise, parallel processing of any form has always fascinated me. It seems to counter the assertions of insular American culture (everyone’s a hero), but I think that just means people need to recognize where they are an individual and where they can be part of a larger whole on occasion. Maybe it’s just in the packaging of it. Few seem to have a problem doing the wave at a stadium.

]]> By: Ripples in the Sea of Peoplehttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1034 Ripples in the Sea of People Thu, 05 Jan 2006 04:28:03 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1034 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242There’s been a lot of heavy, arguably negative stuff here lately. So I thought it might be interesting to talk a little bit about possibilities instead. [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%-->

[...] http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242There’s been a lot of heavy, arguably negative stuff here lately. So I thought it might be interesting to talk a little bit about possibilities instead. [...]

]]> By: Raphhttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1033 Raph Thu, 05 Jan 2006 03:09:09 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1033 The Wisdom of Crowds theory says that you'd want to tackle specific problems that are easily quantifiable, not ones that are vague like "improve this game system." The trick then becomes asking the right question. "What should the damage be on this sword?" might a better example. Note, you'd take the AVERAGE of all the answers given, even the stupid ones. The Wisdom of Crowds theory says that you’d want to tackle specific problems that are easily quantifiable, not ones that are vague like “improve this game system.” The trick then becomes asking the right question.

“What should the damage be on this sword?” might a better example. Note, you’d take the AVERAGE of all the answers given, even the stupid ones.

]]> By: Mandrelhttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1032 Mandrel Thu, 05 Jan 2006 03:00:16 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1032 I know you like discussing generalities and theories here Raph, but this was bugging me, so I went back into the SWG forum archives for some info. I found a readable post about the storyline <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=GCW&message.id=26891&view=by_date_ascending&page=1" rel="nofollow"> here.</a> In fact, the clues for this stopped dropping about 2 years ago. As far as your main idea, I think it's an interesting way to approach design, but the implementation may be where the difficulty lies. How does one parse the "good" or "successful" data from the bad? In your example, a typical player (what is that anyways?) was able to diagnose cancer correctly at a 60% rate of a pathologist. Was the sample size large enough to make those results meaningful? Was it a simple test of "is this cancer a. or cancer b.?" I would go so far as to say that there are large groups working on problems, albeit not IN the games, but in the community on the forums. Their "incentive" is a better, more enjoyable game. Many games have passionate, well informed community members that spend hours tracking game mechanics, and writing proposals for improvements. Here we run into that implementation problem, of parsing the good from the bad. For every one constructive, well- written proposal there may be hundreds of unrelated, off-topic posts (or data points) that drown out the good. I know you like discussing generalities and theories here Raph, but this was bugging me, so I went back into the SWG forum archives for some info. I found a readable post about the storyline here. In fact, the clues for this stopped dropping about 2 years ago.
As far as your main idea, I think it’s an interesting way to approach design, but the implementation may be where the difficulty lies. How does one parse the “good” or “successful” data from the bad?
In your example, a typical player (what is that anyways?) was able to diagnose cancer correctly at a 60% rate of a pathologist. Was the sample size large enough to make those results meaningful? Was it a simple test of “is this cancer a. or cancer b.?”
I would go so far as to say that there are large groups working on problems, albeit not IN the games, but in the community on the forums. Their “incentive” is a better, more enjoyable game. Many games have passionate, well informed community members that spend hours tracking game mechanics, and writing proposals for improvements.
Here we run into that implementation problem, of parsing the good from the bad. For every one constructive, well- written proposal there may be hundreds of unrelated, off-topic posts (or data points) that drown out the good.

]]> By: xaldinhttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1029 xaldin Wed, 04 Jan 2006 23:45:48 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1029 The total immersion to learn a language would have been really helpful for me. I'd like to see more stuff like that honestly. I do think that online worlds/enviroments (which is what we're talking about really not games by the current sense) have a lot of potential the issue becomes trust in the results. I'd be very nervous about letting say the population of SWG diagnose me for possible cancer. Your results may average out to even but I typically don't go to an average level doctor either for those same reasons. The total immersion to learn a language would have been really helpful for me. I’d like to see more stuff like that honestly. I do think that online worlds/enviroments (which is what we’re talking about really not games by the current sense) have a lot of potential the issue becomes trust in the results. I’d be very nervous about letting say the population of SWG diagnose me for possible cancer. Your results may average out to even but I typically don’t go to an average level doctor either for those same reasons.

]]> By: Raphhttp://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/04/treating-players-like-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-1026 Raph Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:32:11 +0000 http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=242#comment-1026 Mandrel, the in-game quest part is indeed still there, and I believe people can still take a whack at solving the puzzle. Mandrel, the in-game quest part is indeed still there, and I believe people can still take a whack at solving the puzzle.

]]>