Raph's Website » New major study on MMO players

New major study on MMO players

September 5th, 2008 (Visited 6715 times) Tags:

Dmitri Williams has released the first paper from an initiative that I helped get off the ground years ago, before leaving SOE. Basically, SOE gave him full (anonymized) logs of activity for EQ2.

Some key findings:

the largest concentration of players are in their 30s
There are more players in their 30s than in their 20s
Older players also play more than younger players
Female players play slightly more hours per week than male players
EQ2 players come from wealthier backgrounds than average, & are also more educated than the general population
have substantially different levels of spirituality than the general population, particularly are far less likely to be Christian and much more likely to state they have no religion compared to the general US population
Physically, EQ2 players are healthier than the regular population. So much for the overweight geek stereotype
However, they have lower indicators for mental health — particularly for depression
the desire to get ahead (“achievement”) and the desire to spend time with others both predicted increased playing, whereas the desire for immersion was a predictor of playing less

More papers will be coming — they had to goto NCSA supercomputers to crunch the terabytes of data! — and I look forward to seeing what else emerges.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

gamedev.zi-yu.com wrote on September 6th, 2008 at 12:45 am:

New major study on MMO players…

Dmitri Williams has released the first paper from an initiative that I helped get off the ground years ago, before leaving SOE. Basically, SOE gave him full (anonymized) logs of activity for EQ2….

Research profiles the typical fantasy MMO player | MMORPG-BAY wrote on September 7th, 2008 at 11:11 am:

[...] Dmitri Williams and his team have been doing some very hardcore MMO-related research. Thanks to Raph Koster, they were given free reign with the whole of SOE’s EverQuest II-related user statistics. They’ve [...]

MMO Clerks » Research profiles the typical fantasy MMO player wrote on September 7th, 2008 at 5:30 pm:

Games All-In-One Blogs » Blog Archive » Research profiles the typical fantasy MMO player wrote on September 11th, 2008 at 12:43 pm:

Research profiles the typical fantasy MMO player | Game Pet wrote on September 24th, 2008 at 8:02 am:

Wilfried said on September 6th, 2008 at 2:20 am:

Great read

the desire to get ahead (”achievement”) and the desire to spend time with others both predicted increased playing, whereas the desire for immersion was a predictor of playing less

The interesting question would be:

It’s easy to include all possible bells and whistles for achievers and socializer in the MMORPGs of today, do they at the same time fail in delivering immersion to a level that can entertain players enough to keep them?

Or is trying to make an immersive MMORPG doomed to fail by definition, because immersion works for a book or 2 hours in the cinema but not for a MMORPG?

HatHead Rickenbacker said on September 6th, 2008 at 8:30 am:

@Wilfried: your question is a hardly framed as a neutral one.

Morgan Ramsay said on September 6th, 2008 at 1:11 pm:

Wilfried wrote:

The data, and interpretations, are specific to EverQuest II.

sean said on September 6th, 2008 at 2:44 pm:

immersion by itself is not enough. there must be something to do – the much maligned “repeatable activities” of combat and crafting in MMOGs are something to do for more than two hours. if you have _just_ an immersive world, then you are stuck in the content trap. The activity is consuming content in the world by exploring, and you can never create interesting content of this type faster then players can consume it.

sean said on September 6th, 2008 at 2:46 pm:

er.. why dont we let user create content for each other, then we get out of the content trap? duh. Why didn’t someone think of that. Oh, hang on…

Eolirin said on September 6th, 2008 at 5:51 pm:

@sean, because most users can’t generate decent content, so that’s actually not as easy as it sounds.

You certainly can’t build a game around user created content and then just leave it there without providing your own work too and expect it to go very far. And you have to isolate and prevent players from running through the 90% of garbage content because that’ll cause them to bounce really easily if that’s all they see.

Now, if you want to talk *platforms*, like YouTube or Metaplace, that are more conglomerations of unrelated content than they are a single world filled with content, you can go further, but it’s not the same design issue.

Rik said on September 6th, 2008 at 9:05 pm:

The problem is not that most users can’t generate decent content. That’s easy to fix with a score keeping filter system.

The problem is that 90% of user created content is pornography, copyright infringement or both.

Morgan Ramsay said on September 6th, 2008 at 10:25 pm:

Rik:

If only all problems could be “fixed” by sweeping them under a rug…

Ola Fosheim Grøstad said on September 7th, 2008 at 12:49 am:

I haven’t read the paper, but you’ll have to expect significant bias for a sequel to a game that launcehd such a long time ago..

Rik said on September 7th, 2008 at 12:55 am:

You make it sound like my solution to the homeless problem is throw blankets over them so no one see them. There is no problem with players making bad content. Bad content can be a good leaning experience for the creator. Many will not care if it’s ever seen by another person.

In fact player-made content does follow Sturgeon’s law, same as professionally made content*. Better content creation tools will not change that, it will just make the better content better still. So if we define the problem as “Players need to find the good stuff quickly and easily” then the only solution is to filter the content somehow. The shortest path to that is a vote-gathering system. You could set up an in-game cost system, or an out-of-game cost system that would tend to discourage some people, but you have no way of knowing if you have discouraged the right group of people.

Amaranthar said on September 7th, 2008 at 8:20 am:

That’s an interesting piece of work. I’m astounded, as always, by just how well people can do things. However, I think there’s a danger of taking things out of context. I also wonder how truthful people were, especially on the weight question.

Sean said:
if you have _just_ an immersive world, then you are stuck in the content trap. The activity is consuming content in the world by exploring, and you can never create interesting content of this type faster then players can consume it.

Well said. Especially the “just_an” part. Good point. However, it can be done in a single player game, but that’s a different story and not what you meant. But lets explore “exploring” in an MMORPG setting.

If exploring is just sight seeing, then yes, players will burn through it very quickly. But looking at WoW, they have a large world, and you are restricted by your level on how fast you can explore it. I think other kinds of restrictions would work well in a sandbox game, such as required mountain climbing skill + quite a bit of luck, to get up that mountain side to explore an interesting valley. Or hidden content (secret doors or sealed areas) requiring a variety of puzzle solving, pass words, and/or information gathering. Keys is a good idea, but then they gave the keys out in quests or simple MOB bashing. What if the keys are hidden better than that and part of the game is to figure out where the keys are?

Overall, I think there are loads of ways to turn exploration into much more of a game itself. In other words, build a huge, huge world and concentrate on this instead of making quests, and let players make the quests as part of a need-for-components player made quest system. This is leading to player made content.

Player made content I think is possible. But I think it needs to be tightly controlled. You know, fill in the blanks of this contract. “What do you want?” (I want this rare artifact) “How much will you pay?” (I’ll pay one kazillion gold pieces), and then give the questor an option to report this contract if the first question is answered (I want a blow job) or something like that. But more than this is a natural system because of a game’s design. UO had allot of players making “contracts” to supply things. Resources, trade items, and rares. I think it could have been expanded if they’d made an effort to promote this through contracts as above, and/or web pages devoted to this, accessed within the game.

Michael Chui said on September 7th, 2008 at 9:25 am:

if you have _just_ an immersive world, then you are stuck in the content trap.

I fail to see how a world with nothing to do is remotely immersive.

tim said on September 7th, 2008 at 11:05 pm:

Michael, one can certainly be immersed in music or art. Perhaps clarify what you mean by “nothing to do.” Literally, as can’t even move or move but not interact with the world?

Ingrod said on September 8th, 2008 at 12:43 am:

The problem is not that most users can’t generate decent content. That’s easy to fix with a score keeping filter system.
The problem is that 90% of user created content is pornography, copyright infringement or both.

Yeah, but I wonder if when people talk about “player made content” always have in mind “hard player made content”, with players creating content from scratch.

But what about “soft player made content”? How in example semiscripted quest, giving to the players the possibility for craft their own quests throught find in the game world fragments of a chain quest, every chain link will be a small one step quest scripted by devs, but when players combine many of these they can end with their own long adventure.

Also this can be linked to the others “soft player made content” systems, how players made citys or keeps, the most simple quest can be kill ten mobs or cut ten trees or mine for the resources that we need for build this town, but the chain quest can be much more complex and long, the only limit is the chain links number and variety. Every small quest step could be linked to a “content node” tailored by devs, in example a information broker or a criminal hub or a dragon lair, and inclusive player crafted “content nodes”, a player build keep with NPCs guards and a boss is a tipical “content node”, a new player can go to a player city a pick up a player made quest for attack a player made keep owned for a enemy guild -a PvE driven PvP-, or a player mage can sumon a dragon lair that must be defeated near a enemy town with the same purpuose, when the “content node” is put in the world that can generate new chain links for quests linked to that node. Crafters can build the rewards for these quest, and the player guild treasure can provide the monetary reward, and devs de possible experience rewards. Every new player made city can belong a “content hub” and expand the quest grid. With this system players can colonice entire game world regions with new content.

Devs can give the blocks for build quest chains or content in the same manner that they give the resources for craft items, houses or keeps. Instead of static content and quests with every game expansion the devs can provide new blocks, and after players can explore the game world, find these blocks and tailor the content.

Thoughts?

Michael Chui said on September 8th, 2008 at 7:00 am:

Music and art are “worlds”? You’ve answered your own question.

Peter S. said on September 8th, 2008 at 10:18 am:

RL is as immersive as it gets (by definition), and “bored, with nothing to do” is the problem for which video games are a potential solution.

So, yes, I’d have to say that a world can be completely immersive but offer the perception of nothing to do. Not at all times or places, if that needs saying, but yes.

The key difference is, you approach RL with an expectation that you have to do something to entertain yourself. However, a game *IS* entertainment, meaning that it is generally approached with the attitude of “this should entertain me”, with the game expected to be who does the work.

A choice to become actively engaged versus a default of passive engagement… well, it’s not unlike going to a state park, walking alone into the wilderness, and whining about being bored. Extremely immersive environment, but it’s not going to do the entertaining for you.

So, perhaps it should be intuitive that those who choose to actively engage are those who play the most. For one thing, they’re self motivated. Much like how someone who buys a bird guide and sets out to see what birds he can spot and ID is going to have a much better time in a state park, someone who comes to the game with their own specific desire to do something (which ends up being socialize or achieve, since exploring is quickly exhausted) will have a much better time and be more strongly compelled to stay and/or return.

Or, put another way, perhaps immersion is a greater factor for someone wanting the game to do the work, and by it’s nature that approach to an MMO will tend to play out as someone less attached to / involved in the game.

Tim said on September 8th, 2008 at 10:37 am:

Don’t be so purposely obtuse.

Music and art are things you can immerse yourself in, like worlds. And there is nothing to “do” with (most) music or art beyond observe it and immerse yourself in it. The implication is that if music and art can be immersive without anything to do, then perhaps worlds can also be immersive and yet have nothing to do.

Tim said on September 8th, 2008 at 11:37 am:

This ties I think back to the sandbox idea and what kinds of toys are in the box. Some players are more than happy with just a sandbox and a shovel, others want toy cars, army men and other stuff in the sandbox with them. Some like a sandbox by themselves, some like it with others to play with. Some children play well with others, some don’t.

Interitus said on September 8th, 2008 at 12:19 pm:

Amaranthar, did you even read the study?

On average EQ2 players are still slightly overweight but have a lower average BMI then the US population. With 22.2% of players classified as obese. If people lied we would see much smaller numbers. Anyway what reason does anyone have to lie? The information won’t be tracked back to their account by any means.

Slyfeind said on September 8th, 2008 at 4:08 pm:

I’m curious why we find it important (and I certainly have my own reasons, likely different from others’). Do we want to get to know the players better on a personal level? Purely for marketting? Do we seek validation and feel a sense of triumph when we find judges and doctors sharing these worlds with us? Do we want worlds tailored to certain demographics, or do we want the worlds to come, and let people go where they may?

Michael Chui said on September 8th, 2008 at 7:33 pm:

Peter S. said:

I’d have to say that a world can be completely immersive but offer the perception of nothing to do.

You mean I can’t turn around and look behind me? I can’t sit? I can’t try to peer over the nearest visual obstruction? I can’t try to touch something? I can’t study something to see any details I missed at a glance?

That’s as immersive as a painting. You know… not.

Restricting obvious actions (without presenting a set of alternative actions, as virtual worlds are wont to do) breaks immersion.

Tim said:

The implication is that if music and art can be immersive without anything to do, then perhaps worlds can also be immersive and yet have nothing to do.

Sure. Perhaps. Or perhaps… not.

The difference between “music and art” and worlds is that the former is meant to be funneled into you while you sit or stand as you please; the latter cannot be expressed so simply, unless it is flat, miniscule and dull. You cannot immerse in a world that you cannot participate in.

What you guys are describing is less than even a safari tour, which at least involves twisting around in your seat to spot the things that get pointed out. It’s a piece of abstract art, hung on the far side of a large room, separated from you by a glass partition.

Even if you could defend its existence in theory, do you really want it to exist? Or are we simply disagreeing on what “nothing to do” means? Of the five components Bartle laid out to define a virtual world, one was “physics”.

FYI, I can do a lot to actively view a piece of art or listen to a piece of music. But I’ve had the training, no matter how little I learned from it.

—

By the way, I forgot to say this, but thanks Raph for getting SOE to help Dimitri get this info. I’ve been reading through it and it’s awesome.

len said on September 9th, 2008 at 10:01 am:

“You cannot immerse in a world that you cannot participate in.”

Not quite true or not only as a result of participation. Are you familiar with the work of Donald Hebb in neuroscience on the dual trace mechanism? Co-incident activity rewires the human brain and might account for large population behaviors that otherwise seem to be irrational.

We are always participating. Immersion into group activity may create larger populations with similar wiring and what we think of as ‘meme’s may be nothing more than sharing wiring diagrams.

It is an interesting insight into consensus building and the lack of consensus. In some situations, resistors not only don’t agree, they physically can’t. In some cases, we’d agree to jump of a cliff together simply because we are hanging out together long enough to agree.

These are statistical populations, BTW. IOW, there is no right or wrong about the list Raph provides. Endorphin addiction can account for the sustainability of some of the groups, and wiring patterns may account for their shape.

Amaranthar said on September 9th, 2008 at 12:14 pm:

Amaranthar, did you even read the study?
On average EQ2 players are still slightly overweight but have a lower average BMI then the US population. With 22.2% of players classified as obese. If people lied we would see much smaller numbers. Anyway what reason does anyone have to lie? The information won’t be tracked back to their account by any means.

Yep I did. Why would you assume that just because I questioned the truthfulness of the replies that I am saying that they all lied? If 10% of the respondents knocked off about 15 pounds because they feel that that’s where they should be, and that’s where they will be in a few months because they are going to turn over a new leaf starting ‘tomorrow’, then that would throw off the results. And I think that answers your last question, no?

Amaranthar said on September 9th, 2008 at 12:22 pm:

I think Michael’s allot more right than wrong about immersion. We are talking about immersion specific to MMO’s here. And if you don’t have a complete game with “realistic” things to do, in a complete way of participating in that world, then it loses immersion. If there is nothing to do, which is where this started, then immersion is completely lost.

The Pastor said on September 9th, 2008 at 4:18 pm:

The most “immersed” I feel in any game I play is when there is actual drama involved. When you are looking at a plain wooden door and your choices are to open it or not and you really, truely do not know what’s on the other side, when you finally do open that door and see what’s there and it suprises you then your immersion level goes up. It does not have to be photo-realistic, it has to be “new” and unanticipated.
The more monotonous the task the less immersive it feels, no matter how good the graphics are.
When I played DOOM II and I creeped around a corner and found a new monster I had never seen and I had to figure out how to kill him, I actually felt a level of fear. That’s immersion.

IMHO

Muckbeast said on September 10th, 2008 at 12:23 am:

I cannot wait to see the details and actual statistics here. None of that surprises me. Not a single one of those findings. The news itself is very encouraging, but I have to admit I am almost as happy that my suspicions about my fellow MMO players/developers were pretty much spot on.

-Michael Hartman
Blogging about Online Gaming and Virtual Worlds:
http://www.muckbeast.com

Muckbeast said on September 10th, 2008 at 12:28 am:

Rik, I completely disagree that it is “easy” to deal with the bad content most players will make. No matter what filters or ranking systems you have, players will find ways to game it and get their “crappy” content high on the ratings list. This will happen often, and other players will eventually stop trusting the ratings system. At that point, you may as well have no raiting system at all.

Player created content is a total red herring. It will never be good. It will always be 90% garbage. Player created content has its place, however. Housing? Good. Events? Good. Non permanent things? Good. But actual content as far as zones to explore, quests to go on, etc? Bad.

Muckbeast said on September 10th, 2008 at 1:11 pm:

>> In the study of EQ2, the gender distribution was
>> 80.80% male and 19.20% female.

I would like to see a comparison with the % of female gamers in WoW. I have heard estimates for WoW at around 5% female.

EQ2 has a lot of fun, non-combat activities. WoW basically has none. I cannot help but think the lack of meaningful non-combat activities severely limits WoW’s female gamer population.

Amaranthar said on September 10th, 2008 at 2:28 pm:

I wouldn’t be surprised if you were right, Muckbeast. WoW’s guilds pretty much suck. There’s not much to do except quests, and the few I’ve been in were social only in chat. I don’t know hardly anything about EQ2, but if I’d known then I might have played that instead. But one grind is enough, and I don’t really want to start a new one. Especially after everyone else is levelled out. (But actually, I only play WoW because my son does, I’m tapped out on MMORPGs until something I want comes along.)

Michael Chui said on September 10th, 2008 at 7:23 pm:

I cannot wait to see the details and actual statistics here.

Not sure what you mean by that. The paper is available for download. I printed out two copies myself (one at home, which is still in the printer, and one at the office, because I forgot to grab the first one to read on the bus).

I can only hope that further papers will also be just as available.

New major study on MMO players

35 Responses to “New major study on MMO players”

Meta

Recent Comments

Categories

Tags

Recent Trackbacks

Archives

Twitter @raphkoster

Academics

Comics

Game devs

MMO devs

News/Forums

Other

Players