The concept of MMOrality, and how players pass it around
Filed under: Culture, PvP, Grouping, PvE, Opinion
Ryan Shwayder has a look up at what he calls "MMOrality"-- the idea of a calling within any given game that determines how we as our avatars act. When newbie players first sign on to a new game, they are innocent in every meaning of the word-- they have no idea how to act, and even though they may do things that are against the ingame code (killstealing, ninja looting, grabbing quests without grouping, and so on), they are innocent, because they don't know yet what's right and wrong. Only after they're introduced to the "MMOrality" within the game can they figure out whether they want to be immoral, and go against the codes put in place by the game, or moral, and follow the etiquette and standards laid out by the other players.It's an interesting thought, and not a new one-- just as we have morality in the real world, our virtual worlds also have their own codes that can be upheld or broken. Shwayder speculates, however, that this morality requires PvP-- players can only uphold the morality they've put in place if they have the option to control other players by ganking them. But I'm not so sure that's true.
There are definitely ways to define behavior in a PvE environment-- guilds are one way these rules are passed around. Each guild has their own rules, and if those rules are broken, guilds (and even their allies) can blacklist players or punish them by not allowing them to enter into group raids and other places where the best rewards can be found.
Every society, real or virtual, has their own set of codes to live by, and it's very interesting to see how these are propagated in a virtual world. Whether via PvE grouping, or PvP retribution, every game has its own set of MMOrality that new players have to be taught in order to thrive and flourish socially in the world their characters live in.
Every society, real or virtual, has their own set of codes to live by, and it's very interesting to see how these are propagated in a virtual world. Whether via PvE grouping, or PvP retribution, every game has its own set of MMOrality that new players have to be taught in order to thrive and flourish socially in the world their characters live in.
_thumbnail.jpg "Aion Beta: Asmodian Ascension Quest")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
fanguad said on 11:59AM 11-08-2007
I play FFXI and there is a definite set of MMOrality. Actually, there are multiple sets, as FFXI is a multi-cultural MMO. I agree that PvP might make it more easier in some instances to enforce morality - but really, that's just as abstract a punishment as not grouping with someone.
People who are known to engage in RMT are excluded from "normal" parties. If several "good" guilds and a "bad" guild are camping a monster, the good guilds will gang up to prevent the bad guild from getting the monster - getting the monster themselves can be secondary to preventing a particular guild that doesn't follow the standards of morality.
Japanese players in the game have slightly different ideas about proper behavior than Americans and Europeans.
Reply
Gemski said on 11:59AM 11-08-2007
What I find annoying is how etiquette can change depending on server. For instance in WoW. I've been on servers that have PUGs "need" on all BOEs. Pass on BOPs (unless actual need).
Then I've been on servers that greed on everything. Some that change it depending on the quality of the item.
Reply
PlushToy said on 12:43PM 11-08-2007
But it's so much fun being immoral...IRL or behind the screen.
I was told that in one MMO that you actually have to go around and be a douche (KS, PK, etc.), as it is a part of the user agreement that so many of us read.
Reply
Ghen said on 12:51PM 11-08-2007
Its a ridiculous notion that PvP is the answer to social gaming morality. The answer is (drumroll please) social interaction. Guilds police themselves, and the guilds that don't get blacklisted (a guild I know called Smoke Gods for example... You can see how it would attract those of lower moral stature)
So if a game builds a successful social network, where to perform and succeed at the highest levels of the game you need to interact socially, then the problem is as solved as its ever going to be. On the other hand, if a game fails to garner that social network and allows people to succeed in solitude or where great success can be obtained by grabbing any random group of people on the server then you're going to find that morality is a loose term at best. Without enough social interaction to drive people to act cordially to their peers a game will fail. Both morally and financially.
Reply
Rafe said on 1:39PM 11-08-2007
There's an inconstant level of "benefit of the doubt" that's given by any particular player to another - this varies from person to person, and even from moment to moment, depending on mood, attitude, and actions. Some days, I'm feeling charitable; some days, not so much.
I concur that there are plenty of ways to sanction or correct folks who breach the unwritten rules of etiquette - outing ninjas on the forums or in general chat channels, ostracizing inept or selfish players, or offering suggestions publicly or privately - but these are seldom as immediately satisfying as laying the smack down on the offender with a well-placed railgun round.
Reply