You got skills?

Some things should never be spoken.  Some things should never be transcribed.  But myself and Russell did speak and we did transcribe, and so here’s our bastard child: a talk on skill in EVE Online, which really isn’t much about EVE as it uses EVE as a starting point.  It’s a monster in terms of length and a beast in terms of focus, but if you’re a patient soul who can wade through self-glorifying pontification then there’s bound to be something of interest within.

Alex: I was playing EVE Online while my friend Tom watched (who is not into computer games in any shape or form), and he said to me, “That looks pretty cool. I like the idea of flying around space. Many directions. The 3D-ness of it all.” He started asking questions about the game, but mainly around the skill involved playing it. What is the skill in playing EVE? Because the game is based on numbers, someone with a higher shield or armour or structure have better chances to beat you in combat. But there are other factors, too. They could have a different type of weapon that is particularly good against shields, or they could be faster and you can’t lock onto them. But still, the game is fundamentally based on numbers. Someone who’s played the game for three years and is a complete idiot could beat my friend Tom, who could have just joined, simply because they’ve had three years time to just build up what is essentially numbers. After talking like this for a while, Tom said he’d never play it because he couldn’t perceive there being a real skill involved. He couldn’t beat an idiot whose been playing for five years just because of their time invested. In an FPS, you could play for five years, and I could pop on and beat you if I were a good player with natural abilities.

Russell: There’s a certain level of acclimation needed for both the MMO and First-Person Shooter. You have a natural tendency of doing better when you’re familiar with FPS, for example, so between people of equal skill levels, the one acclimated to the environment — the physics of the engine, the level layout, the psychology behind players audience — well, that one’s going to have an edge over someone else lacking that but of equal skill. Not having played many MMOs (and I sort of gave up on EVE), I’d say much of the skill involved centers around the metadata of the game — the stuff discussed outside the game’s play, like knowing what areas you should stay out of, which ones are good for which level, familiarity with PvP, which spots are PVP-hot and when. It seems much of the skill is in aggregating this information and using that to one’s advantage.

Alex: I understand parts of EVE, but perhaps the better players — the veterans — understand more towards the whole. They have an idea of where they are in the world — physically, economically, etc. — whereas someone like me is just a corked bottle floating in the ocean. I could go this way or that way. I see what you mean, though, an FPS may allow wider skill gap, but the MMO may reward information retention and sociability.

Russell: Generally, MMOs seem more based on the amount of time invested. A lot of times, the MMO’s mechanical skills are sort of status symbols. It’s a progressive way of showing where you reside on this sort of social hierarchy. I’m not saying it boils down to this, but in-game skills do take on part of the MMO’s social psyche to an extent.

Alex: So are these long grind sessions necessary because there’s no exercised skill involved? It’s not like you can use your real-world natural ability to spot things from far off, for example. These things clearly don’t play out in the game because it’s not designed that way. And I think that’s what Tom didn’t like: that many games are fundamentally limited compared to the real world. I guess more accurately: limited in some sense but not in another. We can’t fly around in gunboats in space, yet! So setting and theme aren’t limited.

Russell: It is limited in some senses and not in others. I think that’s a healthy way to see it. While there may not be immediate, physical comparisons from one player to the next, there’s that sort of aggregation of information I mentioned as well as the knowing of where to go and what to do, which encompasses most MMO experiences.

Alex: But is it worth it?

Russell: [Laughs] It seems worth it to a lot of people.

Alex: [Laughs] Yeah. My friend said asked if there are games based on real skills: puzzles, things where you can use your brain. Myst Online, which was live for maybe a year and a half, had real logic puzzles to challenge you. But I think the appeal of something like WoW and EVE is that they are easy to get into, but as you play they get progressively more complex (or maybe, just time consuming). But that complexity is kind of difficult to describe. They are doable. They’re not so hard that people are switched off. They allow this level of nerdom, and they appeal to many people. Rand Miller said in his interview with us that grinding sort of ‘tweaks’ people. They like it; they see they’ve raised a point or collected something, and they want to do it more.

Russell: Most MMOs have clear progression trajectories, and I think that’s important to note. For example, the last MMO I was heavily into was DAoC, and I spent countless hours setting up the actual progressive arch that I would take my character down. I knew what I would take at each level, and so it became this sort of trade-off between carrot and adventure. I think most people — particularly in these MMOs — plan their characters in advance, which is a preeminencing of how one will eventually fit into the world. There’s a pay-off to being one step closer to this ideal. I think that can be an attraction: clearly defined goals and rewards. Accessibility is another attraction. Take for example shooters. I have a friend who gets motion sickness with FPSs, so MMOs in many ways are accessible to a wider swath of gamers. They can be casual or, like EVE, hardcore. The skills involved weigh more toward time invested, though that isn’t the sole defining factor. Things like FPSs seem to have this specialized skill-set which a gamer needs to excel: a sort of genre-based tools that’s developed with a history of FPS exposure. Those with it can get into a game much quicker, which makes them feel more effective. And I think that’s a great attraction to any game. This sort of feeling that you’re making a difference within the fictive world — I don’t mean some moral presence or whatever — and that you’re an active and acting agent within the ruleset laid out before you. Then there’s the whole social realm. When I MMO’d I used it a lot as a chat environment to keep in touch with my friends.

Alex: As a kid I remember making a den and putting my BBC microcomputer in there to play Elite. I used to sit in this den and pretend I was in a space craft. A kid now could put their netbook in their den and play something like EVE Online. Instead of a lone kid, it’s an army of kids who interact online in a social environment. Enough reminiscing. So you think there’s skill in games like EVE because it’s acclimatising yourself to the environment?

Russell: Yeah, I think so. And it’s as much processing that reservoir of information as anything else. It’s not really an in-game skill to be actively exercised, but more of a conscious understanding, a knowing of how to use the information to your best benefit. Now, skill as an in-game mechanic, on the other hand, is something else. You know, I’m reviewing Geneforge V, and I’m thinking about skill in terms of a device to control the narrative pace. You can use a skill level to contain oneself narratively within certain zones. I can’t beat monsters out there, yet, and so I stay in here, which means the narrative can be contained within this part of the game. It seems hard to control an open-ended game’s freedom of player choice. So skill seems a natural, seamless way to corral the player in certain areas under the general illusion of freedom. I mean, I hate it when games have this omniscient narrative voice that says, “That lock is too magical for you at the moment,” or something to that effect because it takes me out of the experience. I’m conscious of the fact that the developer is keeping me from this area for the purpose of pace.

Alex: Yeah, and that’s sort of a buffer. It repels you more elegantly.

Russell: Right! And when we’re given the opportunity to visit other areas though get our asses kicked, it feels more our choice and not the developer’s. I’m more willing to buy the illusion under those terms.

Alex: CCP have changed the feel and the intro movie of EVE from one that talked of by-gone times to one focusing on the player, emphasising the sandbox nature of the game. I’m failing to see the wonder in that. I want to explore with purpose. I love Fallout 3 because you just wander among the ruins of a bloody civilisation. EVE gives you mission areas or dead space areas, but they’re generated areas, possibly with ancient space stations, or floating monuments, etc. I know people who like it, but they describe it as this huge social spreadsheet. And that rings true! You’re juggling columns and statistics. I think part of the mechanics balancing may outweigh the culture and story.

Russell: It sounds like they have nuggets of cultural and historical background peppering the universe. To me, that seems great. That’s attractive to me. It’s like the fiction exists — take it or leave it — and I don’t really need or want an external story to convince me of its presence. I see it as the player making his individual story, and that’s fun and personable. I mean, I want this backdrop where I can create my own story through what I do. I say this but I’ve only played EVE for two hours and was overwhelmed by the possibilities of what to do.

Alex: It’s curious that you talk of the narrative. Is that asking too much of the player, to make their own?

Russell: I don’t think so. As I said in a past conversation, EVE is the game I was searching for when I was twenty and had the time.

Alex: [Laughs]

Russell: Now here it is, and I have kids. And I ain’t got the time to do it. [Pauses] I don’t know. Well, does EVE have mini-quests to sort of give you its sense of history?

Alex: I think there’s different tiers and story arcs. I think there are missions that allow you to see the history of EVE, but it’s more sandbox. You certainly don’t have to read the story. I was talking yesterday to someone about mining and they said, “Mining’s great if you want to watch a film at the same time or check your mail.” I’ve never done that in a game. That’s unusual to me. A game is an experience, it’s not a time filler or a job to be done.

Russell: You have both choices, depending on how you spend your session. I just went to the EVE website and was checking out some of the backstory stuff. It seems they have a lot of history written in user-submitted short stories, etc. How much of that stuff fills your need for a storyline?

Alex: To me, that’s not even in the game. You’re reading around the game.

Russell: It’s extending the experience outside the confines of play.

Alex: That’s all external. Perhaps that’s the saying: EVE is a lifestyle.

Russell: Ha! Perhaps that’s the culprit.

Alex: Well, when I’m doing missions, I sometimes need multiple items to make something. Once I needed to find some rare ore so I went into the help channel and asked. Players sent me links to external websites that described the areas and resources available. What did players do when EVE first started? What were players expected to do? It’s bizarre that there are external sources to help complete the task. What are we accomplishing in-game when were being told how to do it outside the game? Just eating breadcrumbs?

Russell: Part of this argument stems from the comparison of a confined ruleset versus an open one, which I guess is partly the definition of a sand-box game. EVE, much like Ultima Online when I honked around its beta, was very open, very regulated by social momentum. The developers create this skeleton to operate within, and the players flesh out the experience and its context. I remember doing things completely unavailable in games like EQ and DAoC because Ultima was so light on rules to govern player community. Sure, UO could be wildly un-fun in moments, but part of its charm was the almost bipolar nature of it as an experience. I never knew if I’d be grieved into quitting or if my friend and I could pull some silly prank within the engine that would entertain us more than the game mechanics proper. That’s very attractive to me. And that’s very overwhelming too because you need this accumulation of knowledge to feel competent. Not only the official publications, but the underground stuff: the tips and history posted on clan websites or someone’s blog (which weren’t around for UO). And I always felt that if I didn’t stay well read I would either be hoodwinked in the game or I would loose sense of its pulse. It was a wildly changing climate because people would try clever things everyday. And along with that excitement came great responsibility to understand its popular mindset. And I guess that somewhat feeds into the skills. I feel I need to know the capacity of all possible career paths within EVE before I devote the time to play a character, and there’s so much information to ingest that I can’t possibly engage it on a competent level presently. I just don’t have the time for it, but I wish I did. It’s completely overwhelming.

Alex: There’s a huge knowledge gap between people like me and those who’re veterans. I mean, I know they’re people between those two points, but I just see this wide, unbreachable gap.

Russell: That’s the big problem I have with MMOs, probably RPGs as well, but MMOs mostly. I put so much energy into understanding the class and the possibilities of where I could develop the character that I remove some of discovery’s charm. I mean, we’re spending 40 or so hours with these characters and you don’t want to throw it away when you’re half-way there, but now I’ve practically made myself a treadmill to traverse.

Alex: I can see you’d work in EVE. You talk of using the time wisely.

Russell: Which I guess boils down to how you define fun. Is fun the experience of getting lost in a world? That’s pretty diverting for a while. But to a degree I think we all, or people like myself, carry the extra requirement to the table of feeding this sensation of accomplishment — and that’s assuming levelling or whatever is an accomplishment.

Alex: [Laughs] I’ve kind of come to the conclusion that things don’t have as much inherent meaning as we think they do. With computer games, something in me thinks, this is a waste of time (just as much as anything else can be, mind you). It’s weird for me to want to play a game and make efficient use of time because I must play it on some level as simply an escape.

Russell: Yeah, but you’re just following these professional archetypes created by the community. Like, this is the right path to go down for mining or fighting or whatever. Hence the websites they recommend when you’re asking your questions. So the paths still exist.

Alex: I guess it’s a matter of choosing to follow or not.

Russell: I think so.

Alex: EVE is something I would like to play, almost for the sake of understanding alone. I’d love to see EVE three years from now because clearly they’re going to make it more complex.

Russell: It seems that many games, particularly MMOs (and maybe stuff like Halo Wars for the RTS genre) — well, it seems that they’re focusing energy toward streamlining the experience, making it more accessible. I understand the mindset of that as a business model since it widens one’s potential target audience, but I really like the idea of EVE moving toward complexity. They’re moving toward this level of esotericism that may make their brand more mystical than actually accessible. I don’t know. I’m really charmed by that vision, and I guess they can make it work by feeding the community that already supports them. There’s this attraction with moving the direction they want to, be damned to the broader market.

Alex: EVE is complex. There’s an economy, and you’re part of it. It’s funny: I hear a lot of in-game chatter about World of Warcraft — a common perception is that it’s inferior to something like EVE. Where EVE is quite hardcore and requires so much out of you in terms of interactivity and time invested, both are MMOs, both are ruled by statistics and not necessarily player skill. EVE seems more complex but is that complexity an illusion? In WoW there’s only a few classes, and those classes are fairly limited. In EVE there are no real classes. You can juggle around anything you want, there’s hundreds upon hundreds of equipment with different statistics. That’s impressive but is it just clever illusion?

Russell: I don’t know how to answer you. I really don’t even know the question.

Alex: [Laughs] I’m thinking aloud. It’s a baffling game to consider.

Russell: And there’s a simultaneous attraction and scare-off to this complexity. I hate to simplify it too much, but maybe if you’re the type of player who enjoys the journey perhaps EVE may be a more rewarding experience whereas if you’re happier knowing your series of goals and accomplishing quests then other MMOs will better fit the bill. Maybe enjoying the play whether or not it gets you anywhere lends to one type of gaming experience whereas playing for the sake of goal accomplishment lends another. And that may be completely different once you attain these transcending experiences such as corporate espionage and the social engineering you may be buffered from as a newb. It sounds like an entire new game tacked on top of the old one, which is pretty darn exciting that the ruleset can lead to such diverging experiences.

Alex: I haven’t been in the upper echelons of EVE. As a new player, I don’t feel that they exist.

Russell: That’s a good point. It’s at arm’s length to you, and you probably won’t be touched by it, and you definitely won’t be involved until much later. So from a new player’s point of view, that stuff doesn’t really exist. It’s on the far side of the moon. Is this leading to a question of hook versus pay-off? Veterans of EVE choose to stay within the universe because of what they know of its experiences. What does EVE do to attract the new ones? We’ve got this new movie and the player-centric ad campaign. This complexity can’t be the foremost method and, in fact, would likely scare off half the potential anyway.

Alex: In WoW, the guild I was in had many players at max levels with all the loots. All the best stuff. So they just sort of pranced around in the main hubs, talking about their quest items and comparing equipment to others.

Russell: That was a big turn-off for me back in the original Everquest. I remember being a druid and sitting in line for this quest item, essentially a requirement for all druids beyond a certain level — a status symbol, if you will. Well I remember it being either an hour spawn or two hour spawn, whatever. But I remember being second-in-line for this item, and so I’m thinking, “I’ve got to wait here for at least another hour for this guy to kill his spawn and then I’ve got to wait for mine, despite the fact I have class in the morning.”

Alex: [Laughs]

Russell: But I’m second in line, which rarely happens–

Alex: Can’t leave.

Russell: And that was a huge turn off for me. That’s part of the reason I never got into Magic: The Gathering. Item rarity is artificial and created for the purpose of extending gameplay. Since I’m conscious of that, I can’t let go. I can’t truly enjoy the experience.