Slashdot Mirror


Studying the Plague in WoW

Nimrod writes 'NPR has a piece on studying the 'Plague' in the virtual world, World of Warcraft. From the piece: 'Spread of virus or disease has a lot to do with human behavior ... Hardest part about researching human behavior is that people often act differently in an emergency than they imagine they will... Peoples reaction to the plague in World of Warcraft were remarkable realistic... Some decided that once they were infected, I really don't care anymore about anyone else, I'm going to teleport in the game to a crowed urban center and infect as many people as I can.' We've discussed this before, but as it has been picked up by the major news outlets it appears to be accumulating commentary about how virtual behavior mimics societal trends. The NPR piece goes into more depth on the subject.

21 of 76 comments (clear)

  1. Creativity is accidental by grogdamighty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why couldn't more events like this happen in MMO worlds? I have to say, this is much more interesting than your standard organized battles or the like.

    --
    My other sig is funny.
    1. Re:Creativity is accidental by grogdamighty · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Your problem is the same as the developers: lack of creativity.

      I was a Dark Age of Camelot player some time ago, so I know nothing about WoW. But it's entirely possible to create "unique events" that don't grief players. For example, a plague could make players weaker, but allow them to find a cure through some sort of new quest. Yes, there are some diehard fans of this or that who would object to being involved, but that is why you have a "/epic event" switch which would allow them to choose to participate or not.

      I imagine most would love such content.

      --
      My other sig is funny.
    2. Re:Creativity is accidental by Taevin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What I would like to see is a team of developers that aren't afraid to 'grief' players every now and then. By that I don't mean camping spawn points with their level 9999999 character they programmed just for themselves (although that could be a fun experience too :-). I'm talking about random events like natural disasters that destroy a town or hinder resource flow. Or NPC enemy groups that wage war on players and player owned towns/castles/whatever. Just anything unexpected that totally messes up people's routines. Of course this should be balanced with good things occasionally as well.

      Mostly what I'm tired of is games forcing everyone to be equal so that it's "fair" to everyone. All that seems to have succeeded in doing is making the games incredibly boring after a certain point. Wow you mean my level 60 paladin is exactly the same as the other 400,000 level 60 paladins in the game... exciting. There should be elements in the game that distinguish individuals or groups. It's much more interesting to have competition for resources and locations than competing for raw number of kills that nets you some meaningless PvP title.

      I'd also like to see constant PvP return to mainstream games, and I'm hardly a hardcore PvP player. The constant threat of death (especially if death is meaningful in some way) adds an extra level of player interaction that I think helps to prevent games from becoming stale so easily. I used to play Asheron's Call on the Darktide server (PvP always) and until they added housing to the game, there was no truly safe place that you could escape being killed. Player created monarchies actually fought to defend and control the towns with the best locations/vendor rates. You just don't see that in many other games. In AC, I was constantly aware of my surroundings in the game and prepared to fight at any moment. When I play WoW, unless I'm specifically looking for a fight, I just don't care. There is almost no penalty for death so most of the time it's not worth the effort to quickly shift from idly watching my character run to town and into battle mode.

      I realize that it's not that simple. The people that play these games are notoriously whiny, and the developer's of a game do have to worry about keeping their customer base. What I see happen all too much though is a working system that is constantly tweaked in an effort to balance it or make things fair, at the behest of the most vocal group that feels that since their particular character/class is not the most powerful in their perception, there is something wrong with the game. Dueling weaknesses and strengths of different types of characters and player attitudes make an interesting environment that will stay enjoyable longer. Removing wood's weakness to fire and fire's weakness to water and so on just leaves a static system where nothing changes and it becomes boring very fast. I wish people would wake up and realize that it's not all about them, and I wish developers would stop screwing with their system that most are pleased with just to satisfy the least common denominator.

  2. Doing "evil" things in games by PhotoJim · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Some people are going to misbehave like that precisely because they can. In real life they probably wouldn't, but they know it's a game and want to see how acting differently will change things. I don't think this behaviour while playing games is particularly worrisome. I played D&D but I haven't killed any evil elves yet in real life.

  3. missed the point by xilmaril · · Score: 5, Insightful

    they're not saying this is a worrying precedent, that people might act like this in the real world some day. they have history books. this is exactly what happens during major plagues. I guess if you know you're going to die really soon, at least a few people will feel alright aboutn infecting others.

    see AIDS for a more common everyday example of this in real life.

  4. realistic? by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm sorry, I don't by it.

    There may be some social studies possible in MMORPG, but a plague is a serious RL issue which can not be adequatly represented.

    Well, it could, but it would mean after being infected, if you can't find a cure, your character is deleted. That would be fun from an observer's perspective.

    But even that doesn't come close. I mean, plagues KILL people like you and me. Most people knowingly infected with a diesease would not purposefully act to hurt others unless they had premonitions of hurting them beforehand, and even if they did, the rest of the community would be acting to prevent such things, via quarantine.

    I play EQ2, which had a plague event back in June, and people didn't like the plague, but you did infect your friends for fun, as a joke, because you know it's not real.

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    1. Re:realistic? by Kelson · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I play EQ2, which had a plague event back in June, and people didn't like the plague, but you did infect your friends for fun, as a joke, because you know it's not real.

      Yeah, any time people know they are in an artificial situation, they will act differently than they would in real life. Online game? Check. Murder mystery dinner party? Check. Dreaming? Check. Sociological experiment? Check.

      I figure it comes down to consequences. If you know there won't be any, or if you know they depend on something different than they would in the real situation, you'll try things you would never consider if you thought the situation was really happening.

    2. Re:realistic? by Surt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And another factor: when you have a real plague, it becomes somewhat more challenging to get out of bed and reach an urban population center.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  5. Barebacking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't people already do this in real life with AIDS?

    1. Re:Barebacking. by pclminion · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Don't people already do this in real life with AIDS?

      Yes. There have been multiple cases, and people have gone to jail for it. But imagine what would happen if AIDS was much easier to spread (say, via ingestion instead of blood/blood contact). Spiteful individuals could infect literally thousands of other people. Among those thousands, there would surely be other psychotics who would also spread it. It would explode out of control.

      The problem with HIV is that it leaves you alive long enough to get pissed off that you're going to die, and with enough time to take out that anger on other people (if you happen to be a psychopath).

    2. Re:Barebacking. by Unordained · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How does that work, law-wise? Is it unlawful to knowingly expose other individuals to a disease? If so, wouldn't that apply to people going in to work when they're sick, or even staying home (with kids, family, etc.) when sick? Is it only based on maliciously exposing them, as opposed to knowingly? Is it only some diseases? If so, which diseases, and who gets to decide and on what basis? Obviously, we can see how this ties in with, say, biological terror (or war) attacks. Using a disease as a means of aggression. But since diseases can spread on their own, without any intent, and sometimes without knowledge, on the part of the carrier ...

      (Not like I expect our laws to truly make sense. Just look at the FDA, drug laws ...)

    3. Re:Barebacking. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've seen it in the States as assualt with a deadly weapon and unlawful endangerment.

      Map of states with laws on it.
      http://tinyurl.com/9jsg6

  6. I hate to say this.... by nsxdavid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hate to say this, but I just have to laugh everytime I see something like this. Someone makes a "plague" that runs amok in WoW... wow! Revolutionary! First time that's been done in an MMO!

    Um, hardly. That's baby-step stuff. Just like most everything that is considered "new and revolutionary" in MMOs, is flippin old hat to those of us who've been doing online games for a zillion years now (read: zillion = 18+ years). I had a plague run amok in GemStone ][ some 14 odd years ago. And we've sure as heck done a lot more interesting things than that in the years since.

    This isn't news. It's just becoming more well known. I don't mind that, I just wish people had more MMO history in their brain pan.

    --
    David Whatley
    1. Re:I hate to say this.... by Jaeph · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "This isn't news. It's just becoming more well known. I don't mind that, I just wish people had more MMO history in their brain pan."

      Don't get me wrong, I play and enjoy MMORPGs, including WoW.

      That said, I wish people knew real history and nothing whatsoever about MMOs. It would make a fascinating twist to the game we call "real life".

      -Jeff

      --
      Please learn the difference between a dissenting opinion and a troll before you moderate.
    2. Re:I hate to say this.... by dividedsky319 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had a friend a long time ago who used to do some GM stuff for Gemstone (if I recall correctly). Gemstone had (has?) a lot of GM run events doesn't it?

      Yep, you're right. That's one of the things I loved about Gemstone. (haven't played in years, though) When there was a merchant... it was an actual person. To get something altered, you would actually have a conversation with the merchant...

      The buzz was always about when "the Juggie" (juggernaut, a merchant ship) would come... or other big groups of merchants... there would be rooms with just goods to buy, but in others there'd be actual humans controlling all powerful merchants... enchanting a weapon or shield or armor, altering goods, creating special items, etc... The game felt MUCH more personal than current online games.

      Heck, I remember running around with Spike the War Rat, a gigantic rat who could talk... he was worked into the plot of the game in various ways. One day, he "died"... I still remember his funeral... (insert dorky, heartfelt sniffles)

      There were SO many ways GS was a changing world. Penant races, dragon bones (gambling), etc... it never felt like a stagnant world. But, I suppose when it's just text, it's much easier to add content.

  7. Re:And The Band Played On by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 2, Informative

    Patient Zero (the french canadian flight attendant was bi, not gay) had no way of knowing he had HIV: No one knew what HIV was. He was the first known case.

    Right?

    --

    There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
  8. MUDS by Kaenneth · · Score: 4, Funny

    I made an amusing object in a development MUD once, It's property was that if you saw it (in the environment, or by inspecting another player), it would copy itself into your inventory and delete itself before being listed, unless you were inspecting your own inventory, in which case it would copy itself into the environment and delete itself from your inventory.

    That is, normally an unlistable object would be impossible, because even if it returned no name, the MUD code would provide the name of the parent class (that is, if a 'Sword' name function returned an error, the player would see 'Unnamed Weapon') all the way up the 'Unnamed Object' base class, but by deleting itself, there was no parent class left.

    Unfortunetly, I made a typo in the self-deletion code and it would occasionally delete the next object in the players inventory. (when the player received another object after the moving object, but before the object moved out of his inventory) but it would still make the copy of itself.

    oops.

  9. Yes and no, IMHO by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, in that history does show that once someone doesn't care (any more) about what happens to them (e.g., because they're going to die anyway), there's nothing you can do to keep them in line. Most you can do is take them out of the game: e.g., lock them away in a prison or kill them.

    The same applies to games, and I wish more designers did learn that from history. (It would have prevented the UO fuckup, for a start.) Once someone doesn't give a damn about what happens to their character, nothing you can possibly do to their character will deter them. In-character justice just doesn't work on them. All you can do is take them out of the game: e.g., ban.

    No, in that the setting is a bit different. We're not talking a case of "waah, I'm gonna die! The world is so cruel! I'm gonna have my revenge against this cruel world!" We're most likely talking about people who never gave a damn about their character, and much less about the minor bother of having to respawn. We're talking people who most likely just saw it as a case of "awesome! now I can kill newbies with this!"

    There's a whole category of people who pays that monthly fee purely to annoy, troll, and cause as much distress as possible. Their supreme achievement is managing to drive someone completely off the game. I.e., griefers.

    They also don't like taking risks, and their favourite kind of target is one which can't even possibly defend at all. E.g., one who's 20 levels lower and preferrably idle. And Blizzard just gave them the equivalent of nuke which does just that: run up to a bunch of newbies, and they're dead with no chance to defend. Far from making them desperate or depressed or anything even remotely similar to RL plagues, it probably just made their day.

    It's not even something new. Bartle described that very same category back in the days of MUDs.

    So, hey, there's an idea for designers: if learning from history is too much of a bother, at least learn from what was already discovered in other games. MUDs ran into most of the same problems ages ago.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  10. It's all just a game by Nimrod545 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...but even with that, I think it's important to note that the human behavior in the game is based on real-life (because for some, the game is their life).

    Somewhere in the replies I read something along the lines of, "Most people knowingly infected with a diesease would not purposefully act to hurt others". I find this comment laughable(Granted, it's slightly out of context). How many of you go to work sick? You know your sick but yet you still go. Why? Then, at work, the germ distribution system (HVAC) works to it's fullest to help insure that as many co-workers (and in turn, their families) get infected as possible. This is compounded even further when you work in an office building that contains multiple companies.

    You and I might not go running around purposely infecting people with some deadly disease, but then again, I don't think we would go stealing TVs after a natural disaster or run into a subway and blow ourselves up. Are you that naive to think that there's not one person in your city that has penchant for destruction? A person who might feel it's unfair that they have been infected with a deadly disease or may not understand that they are a carrier of a disease (Typhod Mary). There are many sick minds out there ( I happen to be one of them, so I know). I would disregard the news blurb, just because I wouldn't do it.

    Pandemics occur both on purpose and by accident.

    Sorry for any indiscretions from my original post. It was my first on slashdot. I was giddy as a school girl to have something that no one else has yet posted that I rushed to be first. I'm so happy. My life is now complete. It didn't occur to me to mention the audio file until after I posted the thread. I just started playing WOW, so I didn't know about an expansion...

    1. Re:It's all just a game by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Somewhere in the replies I read something along the lines of, "Most people knowingly infected with a diesease would not purposefully act to hurt others". I find this comment laughable(Granted, it's slightly out of context). How many of you go to work sick? You know your sick but yet you still go.

      The difference is the intent. I go to work when sick so I can get my work done, not to purposely infect others. Although, at times, I am very tempted to direct my coughs into a specific office...

      Many of the intentional plague vectors in WoW were having a lark... I'm sure it didn't bother their consciences much because the net effect is so small -- just a bit of annoyance for those they infected.

      What's interesting, though, is that this is an example of sociopathic behavior, just to a smaller extent. Someone who knowingly and willingly transmits a plague in real life is a sociopath. WoW (and other MMORPGs) are showing us that quite a few people exhibit sociopathic tendencies to a certain degree -- like all the grievers who play.

      The reason that these tendencies are over-represented in MMORPGs is twofold:
      (1) There are only very small, underdevloped social structures, so negative repercussions for these acts are practically non-existant. This is why MMORPGs have in-game moderators and guilds -- to create the social structures which are otherwise lacking.

      (2) Negative repercussions to the player (not the character) are almost nil. Risk/Reward for sociopathic actions becomes balanced in favor of Reward. Some games have tried to rebalance this by increasing the presence and power of in-game moderators, or better use of formal complaint channels, but most game companies do not want to destroy a revenue source by banning a player.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  11. Most of you are missing the point. by kinglink · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This isn't how people would react in the real life, we all should understand that of course, but in a game, people have wants and desires, just like real life. It could be Desire to gain levels (grow stronger), Desire to gain wealth(greed), Desire to hurt others (masochists), or desire to solve problems (care givers), but if you notice, while each of these things likely arn't the same as these people would do in real life, the actions do exist at least for others in the real world.

    I doubt that they meant to make it "if you do something with the plague it tells you about your real self." It is more it shows them a social system with people of varying desires and ideas after someone introduces a deadly virus. This is something that is almost impossible to study because most people would think someone studying this type of thing instead of helping is a ghoul, yet it should be studied because response systems obviously arn't doing it when everyone passes the buck.

    Now as people have meantioned this likely isn't real life, but notice that once you have the plague you're given a death sentance for the most part, what you do from that point changes everything. Those that run and try to harm others with their plague are actually a real thing. There are those with serious problems (Aids and other life threatening STDs) who will go around and try to infect others because they think there's no quality of life and just like hurting others. There are those who try to avoid this. But both of these reactions are seen in game as well as in the real world. The numbers are schewed but the reaction still exists.

    The point is that the study isn't saying people are acting like they would in real life (and if they were it wouldn't be interesting because of the people who would play these games arn't an accurate subsection of people, especially those who would sacrifice their lifes to hurt others) but they are studying the reactions of people in the game. The fact is while the percentage of certain reactions are different, those reactions are very similar to real life components.

    That all being said, I have to say KUDOS KUDOS KUDOS to Blizzard, because they have created a game I would be interested in and because of that I bought and played it. This plague alone has my interest peaked which makes it great.