Loot Theory In Modern Games

HDRL is running an analysis of loot systems in modern games. They talk about how in-game rewards, formerly the domain of RPGs and adventure games with powerups, have expanded to exist in every genre, as achievements and unlockable bonuses have become standard fare. "For the majority of gamers, once the novelty is gone, they move on. To keep players interested, rewards are required. ... The Diablo series is a perfect example of the theory in effect. Just as in the story of the donkey and the carrot, a game's rewards cannot be too frequent, nor can it be too infrequent. If rewards are too frequent, they lose value in the eyes of the player, and they lose interest. If the rewards are too infrequent, the player loses sight of the carrot, and likely loses motivation to keep playing."

Comments

It really is true

[Lord Lode]

On Newgrounds, many of the new flash games posted there have an achievements system, it's like they have to have it these days. And that is a good thing imho, I enjoy getting these too. The game will have more play value for me due to wanting to achieve these things. It's not like we're drones made to play games right? The achievements make it fun, and that's good. Right?

Hot Booty Theory

[Anonymous Coward]

In addition the Booty Theory also works, if your audience is male.

The way it works is: Add lots of hot women into your game.

You can mix the two, to get the Booty Loot Theory, in which the in-game character gets laid a lot.

Re:Hot Booty Theory

[Creepy Crawler]

That's called Leisure Suit Larry.

Loot? No Loot?

[Creepy Crawler]

I like using other peoples loot. I also like making my own loot.

Games like that are ones that allow hacking around with the game to make new mods and redesign the game.

Who here still lays Mechwarrior 3? Betcha not many. Now, how many play Total Annihilation? Knowing about the multitude of mod sites and Spring, quite a lot.

There's no unlockables in TA, other than mission mode and the tiers of technology, but that's expected in RTS'es. There's no hidden 3rd faction or hidden maps.

And trust me, loading a completely new mod on the network and playing 6 friends on a mod that we've never seen is crazy as hell in a great way.

Re:Loot? No Loot?

[gardyloo]

Who here still lays Mechwarrior 3? Betcha not many.

Damned right. I had what you might call an "industrial accident" when I tried that.

Too Human knows this very well...

[djsmiley]

The game its self (story wise) can be ran through in a matter of hours... but then you can re-run the whole game over and over getting better equipment etc so you end up better/stronger/faster.

I know its a old idea, but its strange to see how well it still works. Also crazy how many people will just grind hours away going for one item which pops in huge rarities... (I remember spending weeks in parts of everquest trying to get said items off random bosses) and I'm pretty sure this must still happen in things like wow?

Really, where is this going to take us? I tend to wonder how this is going to change in the future, or will we always just be looking for the next great bit of loot? - Sounds like the other artical posted other day which basiclly said people grind for higher levels, when in reality i think better items are a far more lucritive reward.

Re:Too Human knows this very well...

[Kandenshi]

I'm pretty sure this must still happen in things like wow

The problem with such stuff in WoW and such games is that the really great loot drops when you're not around. You hear about how a friend of a friend recently got [insert awesome item] and drool. Even if you didn't get that item, the fact that you're reminded that it's around, and that OTHER people are finding it keeps your hopes up. We're like rats in a big room lever pressing for snacks. Other rats getting one is a "reward" of sorts for us, and keeps us working hard in the hopes of being similarily rewarded.

Re:Too Human knows this very well...

[Bragador]

Yeah, Chrono Trigger was like that too...

Actually, the loot system is simply old practices developped by casinos to keep their players gambling, but applied to video games.

Games like WoW are very similar to gambling. You invest time and money and you receive a big reward infrequently. No wonder some players get addicted...

phat lootz for the win!

[Puffy Director Pants]

Total score!

Really, who didn't do things like try to land on the 3,6,9 timer for Super Mario Bros? Who needs a study for that?

WoW pretty much perfected it

[dave562]

When I first started playing WoW about two years ago I was very curious about why so many of my friends were hooked into the game. I knew a lot of people who had been playing since beta. I had avoided it because I knew my own inclinations to spending lots of time plugged into a game on the internet. When I took the plunge, my perception was tuned into what about the game would make it so addictive. After about thirty minutes it was completely obvious. The quests themselves were small enough to be completed in short amounts of time. There were numerous quests grouped around the same area so you get the sense of accomplishing more than one thing at once. Among the common quests were larger "thread" quests with multiple parts that introduced you to other areas of the game. In addition to the quests, the talent system hooks in new players because they can customize their characters. Many of the quests have item rewards to make the character slightly more powerful.

Then the big hit of crack comes in... groups. All of a sudden things start going faster. With another person you're able to complete the quests more easily. You can tackle quests above your level with someone else that you would have had to wait to handle on your own. At that point the whole game world opens up. It isn't just about you fighting some monsters. It is all about you and whoever else you can make friends with getting things done together. Questing solo gets boring and you start looking forward to doing it with others. That becomes the biggest reward. The social dynamic enters into the game. The team work aspect enters into the game. That is the best loot of all... especially for gamers who might not have strong social lives to begin with. All of a sudden they belong and they have a purpose. I see it quite frequently in WoW. There will a young guy (usually) who will farm materials all day to make potions for the guild to use while raiding. That person will farm materials so that other guildies can make better items for themselves. That person dervives pleasure and a sense of belonging by contributing to the efforts of the guild.

Re:WoW pretty much perfected it

[Renraku]

Sounds like they'd be perfect for a stereotypical office job. Serve others so that you can make them way more money than you're making, and can take four weeks of vacation a year while you sit at your desk and grind away those work units and look forward to your one week staycation because you can't afford gas for your '93 Oldsmobile with irregular paint.

Re:WoW pretty much perfected it

[g-san]

Dude, you need to level up.

I have so many achievables

[Ghworg]

Bleep bloop

Re:Ultima Online

[Bragador]

No online graphical game has come close to UO in my opinion. No character classes, tons of items, a cool magic system with ingredients, nice summons, building ownership, good economy, scary PvP like it must have been in the medieval age...

It wasn't flawless though. The wilderness had more houses than the big cities since the developpers hadn't thought that players would have be interested in houses. Also, players were never able to create a good mercenary guild to protect the innocents so it was a world of crime. Yet, I never had so much fun with other games.

I mean, UO was a game were you could beg for a teleport stone and accept the stone from that complete stranger... only to find out it brought you to a lost rock in the middle of the sea with no way of getting back from there.

How cool is that?

:D

Re:Ultima Online

[toad3k]

So it was you!

Skinner Box

[TheLink]

It's called this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning_chamber

That's what many of those games are :)

EVE Online

[mlawrence]

EVE has everything you liked about UO, but it is based on a modern scientific world rather than medieval magic. No character classes, just ancestry, specialization and career. Any character can do anything it wants with no limitations. No grind system either. Skills are trained in real time even if you are logged off. You won't be able to max out your skills in this game! PvP is inherent in this game - because the economy is so realistic, you can't do anything without affecting other players. They offer a free 14 day trial but be warned - this is no WoW.

There are players who avoid these type games

[frovingslosh]

While I grant you that games like WOW are extremely popular, even to the point of adiction, there are some players who avoid such games. I'm one and I want to say why I hope this "all games must have this" approach does not, in fact, come to pass.

I get a different type of achievement out of playing on-line games. I build my skill. I enjoy playing First Person Shooter games like Quake 3, Unreal, and other similar FPS games. But as long as I'm not playing against cheaters (and there definitely cheaters on-line), I can start any individual game on a fair footing against my opponents, the only factor that will influence who wins and who loses is player skill, not stupid repetitive tasks to build up some in-game form of currency that is then used to unbalance players. Even worse (IMHO) are the games that will sell players an edge for hard cash, making everyone who doesn't cough up money their licking boy. I see this as little more than a ligitimized and sanctioned cheat. I'm not going to buy the super weapon from some game supplier to over power the other players, and I'm not going to play in a game against people who do.

In a sense, even games like WOW sell the player better weapons or tools, they just do it by a rewards system (called loot here) that doles the advantages out over time. Thus the stupid requirements of repeditive tasks, "kill 1000 chipmunks and tan their pelts". So while the rich and vast world of WOW greatly appeals to me in eye candy value, I completely have no interest in playing it based on it's Hammurabi economy type of play. I neither wish to be some one's cannon fodder nor to be given what I consider an unfair advantage against others just because I completed some (usually extremely repetitive and boring) tasks.

I could see a loot system in games appeal to me, but it would have to be a system that doesn't affect overall game play, and as yet I have not seen such a system in play. In a game like Unreal, such a system could acknowledge players accomplishments with eye candy rewards that don't affect the actual game is any significant way. Perhaps extra and special skins granted to players for special acchevements (hopefully none that give an edge in being harder to see though, like all back ninja suits) or special flame paint jobs for a character' vehicles. Or a noble title added to a player's name (obviously not to be permitted when the name is first created). Granted, these type of things are harder to come up with than just "leveling up" a player to a level 95 Knight Elf Mohawk, or giving him a sword that has a +23 kick ass factor, but they prevent the games from favoring the players who have played the longest rather than favoring the better players (usually related but certainly not always). Loot systems have unfortunately come to replace the gaining of actual skill in the game play, and for that reason I hope that the prediction that is made in this article, while obviously a growing trend, does not come to completely dominate gaming.

Re:There are players who avoid these type games

[Genericnumber1]

Even FPSes are implementing achievement systems that do not affect game play, or minimally affect it. For instance, in Half-Life 2: Episode 2 you get an achievement for carrying a garden gnome around for a long time and eventually launching it off in a rocket. Does this need to be done? No. Does it give you anything other than an "achievement achieved" message and the right to brag about doing it? No. Do people still do it? Absolutely.

Let me give another example. In Team Fortress 2 you can earn achievements and you even get other weapons for getting more achievements, but these weapons are not necessarily better than the weapons they replace. (Eg, You get a new weapon that slows someone on hit, but it does less damage). Without getting into whether or not all the weapons are equal in power to the weapons they replace, that is the goal of the system.

Addressing your World of Warcraft example, yes, a lot of rewards are based upon time over skill and DO affect gameplay, but not all do. There are many eye-candy, prestige rewards, such as rare mounts (that are no better than other mounts), vanity pets, tabards, titles, etc. Some people take to trying to collect all of the vanity pets in the game, and while it has no affect on gameplay, they do get some sense of accomplishment out of it.

While I agree some systems reward people for doing non-skilled, repetitive tasks, I do not agree with you when you say...

[a loot system] would have to be a system that doesn't affect overall game play, and as yet I have not seen such a system in play.

That isn't to say you didn't have some very viable points, and I do also acknowledge that you likely were referring to whole-loot systems, instead of sub-systems, but I feel that many of my points still stand.

What about no loot

[neostorm]

This is something that's been bugging me for a while, I could care less about loot. One of the things that keeps me from playing online RPGs is that the only thing they have to offer is "more loot". Warcraft players just talk about the loot they've gotten, or will get, and I'm playing Lord of the Rings Online right now and it's much more of the same.

We absolutely have to find a better reason to play than "loot". What about the joy of playing? What about the story? Are these things no longer important to us? Do we need that kind of reward to keep us in the game? I swear, games are becoming a sick reflection of our materialistic society in some ways.

Re:What about no loot

[MagicDude]

You should play City of Heroes. The core gameplay isn't centered around loot per se (though some of the recent expansions have introduced a system of optimizing your character with "salvage"), but is more of the kind of story you'd expect from being a super hero - fly around and bring righteous justice upon the criminal element. On top of that, there is a fairly good story system, where you make contacts who take you on story arcs where you ferret out conspiracies, do hostage rescues, timed bomb disarm missions, etc. The accomplishments are in earning medals and badges for completing some of the larger task force missions or other similar tasks. I found COH a lot more fun when WOW in that WOW people aren't in it to enjoy themselves it seems, it's all about leveling up to get to a high enough level to do raids to get the good loot. When my WOW characters were low level (under 20), I found that nobody was interested in grouping to do the missions from the starting towns ("Does anybody want to do the mission to kill the troll chieftain?" "Go to hell noob"). When I posed the question of how to go about getting small pick up groups on the WOW message boards, I was basically told that unless you're in a guild, nobody will want to team with you, and that I should just grind my character up to level 25 so I could start doing some of the upper level raiding. COH seemed much better for casual gaming and to do pick up groups, and there's no greifing or fighting over loot.

Where's the paper?

[Jack9]

HDRL is running an analysis of loot systems in modern games.

I am looking for the analysis, not just a blog comment. Can someone provide a link?

Put more thinking into it

[4D6963]

That's what I hate about CoD4. When you start, not only it's hard to fight more experienced player, but on top of that they have better weapons, perks and all that. So what happens is that you're really widening the gap between experienced players, which means the "noobs" get "pwned" a lot more than they naturally should. I think that sort of system is pretty weak, and it calls for a rethinking of it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about removing that sort of promotion, or even reversing it. No, rather, I think it has to be approached differently. I won't solve the problem in 5 minutes of thinking time, but an idea could be instead of giving you an edge that makes you an even more deadly killing machine than you already were, you could gain access to new skills, no responsibilities, new capabilities that wouldn't make you more deadly a soldier but nevertheless achieve new things by gaining strategical advantages, i.e. you could gain some sort of intelligence and leadership others don't get so you could turn into a sort of leader. If you look at it, in CoD4 as you climb the rank ladder all you get is better guns and such. They could at least get some inspiration from reality, when you become a colonel in the Marines they don't reward you with an AK-47 and better ammo.

Re:Put more thinking into it

[wintermute000]

My sentiments exactly

The most broken things are
- Airstrike and Helo kills stacking. Once you get an Airstrike you're almost guaranteed a Helo. Support kills should not count same as normal kills
- Grenade perk is overpowered

But being multiplayer its pretty hard to think of leadership/intel perks as all the other players are human, and they're not going to be inclined to take orders ;)

Still a level 1 player in COD4 is on a far more level playing field than any MMORPG confrontation between people of varying levels. A headshot is a headshot and even starting out you have the tools to do that ;)

Everquest was the first to perfect it

[mlawrence]

WoW copied all the Everquest ideas you mentioned above - quick quests, many quests, group quests. Everquest launched many years before WoW. WoW just had a much better marketing system with the success of the Warcraft line. But they didn't do anything groundbreaking.

Re:Everquest was the first to perfect it

[SuperMog2002]

I dunno what version of EverQuest you were playing, but when I played it around the time Luclin came out, the quest system was a royal pain in the rear. There was nothing quick about it. No quest log, no clear indication of what NPCs were offering quests, and on several occasions, I was given a quest that characters ten levels higher than me had no hope to complete.

Re:Everquest was the first to perfect it

[MeanderingMind]

The implication of your parenthetical statement seems to be that Diablo was groundbreaking but doesn't count as it was developed by Blizzard North. That is misleading.

Diablo wasn't particularly groundbreaking, plenty of other Dungeon crawlers existed prior. Like every other Blizzard game Diablo was simply better.

I'm confused about the second implication. Blizzard North was no more separate from Blizzard than Will Wright is from EA.

Perhaps I simply read into your statements, but I felt clarification was necessary.

Wrong

[RichiH]

If you think Larry gets laid a lot, you did not play the games :)