255: Gaming's Social Contract

[ajbell]

Excellent article. Such seemingly small things are why some games succeed and some games fail, and also why some games can be a hit with the sales, get high scores on every review, and be forgotten a year later. Now finding the precise point exactly between a breach of the social contract and needed suspension of disbelief, that's the tricky part.

Great article old bean. But I simply must say, if you ever use the word "mom" again, I'm going to come round your gaffe and wrap your 360 right around your noggin.

Wow, your mother sounds really angry!

While Iain may be an old woman at times, he is NOT my mother!

I don't know if "social contract" is the right phrase, though. I think "expectation" might be a better way of describing it. (Maybe they are the same thing?)

You say "potato", I say "carbohydrate rich root crop of the genus Solanum"...

Joking (and academic tendencies to use overly complex language) aside, I think there is a difference. In my opinion, it comes down to the degree of upset that breaking the convention causes. Expectations are a little easier to break with. You just need to look at the sense of "the computer is cheating" type comments here to see that we do perceive these things as rules, rather than just conventions.

There's also something in the social contract idea that implies two-way traffic. Although I didn't talk about our obligations as gamers as much, we do give as well as take in this relationship. (And not just in monetary terms.) Suspension of disbelief is one, but other things, like not being able to perform certain actions or allowing some degree of railroading is part of it too. How often have you thought "this would be much easier in real life" while playing a game? But we don't hold that against the game, because we understand, albeit subconsciously, that letting this slide this is our end of the bargain.

 

[Silva]

As for DA:O, it might be different on PC, but on the Xbox there were points where it was simply impossible to avoid a death. The battle outside Orzamar in particular was the one that scuppered me. As it was the first time I entered that area, but late in the level progression the NPCs had a lot of stun abilities but I had not been able to get the anti-stun potion. I don't doubt that some of this is due to the consoles' control system. ("What do you mean I can't order my party to go to different positions at the same time?")

Sadly, I'd say that the PC version had this problem as well. Just like yourself, I got stuck in Orzammar. The bosses were unfairly difficult, mainly because they require a great deal of item preparation by levelling and using Herbalism (which I had somehow avoided doing until then). In the fight with the dwarven thieves I died unreasonably and repetitiously, simply because the tactics used varied so much, and were layered so thickly on top of pure brute strength, that even multiple tries could not get me through. Thus, Dragon Age: Origins joined the one out of about two games that I decided not to finish.

Just as unfairly, I found that the game didn't cater to all class type players. I chose to be a dual-blade warrior at the start, assuming that I would have just as much chance of beating the game as anyone else (as the social contract from other games had me believing). It turns out that these characters are just generally the worst in the game, and even with three mages other than them around, you're not doing enough damage per second to beat some of the bosses. Not without using a mountain of potions, anyway.

 

[Skarlette]

I miss the days where games had cheat codes you could input if you were pretty desperate or just tired of being killed. A particular game perhaps too "hardcore" and you want to enjoy it without spending hours trying to get your strategy down? -- God Mode time. Feeling frustrated that you, in your far-too-human way, wasted all your ammo trying to kill an enemy that the hit detection seemed to only register 1-in-5 shots even though he's RIGHT THERE! -- Infinite Ammo.

I'll forgive a game for the occasional moment that things go utterly broken and I feel I'm being picked on, only if there are some fallback options to ensure that I can proceed. It can be setting the difficulty lower, or turning on auto-aim, turning up hit accuracy, or something, because if you're sitting there miserable, frustrated, hating the game and the AI to the point where you don't want to play anymore... then why are you playing?

 

[PlasticTree]

Excellent article.

..And that's pretty much everything I wanted to say with this post. I don't even agree with the Dragon Age-criticism somewhere on this page. I definitely wouldn't mind seeing more of your articles in future issues.

 

[Daipire]

I think we can some this article up pretty well in saying that The Computer is a Cheating Bastard [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheComputerIsACheatingBastard]

(Temp Sig!)

I got a fail box too

And Crysis also suffered from Far Cry's superhuman guards, I'd stealth into the bushes, crouch and when I ran out of power, I could count to 10 and I'd be under fire again!

 

[ajemas]

I've seen a particularly bad case of contract breaking in Splinter Cell: Conviction this morning.

If I am hiding in COMPLETE DARKNESS, nothing near me at all, and shoot out a light halfway across the map, how do I get detected? I understand if they get an idea of my location. But I got full on "Mission Failed" detected in Infiltration (kill a buncha dudes without being detected, even once) mode, from shooting out a light with a silenced pistol.

A stealth game shouldn't count you as detected until visual or audio confirmation of your exact location.

I'm not claiming to be a firearm expert in any way, shape, or form, but I can tell you that even with a silencer, pistols are LOUD. They don't make that *thwip* sound like they do in the movies, but a fairly sizable bang, not to mention the muzzle flash. In complete darkness, you would definitely give away your position.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I've seen a particularly bad case of contract breaking in Splinter Cell: Conviction this morning.

If I am hiding in COMPLETE DARKNESS, nothing near me at all, and shoot out a light halfway across the map, how do I get detected? I understand if they get an idea of my location. But I got full on "Mission Failed" detected in Infiltration (kill a buncha dudes without being detected, even once) mode, from shooting out a light with a silenced pistol.

A stealth game shouldn't count you as detected until visual or audio confirmation of your exact location.

I'm not claiming to be a firearm expert in any way, shape, or form, but I can tell you that even with a silencer, pistols are LOUD. They don't make that *thwip* sound like they do in the movies, but a fairly sizable bang, not to mention the muzzle flash. In complete darkness, you would definitely give away your position.

Hmm...Well, I figured as much in reality. But I was going on standard "game logic".

Hell, you can still hear them clearly in games.

 

[ajbell]

To all those saying they liked the article, you're very kind. Now, if any of you happen to know the Escapist editors/work for Themis Media/have any incriminating photos of Escapist staff do let them know...

Onyx, I do agree that stealth logic is often pretty warped in games and does require a more serious than most other types of gameplay suspension of disbelief. I don't know if this is because we've got used to conventions that cropped up originally due to processing power limitations (such as the old "I'm standing in a patch of shadow in front of a brightly light wall, shouldn't my silhouette be blindingly obvious" problem) or some other reason. (Maybe genuine stealth gameplay isn't much fun?)

Oh, and I totally agree with ReverseEngineered's point about the scripted death/escape. It's the "your actions should make a difference" part of the social contract. (An earlier draft of this article had a section on how offering a choice, such as whether or not to deal aggressively in a conversation, but then providing the same result regardless was rendering that player input null and void. The magically escaping boss is a worse version of this, but thankfully somewhat rarer.)

EDIT: Heh, tried to post this during the first fifteen minutes of a new ZP being up. Must have taken longer loading the forums than writing the damn post!

 

[RobfromtheGulag]

2 kind of OT notes:

The background denotes FarCry 2, which I've never played, but I've heard people rage about the enemy aim in FarCry 1 before and I just want you all to know that hiding in bushes is like this magical aegis that protects you from all view [and consequently fire] until the enemy is like 5' away. So that's kind of a remedy to the breaking of the contract.

And Oblivion gets a pass in my book [and probably a lot of gamers books] due to the immersion factor. My biggest related gripe is that there are so few enemy models. This seems to allow them to be a little underhanded and just have the same enemies level with you, so that at max level you're still shooting giant ants [Fallout] and rats, but they're just harder. The games make up for this with immersion and cooler ways to kill the enemies. So perhaps my stats aren't noticeably up like in a JRPG or MMORPG, but my methods are.

And something that's occurred to me that undermines RPG's 'you get stronger' MO entirely is that the enemies must get harder in order to maintain a challenge, but at the same time the enemies getting stronger just means all your statistics boosts are essentially irrelevant. This is daunting, because if we take out the new enemy skins/models essentially you're playing the exact same boring fights for 30+ hours.
-The entire idea of the RPG is to get stronger and then lord it over all the peasants [or in MMORPG's case, the new players]. But we know action would get old quick if you one-shot every enemy you came across.

--Oh, and imo the most notorious social contract breakers are fighting games. I can't really blame them for it because it's probably damn hard to program AI that fights back in a realistic fashion, but once you get to higher difficulties or end bosses you'll notice that most fighters just dodge all your hits, break all your throws, and throw cheap shots.

 

[RobfromtheGulag]

And as long as I'm thinking of contract offenders; Crysis. I play a ton of this game, the gameplay's great, the graphics are great, it's one of the few modern shooters that doesn't require me to go online with other howling loonies.

But they need to do something about object physics. If a barrel explodes and a barrel next to it happens to fly my way and hit me, I die. Realistic right? I imagine that this same programming is the cause of me bumping a box with another box on it while I'm running, the box on top falls over and KILLS ME. I agree this is kind of minor in a game that has checkpoints every 1:30, but if you've set some arbitrary goal like beating a level without dying then it's a real pain.

 

[Tropico1]

"Social Contract" and "Impossible Things Before Breakfast", huh.

Stop using Forgist terminology and watch your credibility rise tenfold overnight

 

[StriderShinryu]

I agree with the strange randomness as found in DA:O. I love the game but for me it was that spell that rapidly drains your life while at the same time preventing you from healing yourself. I hated that spell with a passion and it made some fights excrutiatingly tough (though I'll admit never mucking around to see if I could find an antidote) and then, all of sudden, that one fight that was ticking me off would go by without the enemies using it at all.

One of my biggest pet peeves on this topic is rubber banding in racing games (or in racing events in non-racing games). I'm sorry but if I run the race perfectly from start to finish, including seeing the AI totally wipe out at some point in time, they shouldn't be right up trying to pass me at the finish line. That's just garbage and is such an obvious crutch that it kills any enjoyment I have when it comes to games that fall back on it. It's almost hilarious how bad this is in Mario Kart because you can actually see your competitors locations on the mini-map.. you actually see that one person who is designated as your rival zipping around at a literally impossible rate of speed if they happen to fall too far behind.

My other big pet peeve is fighting game AI. Mortal Kombat is probably the worst for it, but Street Fighter has a few examples too (oh, and SNK's bosses deserve a special place in hell for this). I understand that making good fighting game AI would be difficult without making it trivial or just too random to in any way approximate a real player, but sometimes (like in MK) it's beyond stupid. An AI character should not be able to "anticipate" my attacks 100% of the time. They shouldn't be able to perfect;y counter anything I'm doing before the first frame of my move has even registered on screen. Ken and Akuma in some of the Street Fighter games are a perfect example of this. They walk towards you. You throw a fireball, they jump before you even start the throwing animation. You try an attack, they dragon punch it with inhuman timing. You wait, they throw you as soon as they get one pixel into throwing range.

 

[ajbell]

"Social Contract" and "Impossible Things Before Breakfast", huh.

Stop using Forgist terminology and watch your credibility rise tenfold overnight

Forgist? You've lost me there. "Social contract" is an established social/philisophical/political term for agreed behaviours in a society. The impossible things are (at least as far as I know them) a Douglas Adams quote. ("Done seven impossible things before breakfast? Then why not visit Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe!")

 

[MrJohnson]

Loved this article, and the Hitchikers Guide reference.

 

[emptyother]

The bad AI in Farcry 2 is more a case of bad programming than badly AI-design.

I had an excellent time playing this game, and the AI behaved fair (and is today one of my favorite FP Shooters because of the AI, the weapons and the enviroment). But seing my friend play it on another computer, he was spotted 1km away in an instant, and he couldnt hide in bushes.
Playing both the first S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games, it was totally opposite, my friend could hide in bushes or dark or sneak up behind them, i was spotted trough bushes and cover, in total darkness, no mercy...

I guess the AI is better the more CPU (or the less CPU or something), because i have a crappy computer while he has a computer who can play the latest games on average settings.

 

[ajbell]

The bad AI in Farcry 2 is more a case of bad programming than badly AI-design.

I think in this context game design and programming are two sides of the same coin. (The same is true of the DA:O example as well.) In fact, I would go further and say that high level game design (the overall look, feel and playstyle) has to incorporate programming as part of it, along with level design, art etc. I doubt anyone really intends grants to be uber-tough due to duff AI, so yes, you could say it's a programming flaw. But if you knew, or find out, that you can't programme your AI to behave in a fair fashion in your current set-up, isn't it a design issue to change that set-up so it works? Game design is not just level design, attack patterns and so forth.

Oh, and anyone interested in the more programming aspects of the AI thing, check out Shamus Young's series at http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=4085 (also inspired by FarCry!)

 

[codemartin]

The impossible things are (at least as far as I know them) a Douglas Adams quote. ("Done seven impossible things before breakfast? Then why not visit Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe!")

First shame on you the impossible things before breakfast quote originally goes to a Lewis Carroll. The original quote I believe is from Through the Looking Glass; to be exact.

Second however, how would feel scaled AI would affect the social contract. For example early on in the game (or as one does bad, low points, no power ups, low stats etc... ) the AI is worse than you, horrible aim less health, etc... As you get better the AI gets better as well so when you have amazing stats, every resource whatever the AI gets super AIM, or tons of health or whatever based on the game you are playing.

Do you feel that is breach of the social contract? I have only encountered such a phenomena once in a game called civilization 4, However I was just curious how you felt it effected the social contract in question.

 

[bjj hero]

Personally I had no bother with dragon age. My first play through was on hard. I died plenty in the mid game, well placed traps, not having my strat down, needing to change around my party, things like that. Every time I died I went back to the drawing board and worked out my strategy.

A few encounters I had to come back at a later level, some of my decisions were a bit railroaded as I couldnt beat x forcing me to side with them and in the end I had to let Morrigan be my champion at the landsmeet. All of it felt harsh but fair. I got a lot of satisfaction beating it (on the 360 btw).

I'm surprised no one mentioned the obvious cheating in streetfighter. Without getting involved in the "Seth is cheap" shit storm it always upset me when Guile would throw Sonic booms while walking towards you. Something that cannot physically be done by a human player.

 

[ajbell]

The impossible things are (at least as far as I know them) a Douglas Adams quote. ("Done seven impossible things before breakfast? Then why not visit Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe!")

First shame on you the impossible things before breakfast quote originally goes to a Lewis Carroll. The original quote I believe is from Through the Looking Glass; to be exact.

Second however, how would feel scaled AI would affect the social contract. For example early on in the game (or as one does bad, low points, no power ups, low stats etc... ) the AI is worse than you, horrible aim less health, etc... As you get better the AI gets better as well so when you have amazing stats, every resource whatever the AI gets super AIM, or tons of health or whatever based on the game you are playing.

Do you feel that is breach of the social contract? I have only encountered such a phenomena once in a game called civilization 4, However I was just curious how you felt it effected the social contract in question.

Aiiiiie, shame on me indeed. Now that you've pointed that out, you are obviously right. One of the queens I seem to recall. (But we've already established my memory is pretty ropey on this.)

On your more substantive point, smarter AI would seem (to me) like a very good way of dealing with the progression aspect of the social contract. We expect progress in a game, and more challenging enemies is a part of this. More intelligent, rather than higher damage/more health/wearing a magical hat-of-bullet-proofness-that-also-mysteriously-protects-your-throat, baddies would be a nice change. Bloody hard to achieve though!

Personally I had no bother with dragon age. My first play through was on hard. I died plenty in the mid game, well placed traps, not having my strat down, needing to change around my party, things like that. Every time I died I went back to the drawing board and worked out my strategy.

A few encounters I had to come back at a later level, some of my decisions were a bit railroaded as I couldnt beat x forcing me to side with them and in the end I had to let Morrigan be my champion at the landsmeet. All of it felt harsh but fair. I got a lot of satisfaction beating it (on the 360 btw).

Again, just to be clear, I don't think "hard" automatically equals either "unfair" or broken contract. (And I know you might not have been talking to me specifically, as there has been a bunch of DA:O chat here.) A game can be hard but fair. My problem with DA:O was not that it forced me to develop a good strategy, but rather that it didn't. The RNG and the fight AI conspired to, in effect, "throw" the fight at times by not using its most powerful abilities. The degree of difficulty that is ideal will always vary from gamer to gamer, but I doubt many (if any) of us want to play games where the computer will "let" us win in an obvious fashion.

 

[ultrachicken]

Thanks. I think this explains in a nutshell at least five of the reasons why I seem to be one of the few people in the world who really didn't like System Shock 2. (Stop shooting me with empty, broken shotguns, dammit!)

A reason for the shotguns being broken might be the fact that you might have broken them as you were killing the guy, which also would ruin all the ammo inside the shotgun.

Anyways, BFBC2 breaks the social contract of progression in its campaign. Once you get the SPAS and any LMG, you've got the best weapons in the game (this occurs by the end of the second level). I literally used the same weapon set for the entire game. Also of fairness, since they have many sections where they tell you to do something but there's always a catch. Shoot the villain? You have to wait a few seconds after we tell you to before you shoot him. Shoot the jeep? You have to have an LMG or else it'll paste you.