ARG Designer Believes Online Gaming Can Save the World

[Kollega]

Realistic expectations or not, one thing is certain - we need more games based purely on cooperation, including MMOs. I once thought of online game with community features (not quite a MMO, but not just multiplayer either) which would rely on players helping each other out with missions. For example, if a player gets cornered by enemies, he can send out an SOS signal. Everyone in his immideate vicinity will be notified, as will the players on his friends list (if they are currently running the game). Someone then can fly in a Big Damn Gunship and airlift that player out of a sticky situation. For that the rescuer recieves a positive reputation, which provides some kind of advantage.

This is just a general outline of an implausible concept, so please don't hate on me.

 

[fanklok]

Perfect now when my mom asks me why I didn't go outside I can say it was for science, to save the world.

 

[Jared]

I can certainly see where she is coming from. Ive been involved in some online events with 50+ people all working and doing here best to achieve a single goal, putting everything they can into to make it happen.

So, the truth in her arguement is there. However, aplying it to a real-life situation may be something very different.

 

[Antiparticle]

McGonigal believes that the best versions of ourselves are expressed in online gaming.

What. People are at their worst in online games. At least, I really really hope all those cursing, cheating, ragequitting verbally abusive assholes on Xbox LIVE don't also act that way in real life... now there's a scary thought...

 

[Buccura]

I'm surprised it hasn't mentioned the Year Zero ARG to promote the Nine Inch Nails concept album of the same name. It was really interesting.

 

[bjj hero]

On a grand scale, the 5.93 million years that McGonigal points out the world has spent playing World of Warcraft is affecting our cooperative abilities, which could easily transfer to solving the problems of world hunger, poverty, or climate change.

I'm pretty sure if people switched the computers off and spent 5.39 million years actually trying to solve the problems you'd get a better result than everyone playing WoW. For starters, think of all of the power being saved when you take 5.39 million years of computer time away. You don't have to be a genius. Im sure there is paper work, logistics, cleaning, even making coffee involved in solving climate change, you could do some of this even if you were dumb as a post.

As far as fostering co-operation, I'll remember that next time some subnormal 12 year old does nothing but team kill all round on MW2, when no one can be bothered to switch their mic on BBC2 and when someone runs straight for the helicopter only to crash it straight away.

I enjoy gaming, its no more harmful than watching TV or playing a boardgame but I don't buy into the "wonderful benefits" some people believe it passes on to the gamer.

 

[Jharry5]

I can sort of see where she's coming from, as long as she means co-op games. Competitive games, at least from my experience, don't seem to bring out the best in people as much as co-op.
What she's saying seems very optimistic at best, but at worst, it seems a bit naive...

 

[Leftyshu]

I disagree because I think people who spend that much on online games would never do anything in the real world anyway, or have motivation to walk away from their computer screen.

I disagree with you sir, i believe that people who post useless **** on forums are just as bad

If your neglecting the important parts of your life why does it matter how you do it?

It seems to me that online gaming gets a bad rep, mostly from; immature, bad mannered, selfish, impatient....kids. Even if they're not children, acting that way online (where we are mostly ageless) is a shame.

Forget the specific benifits of gaming. Thats a grey area. This is about the opertunities it offers. (i know it's just people sat in front of their systems playing games but thats not much different to anyone reading or posting here)
The "Real world" rarely gives us the opportunity to communicate on such a broad scale or to affect any kind of change in the systems which control us.
If online....activities....help people to come together and give them the belief that they can make big changes in their world then Jane McGonigal is onto something.

 

[viciouspen]

Awesome.
I knew I was the last best hope of humanity....and not just because Three Dog told me so when I reached level 20.

 

[Wandrecanada]

I think she could be right, but if people will actually bother working together and actually think about what they're doing remains to be seen, I am slightly doubtful, what with teams of lonewolf k/d morons infesting my dear Bad Company 2.

TEAMWORK, YOU F-! *Cough*
Sorry.

Issues, you know...

Funny that was the first thing that popped into my mind as well. It's nice to make a game where teamwork will get you everywhere. It's another thing altogether when you assume players will recognize how and why teamwork is effective compared to working alone.

BFBC2 is a great example of how a large majority of a population is more interested in personal self proclaimed glory than an imposed set of accomplishments. There is a fundamental culture of individualism built into the capitalist society that tends to override our desires to sacrifice for the group, especially if there is little or no personal gain attached. The personal risk reward is unfavorable for the individual at a superficial level. These people end up defaulting to K/D ratio padding via camping and sniping.

This can all be traced back to the whole Communism vs Capitalism argument. Which is better for the individual and which is better for the whole? Ideally it's impossible to tell since people are far from ideal. Corruption tends to consume both from the inside and the lure of power and wealth by taking advantage of either system's flaws are too enticing for any one or group of people to stave off forever. Does that make even trying a form of naivete or just a way of staying sane in the face of certain doom? Perhaps someone can start working on a mass brainwashing machine that turns us all Roddenberrian.

 

[veloper]

What online games does she play and does she even know about shooters or xbox live?

 

[ishagisaka]

I LOVE TED. Thanks for another excuse to delve into that site =o

 

[MetalGenocide]

There is so much, untrue, wrong and stupid in what she said, that I don't want to even begin analyzing it.

Any and all credibility, this "lady" had in the few seconds, that I learned of her existence, were vaporized, in the instance she uttered the words: climate change.

 

[Booze Zombie]

There is a fundamental culture of individualism built into the capitalist society that tends to override our desires to sacrifice for the group, especially if there is little or no personal gain attached.

Is it ironic that it's the choice of the individual even when they're not being an individual?

Being an individual isn't something special, all teamwork really happens to be is focused individuality.
It will always exist, it just seems some people can't understand when to stop trying to be "the man" (or woman) and just focus.

 

[Sparrow]

Wow. She's purdy for a game developer.

 

[Simalacrum]

hmmmmm.... I'm doubtful...

I really don't think the cooperative spirit will pass onto real life like that... besides, only people in developed nations really play video games at all, let alone online...

Both the developing and developed countries need to work together to solve a lot of the worlds problems, and one cannot do it without the other, so even if this fact is true, then it would only significantly impact those who are rich enough to play online games... which isn't many people on a global scale.

Furthermore, its doubtful that this type of cooperative spirit would transfer to the government (another major factor in solving global problems like climate change), which seem to be so anti-videogames as it is.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

I understand what she's saying.

I think she's over-estimating the gaming community's willingness to convert their efforts to real-world problems.

Gamers enjoy, are enthusiastic, and tenacious with games because there are no real-world consequences. That is the point of a "game"; you can enjoy whatever lifestyle or adventure you want, without all of the real-world risk.

As soon as you apply real-world risk to these proposed real-world problem solving games, her premise breaks.

Also, yes, the franchise starting with Warcraft: Orcs and Humans has been around for quite some time. World of Warcraft (which seems to be the basis for most of her points), has only been around for five years. More often than not, it brings out the worst in people.

Which brings up another point she overlooks, online games are annonymus. The (I guess "social") risks of failing in an MMO are mitigated by annonymity. This does lead to many people who lack self-confidence rising above their comfort level to do more things. As soon as they apply their real-world identity, it breaks.

Also, more often than not, the annonymity and lack of risk leads to people being jerks.