I recently read
a very excellent blog post by Mr. Andrew Reiner, the executive editor for GameInformer magazine, concerning his opinion of the current state of multiplayer gaming, with regards specifically to progression outside of the field of battle (in terms of leveling up or collecting items). He states, rather bluntly, that he feels that Mass Effect 3's system will be representative of what the future of multiplayer gaming holds. While I have yet to play ME3's multiplayer that many of my friends have been raving about (which I'm sure is fantastic), I feel that based on Mr. Reiner's description of what he feels is so compelling about it (which I will not describe here in detail, since he has already done a fine job), I can only say that I hope that when it comes to progressing multiplayer in a way that retains the gamers attention and facilitates replay value (which is the target of his sentiments), that developers are better than that.
Like Reiner, I too am beginning to feel somewhat of a disconnect in terms of the replay value of games. When I was a child, the household that I grew up in did neither support, nor condone the use of video games until I was much older when compared to the majority of my peers, so the few games that I did have access to, I played, and played, and played, and played. The same type of game that could be worth 12 total hours of my time today, I likely squeezed 80+ hours out of back then. Now granted, being an adult, a husband, and a father could very easily account for my significantly shorter attention span when it comes to a game's longevity, but believe me when I say that I still play games far too much (just ask my wife). But beyond this, lately I have noticed that my lack of desire to play the same game, over and over again, is being catalyzed by the game's lack of a solid method of compelling me to do so.
Back to Reiner's article, he points to the drawing point of multiplayer in Mass Effect 3 to be a card-based collection system that occurs after a match is over that serves two-fold as both a means to acquire better weapons and gear for your next mission, as well as a fix to cure the itch ingrained within every homosapien to collect stuff. And let's face it, this does sound like a really fun system that any multiplayer game should have, because really, who doesn't like collecting random stuff and getting more powerful while they do it. This has been a core mechanic of video games since the history of both video and games, and I welcome the evolution of it that we are beginning to see today. HOWEVER, this still doesn't really solve the overall problem. Don't worry, I'm getting there.
One more, important piece of setup before I reach my dramatic point (which has been somewhat brow-beaten already) is the need to discuss the current console generation's use of achievement/trophy systems. Almost every game out there right now uses these systems that are quite literally meaningless, imaginary awards based off of certain milestones or feats performed in the games. These are slowly, but surely, turning even the most die-hard of us nay-sayers into what is being termed an "achievement whore" - somebody who is literally addicted to collecting as many of these things as is humanly possible. At first blush, this seems like an excellent solution to a gamer seeking to maximize his replay value out of his purchase. However, through my own experience, I have noticed that with most games, this creates one of two glaring problems. Either it will cause the gamer to continue playing a game long after he continues to find it fun, or the game will still be enjoyable, but he will have already collected all the possible achievements and no longer find playing the game to be "productive". I put productive in quotes because if you describe playing a game as a form of productivity, than there are some more pressing issues at hand.
So now, after all of this setup, I get to the real meat and potatoes, and I'm sorry for taking so long to get there. For finding a true solution to the future of multiplayer (which is where the answer to maximizing replay value lies) you must first ask a question: Why is it, that in any other form of competitive entertainment, namely sports or board games, does the replay value stretch to nearly infinity? What do I mean by this? It's simple, take professional baseball, the sport is close to 200 years old, and despite the occasional rule change, it remains largely the same, and is more popular today than it has ever been. There is no Baseball 2, or Baseball: Modern Warfare. It's just baseball, year, after year, after year. Same can be said for Monopoly (there are different editions, but it's all the same game), basketball, scrabble, or even Uno. How come I can buy a chess board once in my life, and never feel the need to upgrade it every single year, but I can't play the same video game for more than a month? I think I have thought up the answer. Achievements, collectibles, experience points, all these things are great, and I welcome them in all my games, but every single one of them are limited. They run out. You reach the highest level, you collected all the trophies, you have every weapon in the game. You beat it. The single-solitary issue with the replay value of video games is that you can beat them. When was the last time you heard somebody say that they beat the sport of baseball or that they beat the game of chess? These are things that cannot be beat, only the competition. Multiplayer gaming needs to shift its focus to be more about this. Oh, I lost a round of Team Fortress 2, but look, I double rocket jumped while eating a sandwich and got the achievement for that. The fact that there were other people you were playing against is simply a means to an end.
Lately, I've gotten back into an old love of mine: StarCraft. StarCraft is the largest e-sport in the world, meaning there are literally people that make far more money than you or I by playing this game professionally. Sure, there are actually several hundred achievements you can unlock for your profile when you play this game, but I can honestly say that after playing a few matches a night for several months now, that this is the first game where I feel like I am collecting achievements as a reward for successful competition, not competing so that I can get more achievements. And what's better, is that literally every single person that plays online is placed into divisions and given rankings within that division, with the goal of becoming good enough to ascend into the next divisional tier. When does this end? Once you reach the Grand Master division, which only the top 200 players in the world get to enter, and at which point you should start considering doing it professionally. In other words, it has almost infinite replay value. It's not a perfect system, but that is what I hope the true future of multiplayer is.
In a sense, Mr. Reiner could be quite correct. The collect-a-thon style that is evolving in Mass Effect 3 JUST MIGHT BE the future of multiplayer, but that doesn't mean that I think that it SHOULD be. If the real concern here is that we want something to continue to pull us into a game long after we have "beaten it", it will take a focus on the competitive, human versus human, aspect of it. Skill ceilings that can't be reached, a constant desire to be better, and constantly another person, not a carrot, dangling just in front of you, taunting you and teasing you to beat them. That's the competitive human nature... and THAT is where the future of multiplayer games needs to be headed.
Side note: To all my hundreds of Xanga subscribers on here who have likely died off due to my inactivity, I can't promise that I'm back... but I might be. I miss you guys, and I miss this place.
Until next time, good luck with life.
True
