Saturday, April 5, 2014

Mind Games: The Good and the Bad of Psychological Warfare in Gaming



            Okay, so last week, while I was writing up my discussion on the goods, bads, and confusing elements of Dark Souls 2, I touched a little bit on my belief that the game was actually trying to engage in some psychological warfare.  I intend to go into that here, because, for what the game is trying to do, I think this type of mind game is actually pretty amazing.  Before we do, though, there are probably a few questions people might have about psychological warfare with games that need to be addressed first.

Yep, we're gonna be talkin about you today, Hearthstone...you and your MIIIIIIIND GAMEEEEESSSS
            Psychological warfare in a video game does not mean a psychological thriller, necessarily, like Silent Hill 2.  While there can be elements of psych warfare in that type of game, Silent Hill 2 and many games with a psychological bend are more interested on looking at the character they've given to the player and exploring their development in a nonlinear manner, showing their strengths, weaknesses, and growth through their actions and the world around them.  No, when I talk psych warfare, I am referring to when games perform something that does not affect story or the world they are in, but which elicit a particular response from a player that is contrary to what they know or believe the way things should be done.
Psychological thrillers and psychological torment is not the same as psychological warfare.
             Free to play games are probably the ones people might know best for psych warfare.  Free to play games operate under the idea that, a player goes into the game knowing full well that they DO NOT want to pay for it.  They want to get the maximum enjoyment out of the game as possible without having to spend a dime.  However, the way the game is built, it makes the game easier and ultimately more enjoyable if you will actually pay.  The game gives you the option to do what you believe is correct, but ultimately is trying to drive you towards something you don't want to do.  Hearthstone is a good example of this because it is subtle...it's not in your face about it.  It puts a 100 gold win cap per day on individual players, so they can't win more than 100 gold from matches per day, and gives them quests every day to win gold, which they can use to buy new cards or participate in the game's arena mode, for free.  However, 100 gold a day buys you one, count them, ONE pack of cards.  The Hearthstone store allows you to buy up to 40 at once...provided you are willing to pay real world money.  So, for a starting out player, who gets trounced by the guys wielding expensive cards...this is a real temptation.  It defines pay to win and wants to goad the players into spending, even though in their mind, they know that's not what they want to do.  This is psychological warfare.  It is trying to elicit an action from players contrary to what they might do in normal circumstances.  It aims to mess with your mind.

Behold the Hearthstone Store.  Funny how all the boosters above one cost real world money, huh?
            Now, free to play games are inherently at war with a player and that is our choice, if we agree to play them.  I deal with Hearthstone's frustrations and the psychological warfare because I like it and that is my choice.  However, like any great power, psych warfare can be easily abused.  Jim Sterling coined the term "fee to play" where a player pays a fee to buy a game, sometimes as much as 60 dollars, and then have the option of performing microtransactions and paying the game to give them more content that is behind a pay wall right off the bat.  This style of game tends to harass players into spending money rather than giving them the option.  It can never force them to, but it teases them, while still requiring them to pay, and this type of psychological warfare is pretty devious, because it tries to squeeze as much money from a single player as possible without enhancing the experience.  In truth, fee to play games are the worst kind of psych warfare because while free to play allow a richer experience if you are willing to put down a little money, fee to play negates much of your hard work, because you are paying to make a game you've already paid for easier and shorter.

Paying to make a game that you've already paid for easier and shorter...just seems kinda counter intuitive, doesn't it?  Or is that just me?
            With that outline on the basics and the negatives of how psych warfare works in gaming, let me move onto the meat of this discussion.  How psych warfare in a video game can actually be used to enhance the experience.  I'll start with a baseline example, then move into Dark Souls 2, as I think it's pretty amazing what they've done there. 

            I find that most old school JRPGs invoke just a little bit of psych warfare, so let's start with them.  Final Fantasy 5 has an area called Gil Turtle's cave, where you fight an INSANELY tough monster called Gil Turtle every few steps in a long, straight, one square corridor that there's no way to go around.  Now, you don't have to do this.  The area is completely optional.  However, what's interesting about it is that the game keeps the camera pulled just far enough back that you can't see the end of the corridor from the overhead view.  You don't know if there's treasure in there, or if there's nothing at all.  However, there's this compulsion to know, since this cave is right next to one of the big cities we've been using as a base for the last few hours.  More than that, in JRPGs there's this knowledge that if you fight a boss, you will ultimately get a powerful reward.  So, players might waste time dying against the Gil Turtle monster or spend a lot of money trying to get equipment specially made to beat it or devote time to leveling up skills they think might help.  Even though in the back of their mind, they know they ought to either move on and come back later, or just ignore it, since they're not strong enough or what have you.  The game teases you with possibilities of what is hidden and so we persevere and find...nothing but money.  And not even that much money to begin with.  Frustrating, perhaps, but we did this to ourselves.  Final Fantasy 5 goaded us into the cave and into fighting Gil Turtle, sometimes as many as a dozen times for the very unlucky, just for money, but we're ultimately the ones who gave into it.  However, let's look at this from the other perspective.  I just gave you an example of how good psych warfare makes a game frustrating, but from a separate perspective, it can also force players to get better and start thinking more strategically.  For example, some players discovered that Gil Turtle was an undead and took damage from the bard spell requiem and holy magic, making the battle much easier if you have those who can cast it.  Also it was discovered that Gil Turtle largely uses physical attacks, so if you have a knight protecting players, or a spell that gives them evasion, it's doable without much risk.  However, no matter which perspective you take, you have to admit that your experience was drastically changed by the game's use of psych warfare.  Maybe it made you a better player, maybe it gave you a feeling of accomplishment for beating a hard boss...maybe it just taught you not to be so obsessed with treasure that you risk your own life...either way, it created a unique experience for you.

Get used to this screen...it's gonna happen A LOT.
            That, I believe is the power of psychological warfare in gaming.  It can alter how we decide to play games and give us a unique experience.  Heroes of Might and Magic does this in a very simplistic way, putting a large stack of enemies in between a player and great riches.  They know they probably won't beat the enemies at their current level, so they focus on building an army to get the riches...only to have their opponents take them apart because they were focusing on the monsters guarding the treasure instead of their true enemies.  It's a way of messing with the player, and possibly teaching them a few harsh lessons.  Either way, it alters the way we play games based on our own weaknesses as humans(greed makes us want treasure, curiosity makes us explore areas we shouldn't just yet, impatience makes us play sloppy, etc.) and ultimately changes how we experience a game.

That demon is guarding sooo much treasure...if only I had a dimension door...
            Now, I want everyone to understand that what I am about to say is purely speculation on the part of Dark Souls 2.  I don't know if this is the case, but I believe it to be so based on the game design.  Alright.  Now, in Dark Souls 2, you have a hub town.  This is where you level up, this is where you strengthen your recovery items, this is where you upgrade and buy items and weapons, this is where you are safe.  Problem.  You have to warp back to it for any of this, and that takes you out of combat, breaks the flow of the game, and puts you behind a loading screen.  I heard many players during the beta talking about how it was an issue for them.  About how the original Dark Souls allowed them to repair items at a bonfire, level up at a bonfire, improve recovery items at a bonfire, all taking only a minute or so and just like that, they were back in combat.  This new system seemed frustrating and baffling and I felt the same way...at first.  However, I realized after several painful deaths involving the loss of over a hundred thousand souls(the in game currency and experience points), that the game was messing with me.  You see, all those benefits to the hub town?  They're supposed to be inconvenient to get back to.  Not so inconvenient as to make the game frustrating, but juuuuuuussssttttt inconvenient enough that you don't want to go back to them from the middle of battle, even though you KNOW you should.  This is where the psychological warfare comes in.

Quaint little town, isn't it...it's a trick!
            In the original Dark Souls, one of the rules of gameplay was to spend your souls as soon as you got them, level up often, never wait, because death was right around the corner.  However, that mantra changes a little bit when you're taken out of combat and put behind load screens, short as they may be, because it's no longer easy to spend souls quickly and efficiently.  You  have to warp back to your home town of Majula, talk to the Emerald Herald NPC, talk to others to see if they have new wares in or to fix items, it completely takes you out of the "YEAH, I AM KICKING ASS" mentality for players doing well or the "MUST GET SOULS BACK/MUST GET REVENGE" mentality of players doing poorly.  And most players don't want to lose that mentality.  They're having fun, so they don't want to stop, even though, in their mind, they know they really should, because they're carrying a lot of souls they could use to level up or buy/improve items.  And this...this is where the game gets diabolical.  I believe that the hub town and the NPC who you have to level up with were all intentional.  The developers were trying to wage psychological war with players to try and get them to act recklessly, because everything in Dark Souls 2 is surmountable if you are careful or if you're open to experimentation.  However, neither of those is conducive to the fast pace of an action game or the impatience of many players.  So, they get sloppy and die.  And when they die, they lose A LOT of souls.  Why?  Because it was just a little too inconvenient to go back to Majula and spend them. 

You'll stay by our side until hope withers, eh?  We shouldn't take your words lightly, Emerald Herald.
            In many ways, this is a better difficulty scaler than anything.  You see, the game is only hard if you're reckless.  If you don't spend souls as soon as you know you have enough.  Because you'll lose them.  Samuel Vimes in Terry Pratchet's "Night Watch" once said, "I have to get lucky all the time.  They only have to get lucky once," in regards to people trying to assassinate him.  The same mentality applies here.  You have to keep being lucky, because no matter how skilled a player, eventually there will be a mistake.  The enemies only have to get lucky once...and that's devious, because it lets you know the status quo...that all your assets are in this hub town...but then encourages you to ignore it at your own peril.

You're wise beyond your years, Sir Samuel.
            Even the rewards for the game encourage this to an extent that is rather shocking.  There are two items in Dark Souls 2 that are based around this same principal of making the players go against what they know is proper.  Illusory Ring of the Conqueror is awarded to players who beat the game without dying.  Illusory Ring of the Exalted is awarded to players who beat the game without using a bonfire.  Now, dying to experiment with different play styles or strategies and using the bonfire to heal and warp are cornerstones of Dark Souls 2...and encouraging players to get these rings by ignoring them is playing a bit of mind games with them.  You can only get these rings if you go against the game design and against convenience, as the inability to use a bonfire, for example, means you cannot warp or repair items and have to walk everywhere and deal with broken weapons at a regular basis.  It also means you cannot easily get rid of your souls via leveling up.  Yet, the game encourages players to try this...it is setting them up for failure, but it is a failure that they themselves could easily stop if they just did what they knew was the right choice.  And these rings?  They only make the item you're holding in each hand invisible.  Useful for PvP perhaps, but hardly worth the effort.  Yet some players are already working towards them.  This is what leads me to believe the game is messing with players.  It is more difficult than the original Dark Souls, but only if you let it get to you.  Let it get into your head and ignore the warnings.  This is psychological warfare.

I hope the ring was worth all the psychological warfare you subjected yourself to.
            Now, there are plenty of examples of varying degrees of psych warfare at play in the games industry.  I've only scratched the surface.  There are plenty of ways to mess with someone's mind.  Conditioning, for example.  In Pandora's Tower, you grow closer to Elena because the game conditions you to, with the relationship meter and the fact that she will do things for the player if they talk with her.  She can improve your items, give you buffs or healing tools, or many other things.  However, if you just want to play the game, she's a bit of a barrier, as you need to talk with her regularly...however the game is trying to convince you she is not a barrier and condition you to like her.  This happens, A LOT with games.  Some do it well, and I do believe Pandora's Tower does it well, others, like Final Fantasy 13, do it poorly and just make the character an annoying anchor around your neck.  However, ultimately, that brings me to an interesting question I asked myself while playing Dark Souls 2.  Is psychological warfare in a game beneficial to the player?  Is it "good?"

What can I say?  I'm a softie for Elena...
            Now, that's not an easy question to answer.  Some of it is clearly ripe for abuse, such as in free to play games.  Dungeon Keeper on mobile platforms abuses it's psychological warfare to try and bully, harass, and goad the players into spending real world money.  The NPC guide of Dungeon Keeper mobile actually says, "Who says money can't buy time?"  Now, with this level of abuse, especially in the fee to play games that Jim Sterling has outlined like Dead Space 3, psychological warfare is a bad thing.  It is meant to squeeze money out of players.  It does not serve the game, it serves the publisher.  In this case, I'd say psychological warfare is something to be wary of and try to be aware of as soon as possible and avoid.

This is psychological warfare in gaming at its absolute worst.  Manipulating the players for the profit of the publisher.
            Along that same note, I want to say that I consider psychological warfare to be completely different from brain washing.  Many games, some with political messages, some with ideological messages, or what have you, will try to brainwash its players into thinking a certain way.  This isn't warfare, it is programming...and that's just despicable, in my opinion.  Good players will agree or disagree or make their own decisions about how a game's views and agendas play out.  You can like or dislike the extreme racist views of Columbia in Bioshock Infinite because it doesn't necessarily play them out as good or bad, just a product of the times.  However a game made specifically to convince a player that their beliefs are wrong or invalid and that the beliefs of the game designer are right and thusly they need to change how they think?  That's not a game.  That's a piece of trash.  Most of the time, you don't see games like this sold commercially, because no one will pay money to be talked down to and have their beliefs belittled, but it is something to keep in mind for certain freeware games or for game design in the future.

Racist and insane as it may be, at least Columbia isn't trying to brainwash you into believing it's right...or if it is, it's doing a damn crappy job of it.
            HOWEVER...when a game doesn't try to brainwash or belittle a player?  When it doesn't have microtransactions?  When it is actively trying to make the player experience the world in a different way?  I actually think these types of mind games enhance the titles more than hinder them.  I freely admit to allowing myself to be taken in by the conditioning of Pandora's Tower and really growing attached to Elena and...that made the game better for me.  Playing Final Fantasy 5 and getting stuck in Gil Turtle's cave actually gave me some perspective onto how brutal some of the secret bosses could be and helped me work through strategies on how best to defeat other secret bosses, like Omega and Shinryu, which I did.  And in Dark Souls 2...I have to admit, it made me be a bit more aware of my actions.  I knew that the risk I was taking was stupid, sometimes, but it enhanced the thrill of the game when I did it...and it also made me feel smart when I chose not to, spent my souls in Majula, and died moments after going back to battle.  It taught me how to better play the game.

I praise the sun for this victory!
            Thing is, it takes work to put psychological warfare into a video game without microtransactions.  It takes work to design Gilgame's cave to make it so difficult to pass through but so easy to avoid.  It takes work to try and condition players to like characters, even if it fails, like with Vanille in Final Fantasy 13.  It took work to make Dark Souls 2 function the way it does, with an NPC to level you up and a hub town behind a loading screen to spend your souls at.  And why do all this work if not for the benefit of the players and the experience?  I know that some people might get a little iffy about being played or having their mind messed with, but in most games, psychological warfare is actually meant to enhance the experience.  Recognizing it actually kind of changes the game too, because you can choose to be taken in by it or to play it without being messed with, further enhancing a game's replayability or it's value.

            Psychological warfare in games isn't meant to program you to think a certain way, even though conditioning can make you look at characters more fondly...the point of it is to enhance the experience for the player so that they will buy the sequel or recommend the game to others.  If a game tries to overstep that bound and doesn't serve the player, that's when we have a problem.  That's why I have such disdain for games like Dungeon Keeper mobile or other fee to play games.  Because they don't want to enhance the game for the player...they are there to serve the publisher or some other party.

            Let me close out by saying that you don't need to recognize psych warfare to enjoy a game or to be swayed by it into playing it differently.  In fact, if done well, it should be very hard to recognize indeed.  However, it is a very interesting little look at how some game designers go out of their way to make a game better by trying to understand how a player will think and then work against them or with them(in some cases) to try and make the experience more unique and fulfilling.

No comments:

Post a Comment