Feeding Addiction

Many people are drawn to the promise of ever more 'status' in the game. The most explicit way to incorporate status is through things like experience points. Other players can see your status and it gives you bragging rights. An (or the most) important goal in such a game is to gain experience points; it is what drives the game.
This is fine untill you get to the point when no more points can be gained: you have arrived at the end of the rainbow and nothing is there. As many MMORPG (UO) players do testify: "it's not worth it".

In a game such as quake, status is also important but it depends entirely on player skill (aside from ping, framerate and such..). There is no hard limit to skill; you never reach the end of the rainbow. You can reach a practical limit of your own skill but that's life: there's always someone better than you.

I want a holodeck. If I worked on a star ship with a holodeck there would be alot less trekin and alot more humpin!

A game should allow high level's of mastery.

If there was a MMORPG version of Deus Ex with incredible world depth and lots of profession choices and lots of different factions, I'd be a hardcore addict. Neocron looks kind of promising in this regard :D

Deep, complex gameplay makes a game that may not necessarily appeal to the masses, but will keep a hardcore following enticed for a long, long while.

This is why Starcraft is doing ridiculously well in Korea, and Tribes2 has a loyal, cult following here in America.

On the other end of the spectrum, simplistic gameplay can also make an addictive game. Minesweeper, pinball, and Counter-Strike all have very simple rules, but all are very addictive.

Allright all you old school Quake addicts, come out. Back when Quake was released, how many hours a day did you play it online? I was playing 10 - 14+ hours a day. Dropped out of college, quit my job, and left my girlfriend. I was addicted and that's the story of my life. And I still haven't fully recovered. Quake has been the only game that ever had that effect on me. No other game can compare. Doom was a fun little game, but it didn't do that too me.

I'm sure this has already been said but I think a sense of community is the most important thing in online gaming.

Don't know about you, but I keep going back to Icewind Dale because there's a chance one of the chicks will take her clothes off. I know, because when I clicked on her, she said, "Get me to a 47th level mage and I'll show you real magic, boy."

Each path along the mission map has an associated value. When completing this level (or game) you are assigned a login/password (value?) for that path. This lets you log into a webpage for the game and open an area that can display all the maps, and missions you played, and missed during the level/game. This gives the players something to look forward too (a goal aside from ‘completing the game’). You can also have a score upload section that the player can use to rank himself against others who played the same/different path. The mission map on the webpage will detail the secrets, and weapons missed during the game, so the player gets to go back to mission2 and fail it (ie: not complete all goals. With mission2 that might be, not destroying all guard posts, sensory equipment). Players can also access a msg/chatboard with other players who have completed similar parts of the level/game, and also get to talk to those that have finished different missions. We don’t want to make it easy for people to get from mission to mission. We want players to have to think a bit.
Mike- ‘how did you get to mission 7? I’ve tried everything.’
Jack- ‘I don’t know, did you destroy all 6 sensors?’
Mike- ‘oh, I only got 5, thanxx dude.’
Mike leaves
Jack- ‘maybe I should have told him about that side entrance too?’
*** this gives the player some 'respect' or ranking in the online world. you get to hang out with all the other veterans. hehe...
could be a good addition? maybe diabloIII will have a better multiplayer setup section, with specific chat areas like this?

rad.
i like the little goals.

- Easy ability to edit levels/items.
- A pseudo working economy with things that actually have enough value in game, that some idiots will pay REAL money for ingame rewards.
- A game that has a well synced pace with most players. Just as one area got boring in Diablo II, you were somewhere else new and interesting.
- A level system to indicate prowess and experience (or in some cases, just way too much time spent playing the game.)
- snazzy graphics that only enhance good gameplay, but do not come at the cost of less content.
- A REAL story that is fairly unique, and that isn't just passive. Diablo II kinda squeezed this out barely. Games like Deus Ex, Half-Life, and the Forgotten Realms games by Black Isle have these in spades. (Baldur's Gate, BG2, Planescape, Icewind Dale)
- SEVERAL types of gameplay. I'm waiting to see this really happen in a game. I think a good addictive adventure game should let you interact more with your environment. You should be able to pilot vehicles in adventure games as well as fight. Puzzles and discovering more about the plot should not be traded in for FPS action in an adventure style game. MMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmm Deus Ex. Now if only they could make several Deus Ex's with several different themes and better graphics. ;)
- A sense of accomplishment several times along the way. Make getting items a more intriguing process, not just passive. Kind of like the side quest or plot of a level. Remember how each level of Zelda had a new item as well as a new monster and a piece of the triforce?
- New themes. Sure, Tolkienesque RPGs and futuristic games are great, but where is the variety? Max Payne comes to mind. A real adventure game with great graphics and action that's not just another sci-fi shooter or Tomb Raider clone.
- I almost forgot the fear factor. Everyone slammed Quake I and II for not having a real story. True, but didn't the monster placement, and the environments scare the shit out of you? Strangely enough, I was MORE frightened in Q2 than Q1 which had a more demonic cast of monsters. I think the first time I heard TRESSPASSER! shouted in a dark quiet room, I nearly pissed myself. Same goes for when the acid-spitting-dog-thing chased me out of a dark hole.


Games I want so bad I get w00d:
Neverwinter Nights
Max Payne
Duke Nukem Forever
Metal of Honor (made right here in the Sooner state! w00t!)
Neverwinter Nights
Warcraft III
Halo
Neverwinter Nights

....and since I'm still going and no one else even cares at this point, some of the most underrated games of all time.

SWAT 3
Heretic II
SiN (despite all the bugs, there is a great game underneath it.)
ReVolt!
Powerslide
FAKK2
Forsaken
Driver
... I guess there are a lot of good games that missed the boat.

I played EverQuest after beta because of the friends I had made. Two of the group left and it wasn't fun anymore. I've no interest in playing it again.

I've never liked either Diablo game.

I can't stand Counter-Strike.

The closest I've come to game addition was because of the group of friends I was playing with. Once they were gone, the game was dead to me.

I don't know about you guys, but I've recently become addicted to Subspace again. Yea, that lil 2d space game that came out 4 years ago .. and now that it's free .. I play at least a couple hours a day. Most of the game modes suck .. but Trenchwars is pretty amazing, where each ship has a specialty, and everyone has to work together to capture & hold the base.

Going back to the 'good book' theory, I play this because it reminds me of Star Control 1 & 2 .. 2 games that I wasted much of my younger life playing. They're really simple to play, but hard to master .. and i find the same true for subspace. I'll never get the feeling I had from Star Control originally, but i somehow tap into a portion of that when i play similar games. Goes the same for books .. one will completely floor you, and you'll read another of that genre just so you can continue/respark old feelings.

Being an original Commodore64 gamer, I get this alot :)

I think it's becoming increasingly more difficult to satisfy a gamer with one game for an extended period of time. Our attention spans are getting smaller it seems. Either that or we are just becoming jaded. I can't remember the last time I was scared while playing a game or felt like I was really there... Actually I think the last game was Thief, and that was a while ago.

Also, it seems like I'm only satisfied for maybe a week with a game and then I move on. It's like, I think a game is really cool when I first start playing it but then the novelty of the cool graphics or whatever wears off and I'm done and on to the next thing. Am I the only one like this?

The last game I played all the way through was Half-Life... Most games these days I dont even get 1/4 the way through.

If we could understand what made a game great we might just get tired of them since the formula could get exploited all too much.

For me a great game is simple, time consuming, multiplay and whatever feeds my ego like MOO2. I love beating up other creatures then blowing up the planets. HAHA.

Now the best games are ones I can play with my friends. Where I can taunt them beat them or get smacked hard by them.

Stat games like CS get me mad I should not be playing for numbers but for fun. Why should getting more frags then deaths be better than going 0:99? Games are not about winning in my mind. If that is how you think of games then you have no idea how to have fun. When I was a kid losing in tag did not mean I had no fun or losing in dogde ball just teh act of playing was great now stupid weak parents ban dodge ball.

A friend of mine online, who I play Diablo2 with often, had a simple explanation on why games are addictive.

It's all about that squirt of chemicals in your head when something unexpected or exciting happens. When humans get excited and overjoyed, it causes chemicals to be released that give us that "rush" when something cool happens.

The reason we play games like Diablo2, Quake, and other interactive games is we want to get that squirt. Good games give you that squirt at decent intervals. Too many exciting moments and it becames boring and no more squrits happen.

Diablo2 is extremely exciting because its designed so well. There's the squirt when you defeat a hard boss, the squirt when that fanatasic item finally drops. It's pacing is fantastic as well as its a game you can sit down, play for an hour or two and enjoy yourself quite a bit.

Quake games gives you a different sort of joy. You die, get owned repeatedly, but then there's that moment when you pull of three direct shots in a row, or end up winning the map. Major squirts happen than and you play repeatedly to get the same feeling again.

For me, there have been four central games to my life. Defender, Street Fighter II (and the many sequels), Quake and Diablo2. These games are ones I devoted enourmous time to because they providing the perfect avenue for me to get that squirt of chemicals at the correct intervals to make me happy.

What's next? We'll see.

/// Zoid.

There is one thing keeping most of the gaming public away from MMORPG, the fees. I wouldnt pay a dime to play a game. Im already paying for my broadband connection. I dont see Battle.net charging anyone to play on their servers. Why does Sony have to be so greedy and charge people to play EQ? Make a good game and dont FORCE PEOPLE TO PAY to play their game. This is what makes a game so popular. Look at CS, what if Valve made you pay to play it online. After playing it for so long, i prolly would pay for it, but look at the regular newbie. He/she will get his/her ass kicked over and over again. They would consider it a waste of money. I personally wouldnt have payed to play CS when i started. Its all about the fees. Just look at todays vote, most of the visitors to this site voted not to pay for games online.

The reason CS is addictive is larger due to the randomness. Every now and then you get a bunch of kills in a round which'll give you a rush, then you keep trying to get that rush again.

It's like alot of puzzle games, easy to play, difficult to master.

Well I think the real definition of "replayability" is that the game is different every time. And the more different it is, the more addictive that game will be. Counterstrike, like any multiplayer FPS, fits this bill, as even though you'll be playing consecutive rounds on the same map, with the same people, etc etc etc, the outcomes and the paths you take to reach them can be different enough that you might never play the same round twice. Also, I find that one of the most common reasons for me saying "Fuck this!" and finding a new server is that, for whatever reason, every round is playing just the same, which defeats all the excitement and suspense (especially if this cookie-cutter round involves you losing like mad). I also think that any truly addictive game has to be nearly bug-free, which is why I don't play CS right now :(

Another horribly addictive game, which has consumed so many of my waking hours, is Final Fantasy Tactics. FFT has an amazing plot and incredible atmosphere, but that's not what made me play through half a dozen times (50+ hours each). What FFT has is one of the greatest character systems ever made. There are 19 classes that normal characters can take on, plus half a dozen special classes unique to certain characters. Each class consists of certain innate abilities and statistic modifications, plus skills that you can learn and use on any job (class=job in FFT). You could have a party of mages (there are 6 kinds), or fighters (plenty here too), all Ninjas and Samurai, all special characters, etc etc etc. You're allowed to take 5 characters into battle, so the combinations are nearly endless. Add to that the fact that your 5 battling characters are chosen from up to 20 that you can hang on to. Let's just say that if Square made FFT2, I'd buy it and whatever system it was on without even thinking twice.

Anyway. I dunno if I had a point or whatever. I don't think being "addicted" to a game is such a horrible thing, so long as you still take time to eat, go to school/work, play with your real friends, etc.

And, GOD DAMMIT, FIX CS!!!!!

MoNsTeR

A good game = a good book.

What made me play Half-life so many times? Why is Starcraft cool? Why is Diablo II the same? What was the only thing I liked about Daikatana? It played like reading a book. You might argue that Doom had no story, but it did. Serious Sam was the same. It was loosely written, maybe like a "easy reader" for kids, but it was there.

If a game is presented and done right, metaphorically speaking "written by a master like Steven King," it sucks me in. If it's a good "book" then it deserves to be re-read.

I think one major component is the game's ability to "bring you into the world." Getting you involved takes a lot of work though. Here is my list for an FPS.

-a well thought out game idea (GOOD STORYLINE)
-an interactive/customizable world
-realistically designed levels, weapons
-realistic people (Hell, realistic everything)
-a great music score
-the ability to play the game different ways, and see different outcomes depending on what way it was played
-the game, (thus developers) not falling flat or losing their focus halfway through the game.
-new areas in the game, basically not being in the same environment 24/7.

well that's about it, for me anyway. Some of the best examples of games using these points are Half-Life and Deus Ex. Keep in mind that when I say "realistic" I mean physics and shape wise. Everything up until Xen was realistic in HL, and that served to involve you more. If you see and hear an environment around you that is similar to your own, it only serves to make the game environment more realistic--and fun.

Though Deus Ex was set in the future, Hermann was a "mech" and you were heavily modified too, the world around you was believable. It wasn't hard to see Earth and its people becoming what they were in Deus Ex. Additionally, the environments around you were incredibly well built and thought out to make them appear indistinguishable from today's. The music score was also a major part of Deus Ex. Music wasn't something I hadn't really thought about, but it made such a big difference in that game. Going to Tokyo and Paris was a huge plus, the entire game wasn't centered in New York and with UNATCO. Last but definitely not least, Deus Ex had a customizable environment. I can't tell you the number of times I wished I could blow up doors to gain entry into an area. It's not realistic when a wooden, beat up door can withstand a bunch of C4 explosive and/or a ton of weaponry. You could also pick the door locks, or open them through screwing with the keypad. What you did to your environment, and the people in it, had reprocussions (sp?) later in the game.

My opinion, anyway.

This may sound strange, but some people are addicted to winning. Many of them only feel self worth when they have won a game, showing they're "better" than others. Constantly feeding self-worth involves constant practice in the game, which turns into an addiction. This happens even with games that just aren't any fun to play-- the only thing left is who wins and who loses.

But this explains counterstrike cheats an awful lot. Cheaters need to win to feel good about themselves. Or rather, they need to make sure other people lose to feel good about themselves. It's an addiction of the ego.

-Ted

to me there is only one reason to personaly get addicted to a game, thats if i can play it with friends or not. For example, i play Asheron's Call, An online game much like everquest, but the thing is i didnt like it very much, but like 3 or 4 ppl i know started playing it, and wham, i got into, my other friends got into it and chain reaction. i never liked the game too much, but the fact that all of my friends played it made it a much more fun game.

Another thing about Starcraft that has made the game huge are low system requirements and virtually no game killing imbalances or bugs.

note: this is only an opinion. thankyouhaveaniceday

i belive diablo 2 is a "my dick is better than yours" contest. have you ever heard anyone mention diablo 2 with mentioning what level their character is? or spouting off about what kind of superpower magic ass busting armor they have? the game is a boxed bragging right.

they made this static world, that just goes out of its way to interact with you, threw a bunch of shit and then a few valuables here and there, and called it a game. it's not addictive... you're only playing it because that little evil man in the back of your head is saying "your geekass friends will envy you... envy you.... envy you..."

/end rant

2D games are more addictive than 3D games. Starcraft and UO prove this.

Someone take Post 200 already?

Games are successful and addictive the same way casino gambling games are minus the money. Although anyone who's ever been addicted to gambling can tell you it because less and less about the money and more about the game itself. Winning and losing.

Any game that relies on time spent playing over skill is BS I have spoke to more than one person who has had level 50 or better EQ characters and they have said "It's not worth it" More work than fun. I have a level 60 on AC and I can pretty much support this, although my minions did alot of leveling for me so it wasnt quite as tough. Still... I did have to do alot of leveling just to increase skill points which did not seem to boost my characters skill until I had spent weeks tediously killing the same creature {tuskers} over and over. What a snore. Ahh well, live and learn.

multiplayer is key. I have never played the same game twice via multiplayer. Every time I play CS something is different. The skills, the players, the maps, they can all change to keep you interested in the game.

Look at life. The only guarantees are that you are born and you die. In between is made up of events, people, etc. It is whatever you make of it. Multiplayer games are just like this. The game is whatever you make of it. "Choose your own adventure!"

Simple Answer:
It's the drive to be the best baby.]b
Making up for failures in other areas of life by being the perfect warrior on the battlefield. Pulling that steaming sword of your enemies flesh screaming, "I'm the best motherfuckers! And even when you were fully armed you couldnt touch me!"

Layers of complexity can make a game incredibly addictive. A game where you can do ALRIGHT if you just play in a simple manner, but a game that allows you to learn shit and strategize to become better...or a passive layer of realness that adds greatly to immersion (like all the side-crap in Deus Ex that you didn't HAVE to do, but made you feel like you were really part of something...or the ghosts and other startling shit in System Shock 2 which just made you forget it was a game).

Addiction = Final Fantasy Tactics Online

no game is addictive per se. take startcraft: almost the entire population of korea is addicted to it, but not so elsewhere. the game is clearly not the only factor.

I remember reading an article quite a while ago about Counter Strike and that it's recipe for success was that it gave gamers incredible highs and lows. Like going 0-15 one game and then all of a sudden going into a room and taking out five people. That's what keeps playing addicted. As for Diablo 2, I played that repetitive peice of shit for about a week and felt bad about not waiting for the price to go down from the $50 I bought it at.

super metroid

i was enslaved to this game for an entire week. everything is balanced just right... the sunken ship and mardia are the two most immersive "levels" i've ever played in a video game... and the abilities you learn as you go along (space jump, super bombs, etc) allow you to reach more and more new areas.

the setting... the world feels so "alone." as if you're the last thing standing between the galaxy and the space pirates. you're on their home turf, and the music takes advantage of that... slow... creepy...

and the story... it never said a word, did it all ingame... and was incredible. i won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't played it, but damn... fucking incredible.

replayability... the faster you beat it, the more of her space suit that samus takes off after the credits. a winnar if i ever heard one. ^_^

(and you can save that ostrich thing and her babies on the way out when the planet's exploding... hidden endings = cool)

QuakeWorld was the cash for several reasons. I think many shackers would agree with me when i say the biggest reason was that it rewarded GUTS. By not showing # of deaths in the scoreboard, ppl didnt give a shit about dying, which meant NO_CAMPING. How many campers did you see in 2fort4? They got 0wned with d33z pipe bombs if they were camping, and didnt do it again. I dont see any game today that gives the sheer adrenaline burst that quakeworld gave me. Must.. kill... only 20 mins to rack up 100 kills....

That was gaming. I would get up after 2 hours and almost fall to the floor i'd be so dizzy from non stop sounds of HWGuys, detpacks, and snipers, and today, the most excitement i get is pointing out that 4 headshots in a row with the AK 47 probably is a bunch of bulls@)t.

Quake14eva
-nick

I still have quake1 full version with tf if anyone wants to play with me icq 1058210 :)

i think Zelda on Nintendo 64 and Metroid were the most addictive games ever.