|
Strangeo Forum |
 |
| Other Alife Game Communities | |
| 
KC11
    

|
2/28/2011 | |
So, I'm wondering-have you guys noticed a difference in how people treat other "alife" games compared to Creatures?
My example comes from the game Creature Breeder, a cute little online game where you can raise and breed little bird or monkey or bear things. The people tend to treat it like a dog show, they even have subbreeds which they can take at least three months working on.
However, I remember the subject of abuse in the game coming up-namely, underfeeding creatures, usually due to other things happening in one's life. Apparently, there are problems with people upset about these "abusers". The community treats them as a crazy fringe group.
Compare this to the backlash from the days of AntiNorn. It wasn't just a fringe group, according to the wiki the whole community back then hated his actions and regarded him with scorn.
Also, just take a step into the Sims fanbases and you don't see people cooing over the sims themselves-rather, you see them hawking third party edits.
You?
Do not upset the ugly worm, lest it be a dragon in disguise. (>oo)>
|
 Prodigal Sock
Ghosthande
    

|
3/2/2011 | |
Nowadays they are just crazy fringe groups. Are people getting desensitized to virtual pets, or do they just have a better understanding of the subject?
The Sims was always marketed as a 'virtual dollhouse', not even a pet game, so naturally there's going to be a different mentality there. You don't see people complaining about shaving Barbie and her friends' heads and locking them naked en masse in the toy box, after all. 
I used to see a ton of stuff against abusing Petz, back in 1999 or so. There was this huge online campaign and lots of harassment going around.
I do still see a lot of that sort of attitude for Chao, although a lot of the people who play with Chao are kids. I still find it funny to see the outraged reactions of some people when they hear of Chao abuse. You know how many Chao forums actually ban any discussion of Chao abuse? It is still that bad. XD
I think the major difference between 'abusers' in other communities is the fact that, children aside, most people have the sense that virtual pets aren't real animals, just characters in a game. If someone hurts one, or kills one, there's not much difference from hurting/killing a character in a first-person shooter; either way, it's still just a game. Creatures was marketed from the beginning as REAL life, with the digital brain and all that. Even if it's not technically life (and I don't believe it is), their complexity still earns them more respect than your average preprogrammed pet.
 |
 Patient Pirate
ylukyun
     Manager
|
3/2/2011 | |
My only other example is neopets. There are some people that are virulently opposed to pet trading, for example, and they're not really regarded as a crazy fringe group. I find it funny because neopets are nothing like norns (i.e. there is no debate that they are actual organisms) and yet the CC is much less moralistic.
RE: The Sims and modding, there is only so much you can do with the actual Sim itself, I guess - it's more like a humanoid tamagotchi than a norn. Although that has been expanded in TS3 with all the goals and opportunities, something that seems to have been quite unpopular. |

KC11
    

|
3/2/2011 | |
...NEOPETS?
They don't even move, they're like, just little posed pictures that you play games with D:
Do not upset the ugly worm, lest it be a dragon in disguise. (>oo)>
|

Officer-1BDI
   

|
3/3/2011 | |
I think the issue with Neopets is (and I could be way off-base on this, as I was one of the users who traded several of my pets back when I played) that group A is angry with group T, the willing traders, because A believes it collectively values its pets as (virtual) pets while T collectively values its pets as "trophies" and status symbols. Regardless, I never saw the point in all the rage: unless someone's begging you nonstop to trade/give your pet to them, why get up in arms about people who trade? It shouldn't be your concern.
Interestingly enough, trading doesn't seem to be nearly such a controversial topic on the pet site I currently play on, Subeta, but that may be because pets aren't the only focus of that site (and also because it's much easier to obtain a given pet on that site than on Neo, so the "status symbols" point is almost a nonissue).
You have to be honest with yourself when you are writing. If that leads to somewhere unexpected then perhaps you really needed to go there.
-- Jim Adkins |
 Prodigal Sock
Ghosthande
    

|
3/3/2011 | |
Right. Basic needs aside, Sims are pretty much just animated dolls. They can act on their own but the point of the game is to "play" them, ie. make them cook and clean and perform typical everyday actions, dress them, rearrange their little houses, etc., like you would do with a real doll.
That's why there was so much frustration from some players about the goals and aspirations--it's a little like having another kid standing over your shoulder, telling you how to play with your toys. Sometimes it can be fun to collaborate to come up with ideas, but other times you just want them to shut up so you can play the way you want to. 
 |

Wiimeiser
   
|
3/3/2011 | |
Chao aren't as abusable. You can still kill them (and apparently it's the only way to kill Chaos Chao) but apart from that it's just six happiness bars, one for each character. (it's a bit more than that but I'm not going to go into detail)
Hashikin ko Tyni Kong Taria Haju'Rumia'an Klodz'Proddi. Terdish oxen saur yessi atai Kongo Dolpik! |
 Prodigal Sock
Ghosthande
    

|
3/3/2011 | |
In most games they are, but in SA2 abuse-related behaviors are pretty diverse. From squirming when picked up, crying, cowering, screaming and running, throwing tantrums, trying to attack you, bullying other chao, etc., etc. The amount of attention the programmers paid to that aspect of Chao "care" was pretty high. Kind of funny when you think about it.
 |
|