A blog that I enjoy following has now posted twice in the last month on the topic of the illusion of persistence in massive multiplayer games. I just have to say that I’m glad I’m not the only one who is somewhat skeptical of how genuine (satisfied by a real-time continuation) the game play experiences are of these titles that claim to be set in a persistent world or feature persistent game play.
Yet, what is persistence? Formally, persistence is defined as unceasing, the continuation thereof; the act or fact of persisting. So how does this apply to gaming? If we use the formal definition as our foundation, then persistent game play is nothing more than just an experience that continues or never ends. According to Keen, persistent game play is the opposite of what he refers to as ‘instanced persistence’ – which is an oxymoron. Essentially, if the experience is match-based, if it ends at any point and still maintains the illusion of truly feeling the consequences of your in game actions then you are not engaged in persistent game play.
After reading about some examples a number of questions come to mind: Why is the illusion in place? Is it intentional? Is the frosting real? Is it just a misunderstanding by developers? And, will the illusion itself continue to persist? I, for one, hope “no” on that last one. But as far as the others, I’m not completely sold on a solid answer. There’s no question that a slice of the Gamer Nation wants to experience true persistent game play in their genre of choice, but for for some reason we’re getting sold on these ‘attempts’ as Keen points out. Which are just misrepresentations of the actual game play desired.
It’s possible that designers are unable to strike a balance in creating an experience that is not only persistent but will reach out to both casual and hardcore gamers alike. We know the people that will sit for hours on end grinding and we know the weekend warriors. We’re all gamers, and in the eyes of the big dogs, a culture to be exacted upon. It’s not always profitable to appeal to just one side of the fence so it’s possible that they’re slowly testing the waters. Or it’s a scam. Not sure which, yet. Maybe we could ‘instance’ two worlds for a game – one for people who play >20 hours a week and one for those that play <20 hours a week. I’m totally kidding by the way.
To build upon the author’s conclusion; the only way to curb being affected by the illusion is to not only understand what it is you’re playing, but to know what it is that you like to experience in game. Naturally, this takes time and some trial and error. Which, obviously can get pricey, but if you know what it is you want and the standards that define it then you are in a more advantageous position to speak up and demand some clarification as to why you were sold on a title that did not satisfy those standards.
Thanks for reading,
– Doc
Doctor's Office 