MMOs Need Opportunity Cost

The comments discussion in my post about why players are trending toward soloing in MMORPGs revealed a concept to me that I think has been neglected for far too long. It’s the idea of opportunity cost.

Opportunity Cost is the loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen. In other words, it’s the benefits you could have received by taking an alternative action.

MMOs need to present players with options and choices leading to opportunity cost, and it needs to happen regularly. This isn’t something you choose at character creation when you pick to be a Warrior over a Cleric. This isn’t something that can be so easily rescpec’d or undone. Opportunity costs aren’t the penalties or the permanent choices some people think of when veterans like myself wag our fingers and talk about death penalties. Opportunity costs are giving one thing up because you prefer something else — the key is that you gave something up.

I’ve discovered one way to do this is to create bonuses and positive gains for all play styles. Soloing should have huge rewards. Grouping should have huge rewards. Both should be incredibly enticing for players. “Should I group, or should I solo today? I just can’t decide!” That’s what I want to feel.

Developers and armchair enthusiasts like myself have often turned to the idea that you have to reward grouping to entice soloers out of that mentality. The result is that soloers feel punished for not being rewarded for playing the way they want. There’s a perception of ‘missing out’ on something despite not wanting to participate.

The perception of missing out must exist for all play styles. Groupers must miss out of something that solo players can get, and solo players must miss out on something groupers can get. There must be benefits players have to forgo in order to obtain benefits from playing the way they choose — the key here being that benefits exist for all.

Choices. It’s all about choices and how players must not be given everything or feel that there is only one way  or path to be rewarded.

  • I think you’re really onto something here. I’d certainly welcome an MMO that worked that way.

    Observation of MMOs I’ve played over the last few years, however, suggests rather strongly that any in-game option that requires players to forego any benefit, even if it means they get a different benefit as a result, is met by gigantic forum threads demanding everyone gets equal access to everything. Players – or the vocal ones at least – appear to hate the entire concept of Opportunity Cost with a passion.

    Still, a good designer gives the customer what he needs not what he wants. Do we have any MMO designers with that kind of nerve?

  • Why are you all reasonable and stuff? I’m one of those commenters who mentioned feeling like I was being punished. I like your concept in this post.

  • It might just be me, but it feels like you kind of went wishy-washy on this topic, Keen. By that I mean that in one sentence you are waxing poetic on the need for players to have to give something up so they feel a sense of accomplishment and/or dedication to their character. In the next you are talking about how grouping and soloing should both reward players a ton.

    If that is the case, doesn’t that setup mean players DON’T have to give anything up when deciding to group or solo that day (that month? that MMO?)?

  • Personally, I think the everybody can do everything and we all win approach is exactly what leads to 3 monthers.

  • The talent point system in Elder Scrolls Online kind of had an opportunity cost feel. Do I want to specialize in something or spread out talent points to open up a lot of abilities or professions but do none of them really well? Take that and apply it to more parts of a game and you could have some interesting choices to make.

    The garrison system in WoW has a similar feel with the types of buildings you choose to build. One thing it does is make me feel like (in both ESO and WoW) I should be playing on alts at least a little bit just to be more self sufficient in professions.

    It’s definitely an interesting idea and I hope to see more of it in MMO’s.

  • Without exclusivity of rewards there isn’t any significant incentive for a player to try a different option than they are already comfortable with.

    For instance if there is a game that levels on the basis of X and Y types of points (for the sake of argument it is irrelevant what “X” and “Y” points actually provide assuming they are equally desirable levelable game currencies that are still obtained regardless of play style), and when one groups they get a +20% X bonus, while soloing gives a +20% Y bonus then why would anyone bother switching styles considering they would necessarily will be missing out on the other bonus while either grouping or soloing.

    From a practical point of view, if rewards were bonuses (i.e. not exclusive) and not disproportionately high, the player will still likely play in the style they prefer and just accept they won’t get the other bonus, since in either case they still are earning both currencies.

    Keep in mind by making bonuses extremely high (eg. +300%) to strongly foster interest in another play style is functionally converting a quantitative difference into a qualitative difference, as one style of play is now vastly inferior to another for the sake of earning X or Y.

    Conversely if the currencies are exclusive to either play style then people will be forced into adopting the other play style if they want the associated benefit of leveling X or Y.

    The key term here is “forced into” and deserves consideration in any suggested win-win reward scheme as depending upon one’s play style preference it will more likely appear as a win-lose or lose-win proposition.

    …and here is really where my primary concern emerges regarding your theory as I understand it (or perhaps misunderstand it?), namely why is it so important that players be coerced playing in a style they don’t prefer?

    As a reader of your blog for quite a while now, I think it is safe to say you have a strong preference for grouping and believe so much of your favorite MMO experiences were derived from this social form play style. As such I think it is possible you believe that much like a missionary if you could just get the unbelieving soloers to experience grouping they will likely become a convert.

    I also do wonder if you actually hold a negative viewpoint of soloers, perhaps as being responsible for undermining a sense of community, which could be one factor contributing to the 3-monther phenomenon? If this is truly the case I think you need to more directly address solo play as a negative play style choice and focus on how to cure it, and not act as both styles need to be incentivized.

    If I am on the right track here then asking “Why do players choose to solo?” may be analogous to those who ask “Why do people choose to be gay?”; maybe it is just in my nature to prefer soloing and yours to prefer grouping?

    Realize that there isn’t any need to expose soloers to the perceived fun of grouping as most gamers have likely already experienced both styles of play.

    In the end we have neural hardwiring that places us somewhere on the spectrum of the grouping-soloing continuum, and trying to convert players to one side or the other may be fruitless.

    All of this brings me back to a previous contention, specifically why bother designing a game that is meant to cater to all play styles? If you want to have a grouping-centric game then make it so that soloing isn’t a viable option for gaining reward currencies. It seems that Camelot Unchained is taking this approach; want to level up on PvE tough luck, play a different game. I fully support this philosophy in vr.

    Functionally forcing soloers to group and groupers to solo may actually undermine a sense of community.

    It reminds me of back in the SWTOR forums where there was non-stop vitriolic arguments about why PvE or PvP player were getting discriminated against. My favorite was this guy who angrily complained that PvE was a more time efficient way to level and he resented being forced into leveling through the storyline, of course completely missing the irony that it was a MMORPG.

    It just goes to show that one can’t please everybody all of the time and likely shouldn’t try. 😉

  • Good topic Keen.

    And yes I also miss that in mmorpg games. Actual choices of branching paths where you can not turn back.
    The deep good single player rpg’s have such mechanics. (fallout series, mass effect series, dragon age origins etc)

    It is strange mmorpg games have so few actual deciding choices if any.

    Lets take for example WoW. Most of us have probably stopped playing it and think back on their adventure. Do they remember the 200+ epic loot items or the adventures and social interactions more?
    For me definitely the last. And if that game had lots of such deciding choices as mentioned above my experience and memories would have been a lot better.

  • Every game has some form of opportunity cost system. No matter what system is used, players will do what they want to do, regardless what they may miss as a result of their play style.

    I know players who refuse to raid under any circumstances. They did not care that their gear looked like. They chit chat about movies, sports etc…. on vent and are sitting in an area doing nothing what so ever. They have eight level 10 characters and would rather talk about anything but the game they are playing. Some would get on vent and talk away and not even be playing the game.

    So what do game makers do, they try to make games that can be enjoyed by all play styles. Failing to do any very well. Do you remember the days when players would say, please don’t help me kill pigs, your hurting my XP. So the system gets changed so everyone gets equal XP. Then equal loot. Then you get to pick your loot. Some games even tell you what groups are in your immediate area and people still won’t ask for or accept a group invite, even after being killed repeatedly. You’ll never make everyone happy no matter what approach you take.

  • Actually I don’t think soloers will like grouping if forced into it. But I do think forcing them into it makes a better game that has a chance of not being a 3 monther. It might still suck for other reasons. All of this is consistent with “listening to players is generally a bad idea”. For instance, if given the option we would all ask for instant max level and the sword of doom on day one. Bad plan.

  • Reward exclusivity is the key. Unfortunately there are way too many other options out there for todays players for this to work on any meaningful scale. They won’t stick with something even moderately challenging when they can go play a quick game of LoL and get the same satisfaction..

  • I have limited time to play these days. I no longer choose what to do in my game time based on what will give me the best reward. It is usually what will I enjoy the most. If I have enough time, I will try and group. But a lot of the time, it is just soloing. I never look at choosing one or the other means I am losing out on better rewards. I guess I just past my min/maxing days of playing.

  • @Rawblin: It’s not wishy washy, rather a different angle to my same approach. Instead of saying you should have to group or get nothing, I’m saying you can group and get something or solo and get something but you’ll have to choose which one you want because you won’t get any crossover. Taken to the extreme, what if only 2 classes out of 10 could even possibly solo. Your opportunity cost for wanting to solo is the ability to play the other 8 classes.