I hate everyone equally. 

[mod edit]

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474977042395

We (speaking very much in general) even commonly use "gay" as a perjorative in the gamer community, so of course we have issues with the gay community that go well beyond GBLTIQ... into cultural issues of gender ambiguity and so on. Gender spoofing is a big issue also, and makes a lot of gamers, particularly males who never made it out of adolescence with a lot of security in their own identities, very uncomfortable.

So long as these gender issues persist in our culture, they'll be reflected in the games community, but yeah the

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/39367/Opinion_Awful_Lot_Of_Heterosexuals_Around_Here.php

is WELL worth thinking about (and I have a comment on that stream too). The industry is really tone-deaf on this issue for the most part. Good for Trion, Bioware, and so on. And, you know, even Turbine who privately enforces, apparently, but won't publish policy, which is kind of lacking in spine.

History is on the side of these folks. This is a human rights issue.

Shava Nerad

resident of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

In some cases, it's not the players who are the problem, it's the employees of the gaming company...GM's, and forum moderators in particular...who are the real instigators. When I played Eve a few years ago, their forums were so homophobically censored that even the word "gay" was banned.

I used to write a blog about Eve and I took on the issue in a long post titled "'Gay' Is NOT A Dirty Word!", which can be found here: http://justagirlandherthorax.blogspot.com/2007/08/gay-is-not-dirty-word.html

I haven't played Eve in a few years so I don't know if things have improved there since, but this is hardly the only example. In WoW there was a transgender woman named Sara Andrews who created an LGBT-friendly guild and had her account banned for it, for no other reason than she advertised that the guild was LGBT-friendly: http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/01/25/profanity-filters-homophobic-slurs-and-blizzards-shaky-relati/#continued

This, to me, is a key part of the problem. Gaming companies can be part of the solution but too many times they're not only ignoring the problem, but actually the direct cause of it in the first place. This kind of exclusion can only continue to happen when the gaming companies allow it  to happen or cause it themselves.

Think of it this way: If I, as a transsexual woman (yes, I am), go to a bar for a drink and an unruly customer verbally abuses me, it's the bartender's or the bouncer's  job to defuse the situation or throw the bum out. If, on the other hand, the person abusing me is the bartender or the bouncer, or if they tell me to shut up as I'm being verbally abused, then chances are I'm going to go find another place to drink, and I'm going to take my friends with me.

I opened this article thinking it was either going to be about elitist/griefing/asshat players excluding casuals/newbies and how that can become a vicious cycle and a first class ticket to a divisive population and/or game developers coding single player games in online environments and how that prevents players from experiencing the pleasure of creating an inclusive virtual world community through inter-dependence...boy was I wrong.

As the great man himself said "One love, one heart", is the world ready for Bob's vision yet? It wasn't back then.

There are a lot of factors that play into a "culture of exclusion" in online communities these days.  Everything from community managers that pander to a few exclusive and snarky sycophants that cleverly bash other members of the community from the safety of their keyboards --- to the widespread and growing popularity of online games to a broader age group, which leads to younger people watching their "mature" counterparts for queues on how to properly act out in an online environment shrouded in anonymous, faceless interaction.

Now more than ever, it seems to be the standard to develop an online presence in General Chat channels by trying to outwit and outbash fellow members of the same server community, or exploiting the anonymous nature of online interaction to say things to others that an individual would never in a hundred years say to another in a face-to-face, one-on-one situation.

It saddens me to see that when I attend an event like PAX in Seattle, I am surrounded by fellow gamers that find a sense of community and comraderie in each other's presence, but when you take the face-to-face interaction out of the equation, suddenly someone thinks they are the "pro" to your "nubsauce", and people generally forget good manners and mutual respect for each other.

Some game developers help cultivate this behavior in the content they implement in their games, in the way they advertise, and in the way they interact with their communities or in the way they let members of their forum communities "troll" other community members without any intervention.  This is especialy harmful when the "trolling" takes place in forums that are supposed to be geared towards a constructive purpose, such as "suggestion" forums or "feedback" forums.

While the game industry is indeed a business, it should not punish the "casual gamer" for not spending as much time logged in as a "hardcore" gamer through rigged "achievements" tailored toward people that have a lot more free time on their hands than others.  Everyone that creates their own individual character in an MMO wants to create a unique and individualized personality for their character that is an extension of themselves.  To offer cosmetic rewards  and items to only a select few "elite" players while leaving every other subscriber to the wayside is another way in which game developers have created a sort of "exclusion" model, especially when they supposedly cater to the "casual gamer" crowd. 

This is, of course, a double edged sword. 

To create "open world" content anymore is to invite "griefing", "ninja'ing", and any other form of harassment, especially when a game is relatively successful, and policing an individual server community is a near-impossible task.  In a catch-22 situation of trying to offer subscribers a hassle-free gameplay experience, it also finds itself caught in a conundrum of having to create instanced content that only allows only limited amount of players to participate without trivializing the content, or making the group size so large that organization becomes impossible.  Inclusion is almost impossible in a game that relies heavily on event-driven content of the instanced variety.  Somewhere, someone's going to be left behind, and feelings are going to be hurt.

However, catering only to the "hardcore" crowd creates another issue, especially when a game tries to blend a Player-versus-Environment (PvE) model with a Player-versus-Player (PvP) model.  Petty rivalries, elitist attitudes, faulty game mechanics, and/or game balance issues explode into another exclusionist mess altogether.  I saw one minor example of this recently in an MMO that I won't name, where someone that was very proficient in a PvP environment had worked their way up to the top ranks of PvP-reward gear.  They joined a guild with some friends that were more PvE-centric, and because of the lack of certain stats on their PvP gear, they were not allowed to join their friends in PvE raid content.  The guild leader refused to let them join in PvE raid content, but letting them join when their gear was missing crucial stats would have hampered the success of the raid.

So, what can a game developer do?  Create more options for a variety of playstyles?  Give crafters as much opportunity to craft epic rewards for themselves through long, arduous tasks as a PvE raider could obtain through a "hardcore" raid?  Eliminate the need for PvP-only stats on PvP centric gear?  Create a "spectator" mode for excess guild members that want to observe and somehow "participate" in their guild's PvE raid functions?  How could they be rewarded for such participation?  How could they participate so they don't feel left out?  Perhaps a mix of SW:TOR's story-driven cinematics and "social" participation, where each person participating and/or spectating can vote for a particular decision and gain some sort of advancement and/or reward?

Maybe the scope needs to be broader.  Perhaps there are other ways to keep subscribers entertained so that no matter what they do, and no matter how long they have to play, they can really feel like they've made some progress that leads them to fulfilling that need to individualize themselves in a MMO environment.

Let's face it.  People LOVE outwardly cosmetic changes to their character that not only individualize their characters, but also glorify them.  Look back on Ragnarok Online.  The countless variations of individual cosmetic enhancements available were badges of pride, despite the silly, cutesy, anime-style, grindy feel of the game.  The various outlandish tier armor sets of World of Warcraft, with the extreme appendages and particle effects, the LOOK was really what it was all about--- no one that raided hardcore content can deny that they LOVED strutting through a major city with a new tier piece, or legendary weapon with particle effect flames blazing overhead.  Everyone could have a flying mount, but the really cool looking flying mounts that came from rare spawns, rare boss drops, and achievements were the ones people were really after, and this is where a level of exclusion was very apparent.

If there's one way that a game can offer a remotely inclusive feel to all of its subscribers, it would be through a very broad offering of outwardly individualized cosmetic changes that are made available through a wide variety of activities.  It would require a very productive and dedicated art department, 3D modeling department, and a dedicated story development team to make it all fit together.

This is just one solution, but after years of playing various MMOs, I think it should be at least the starting foundation that everything else is built upon, because just as we all hate looking like "rodeo clowns" in mismatched gear, we all hate being left behind and excluded from being able to individualize ourselves in our chosen virtual worlds.

the amount of mod edits is amusing!

  I am trying not to mock this entire line of resoning  BUT it is so freakin' absurd, every single point made.

  "Pay it forward" ..lol... Don't bother actually playing the game..are you for real? lol..Occupy EQ2! If you are feelin' charitable do it IRL, where it matters.

"Same sex marraige"..in a game..How about Roman Catholocism and Bestiality? Or Polygamy? or hundreds of other "Humna conditions"? My droid fetish must be recognized and validated by game designers and players...NOW!

  You have to be nice and recognize (and validate) every special snowflake you find!  Just so you know I am a CAREBEAR™ and I think this is an absurd topic.

  My Dad said it best.." Not everyone is going to like you ,it is just something you are going to have to accept " so leave the crybabing at the log-in screen.

The problem is they try to make games that make everyone happy but thats impossible, so with that mindset you're unconsciously deciding to make a shallow product that wont upset too many people.

Originally posted by 77lolmac77

Laughing-Man your argument is valid, and I dont generalize things often, but if everyone was gay how would the human race repopulate? You cannot argue that being gay IS different from the normal behavior of animals. {mod edit}Personally id say my viewpoint is about the best compromise the gay community can hope for.

 

Considering how ridiculously overpopulated this world is going to be in just the next 20 years, the world could probably do with a bit more "pink."

Originally posted by gaeanprayer

Originally posted by 77lolmac77

Laughing-Man your argument is valid, and I dont generalize things often, but if everyone was gay how would the human race repopulate? You cannot argue that being gay IS different from the normal behavior of animals. {mod edit}Personally id say my viewpoint is about the best compromise the gay community can hope for.

 

Considering how ridiculously overpopulated this world is going to be in just the next 20 years, the world could probably do with a bit more "pink."

Well they are already trying to pussify the male population so maybe you'll get your wish.

The context of the OP was how this relates to GAMING.  So I'll present what I consider inclusion / exclusion issues in GAMING that have become too much of a problem in many MMOs.  Before I do that however, here are two guiding principles that get violated to too high a degree too often, thus becoming a problem:

Ability to Participate (inclusion principle)

Ability to Compete (inclusion principle)

The simplist example would be in PvP where a level 70 squashes a level 20.  The level 20's ability to even Participate, much less Compete, is completely non-existent.  Thus, you typically see Battlegrounds level bracketed to enable Participation and Competition (inclusion).

Without that kind of control large numbers of players would be excluded from game play. This is however a simpler example in a morass of a more complex disease in MMOs:

The Ouroboros Syndrome

Ouroborus is a bit of symbology from ancient Greece where it was intended to represent the cycle of life, infinity, rebirth.

Unfortunately in MMOs it manifests as a deadly disease to a game's community in that it represents a small population of players who reach the cap, or near it, who turn around and feed on the lower levels below them.  Like the dragon Ouroborus who turned around and started eating itself starting at the tail.

Dev houses need to think about this dynamic much harder, in more mature fashion, instead of blindly catering to the "stock" delusion it makes sense to enslave large portions of the playerbase to a mindless GRIND under the presumption it's reasonable to expect people to accept login time relegated to WORK (for weeks or months) because . . . . eventually you'll get to a point where you will be Included in game play!

Player Attenuation

Player Attenuation is another dynamic contributing to Inclusion or Exclusion, and the Ouroboros Syndrome.  It's not necessarily bad all by itself, because Progression is a part of game play.  Players DO need rewards for progression, better gear, bigger challenges.  Consider it then like the bacteria in your intestinal tract:  Absolutely required for life itself (when in balance), but out of whack causes major problems.

Just remember your times sitting on the pot, grunting, in severe pain, from an intestinal problem if you don't believe me.  Go ahead, close your eyes and quietly think back and remember.  There we go!  Not fun was it?

Inclusion and Exclusion in game play with others are often the result of of a game being structured exclusively around challenges and content presentation based on Environment Artifacts (E, gear and stats), and not Players (P).

Games are too often designed (to too high a degree) in a way to promote the Exclusion of players from participating with others by redirecting them to The Grind and Work, the Carrot being "if you just level up X amount, you'll finally be able to play".  Except for the fact the cap, levelling, and "end game" is a constantly moving target so the problem never ends.

Progression needs to be there, don't get me wrong.  It has it's place. However, Dev houses need to start paying MORE ATTENTION to human dynamics in game play instead of the amount of attention they do to mechanical grind mechanisms designed around a principle of EXCLUSION by virtue of spending time Working . . . in a game. 

For instance:  A zone or world event where there is a human-player engaged dynamic for either completion, or moving forward of stages.  This might involve the solving of Puzzles, the running of stones/flags, what have you.  Any level can participate.  Boss/mob challenges are structured both for high and low levels so it's not arbitrarily restricted to "level x's".

Rewards match the level of the players as well as the level of participation in the event.

In this example the construct is designed to Include everyone, PLAYERS, and is not designed around the exclusive principle of "level x required", while presenting rewards matching everyones progression level.  A level 60 can cheer on and/or support the level 10 figuring out the puzzle artifact or screen the level 20 running an objective well.  The lower levels can back off and go "Whoa!" when the Boss or Boss Minion spawns and cheer on, perhaps even support, the hot-shot higher levels who then step forward for some serious mojo.

People can bring race, gender, what have you, into any conversation.  That's life.  The trick is to pay heed to an old saying:  "Keep your eyes on the ball . . .".

Be courteous and patient with each other.  Absolutely, that's just the path to good times with people.  Unfortunately a lot of people are just full of Dumb, and none of us have the ability in a game to change that.  So, /ignore them and move on.

The Ball here for me is GAMING.  I love gaming, I'd like to see more QUALITY in Gaming start to show itself, instead of a stagnant wash of repeating, mechanical, Grinds with different skins slapped over them.

Which leads me to to closing:

AGREEING TO THE DOMAIN for Inclusion and Exclusion (in game design/mechanics anyway :)  ):

Inclusion and Exclusion in a game IMO stems from from Player Attenuation in levels/power that affects Ability to Participate, Ability to Compete . . . with others (players).

Most MMOs follow an open-ended steep climb upward in progression, thus the problem. 

Given new players, even low to almost mid-level players, are the LIFE BLOOD of any game, the criteria is present for consideration in an MMO's design model for controlling and regulating progression and power scales at "end game":

Level 1 (or, heck, say level 5 if one is just too much for some).

Specifically, as an example of the concept:

End Game gear/stats/power will equal 20x that of a Level 5.  Meaning, specifically, 15 to 20 level 5's would be able to kill a capped character . . . if they were smart, and knew how to play/pvp.  Health pools, mitigations, to hit, etc. would be calibrated in a way to NOT allow anyone to become invulnerable based on a stat number alone, but would always require player action and attention.

However you slice it, however you dice it, if a game is based on an open-ended power scale aimed straight up, the design guarantees zero mode of Participation between players, either against each other or in service to each other once attentuation separates players by (x) levels.

Should a level 5 be viable in an end-game instance? No.  But it's all in the details. :)