| For an online world, undesirable behavior is behavior that damages or inhibits the proper functioning of the technical infrastructure, the game balance, or the social fabric. The following sections contain some examples of undesirable behavior, but they are by no means complete (human inventiveness will always outstrip attempts to classify it). Attacks Against Technical Infrastructure There are at least three types of attacks against technical infrastructure: -
Denial of service ” This could include crashing or locking up the servers, tying up the network bandwidth, corrupting the account database, or any other method of making the game unplayable for other players. -
Unauthorized access ” This could include access to internal parts of the system, or it could mean that the abuser is able to enjoy unpaid-for services. The most common type of unauthorized access is the use of another player's account by obtaining that login and password (typically via email scam). -
Disclosure of private or sensitive information ” This could include disclosure of credit card numbers , passwords, and other personal user data, or secure system data such as encryption keys and digital certificates. Disruption of Game Balance Game balance can be disrupted in a couple of ways: -
Exploitation of design loopholes or bugs ” In an ideal world, the gameplay would be perfectly balanced, and no player could gain an unfair advantage over any other or be able to advance their goals more rapidly than the designer of the system had intended. However, in complex systems like these, it is often the case that the design overlooks some subtle interaction between features of the environment. Players will inevitably find these loopholes and exploit them. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that players have a strong incentive not to report the loopholes when they are discovered . This is part of the paradox of challenge ”we like challenge, but we also want it to go away (by overcoming it). As game designers, it is our goal to create challenges, to "disempower people in interesting ways." It is the goal of players to re- empower themselves , perhaps in ways that we designers did not anticipate. (Part of the joy of building these systems is seeing the clever and unanticipated strategies that players come up with.) Thus, although players and designers are set in opposition , at a higher level, we are all on the same team, and the behavior of both sides should reflect this. But it is sometimes hard for players to keep this in mind. -
Denial of access to game resources ” Many coveted game items (for example, special ingredients ) can only be obtained at certain places or at certain times. Part of the "puzzle" of the game is figuring out where an item is available or completing a difficult journey to where the item is located. However, players who are powerful or adept at gameplay may monopolize the resource ”not necessarily out of a desire to deny access to other players but out of a need to advance their own character's goals. An example is the phenomena of "farming" seen in EverQuest ( EQ ) . High-level players will enter a low-level dungeon , seeking some rare item that is obtained by killing and looting a particular type of monster. Often the item will only "drop" a small fraction of the time, so many monsters of a particular type need to be killed in order to obtain the item. When the high-level players enter the scene, however, they quickly dispatch all of the monsters in the region, leaving none for the lower level players who are also trying to obtain the same item. In addition, the high-level players may decide to "camp" the area, rapidly harvesting each new monster as it spawns. The result is an effective denial of the resource to any but the most powerful players. Disruption of the Social Fabric Disruption of the social fabric can be seen in several forms: -
Harassment ” Harassment is a broad class of behavior, typically involving repeatedly directing unwanted attention, via speech or action, toward another player, despite clear signals from the other player that such attention is unacceptable. The line between what is harassment and what is legitimate gameplay is fuzzy, especially in an environment in which players are competing directly against one another. -
Spamming ” Online games benefit from having a wealth of communication options, but many kinds of communication are unwanted. In particular, flooding a communication channel with unwanted messages negates the benefit of that channel and makes it harder for users to receive "legitimate" messages. -
Begging ” One very popular form of annoyance is begging ”asking random passersby for gifts of money, items, and so on. Just as in the real world, beggars often take steps to ensure that they appear much worse off than they actually are, even going so far as to create a brand-new character (which then gives the received items to their primary character). It should be noted, however, that while begging is annoying and undesirable, it is not technically speaking an abuse. Begging can be appropriate in some situations, although it should always be discouraged. -
Frauds and scams ” Various kinds of scams, particularly involving an exchange of material goods, are quite popular in game environments. Players may attempt to misrepresent the capabilities of an item, its rarity, or its monetary value. Players may attempt to substitute one item for another, in a classic "bait and switch" tactic. While most games provide for a two-phase commit transaction system for the exchange of goods, in which both players must agree before the exchange can take place, many kinds of exchanges (such as "heal me and I'll pay you 100 gold") are not directly fungible and cannot be handled within the scope of a single transaction. -
Identity scams ” A particular type of scam is the attempt to pose as another player, especially if that player is well known and has a positive reputation. The perpetrator of the scam can then use the illicitly acquired reputation to gain advantages or favors from other players. Often the true character's reputation will suffer as a result of these actions. Often this is done via ambiguities in the text font used for the display of character names ”for example, in EQ , which uses a Helvetica-like font for the chat transcript, the number one, the lowercase "l," and the uppercase "I" all look identical. -
Slander and libel ” There are a number of reasons why a player might want to damage the reputation of another. The player may be angry at some real or imagined slight ; the player may have been done real harm; the player might be enjoying the thrill of a practical joke; or the player might simply be engaged in a primate dominance game of some sort , stroking his own ego by undermining others. A popular pastime among adolescent males (who are often insecure about their own developing sexuality) is to advertise, "So-and-so is gay!" -
False charges of abuse ” One of the more difficult types of abuse to deal with is misuse of the system for reporting abuse. This is a special kind of libel, in which one player attempts to file a false charge of abuse or unacceptable behavior against another. This is a type of abuse in which automated collection of corroborating evidence can be helpful. -
Inappropriate language ” In order to gain the widest possible customer base, we need to ensure that the "norm" of social behavior is one that would be approved of by the larger culture outside. Parents are unlikely to let their children play on a system that is reputed to teach them habits of which they disapprove. Unfortunately, online worlds allow a limited form of escape from those very parents, and may be perceived by those same children as a way of avoiding the parental restrictions. -
Inflammatory language, especially racial or cultural slurs ” In a similar vein, there are certain topics or utterances that can trigger the feeling of a hostile environment. Many people have "hot buttons ," that is, highly charged issues that habitually invoke strong feelings, especially feelings of anger. Others will not be able to enjoy the online experience in an environment in which they do not feel "safe." (It is unfortunate that a "least common denominator" approach to discourse of this type must be enforced ”that is, limiting the discussion to language and topics that would be acceptable to nearly everyone. In particular, the intersection of the community standards of, say, San Francisco, California, and Charlotte, North Carolina is smaller than you might think.) Note that attacks against the technical infrastructure are, for the most part, "out of game" activities ”that is, the attack is conducted not within the game itself, but against the technical infrastructure (servers and network) that supports the game. This document is primarily concerned with "in-game" countermeasures ”that is, remedies that occur at the design level, rather than at the infrastructure level. For this reason, technical attacks and countermeasures will not be discussed further in this document. This document will also not attempt to address the issue of "out of game" email scams or other actions that are disruptive to the larger community outside of the context of the game itself. All of the behavior types listed can be divided into three categories of severity: -
Violations ” This category of behavior is always inappropriate and should always carry a negative consequence when detected . An example of this category is false charges of abuse. -
Annoyances ” This category of behavior is usually inappropriate, but done in moderation is acceptable. An example of this category is begging. These kinds of behaviors should be handled via in-game punishments or incentives, unless the behavior is extreme. -
Too much of a good thing ” There are some types of behavior that are actually positive, but if overused or used in the wrong context can be undesirable. This kind of behavior should also be handled at the design level by in-game punishments and rewards.  |
