Opinions are divided on how ‘social’ social networking is. This Twitter-based spy game presents an opportunity to look at why.
The social value of Facebook or Twitter can be outweighed by reputation games, where people do things just to be seen. Watching and being watched can be addictive. Despite assumptions that people play MMOs (massively multiplayer online games) like Spymaster for the social experience of gaming with others, research suggests a more solitary experience enriched by the presence of, if not the meaningful interaction with, other players.
Researcher Nick Yee identified this as an “alone together” experience, meaning we’re playing in the same space, but we’re not really playing with each other. What is the draw of playing “alone together”?
In studying MMOs, Yee observed that "players have important roles beyond providing direct support and camaraderie in the context of quest groups: they also provide an audience, a sense of social presence, and a spectacle.” He said this trio of factors “can help explain the appeal of being ‘alone together’ in multiplayer games.”
Social networking is motivated by these three factors, making it somewhat of a natural fit for MMOs. Players can engage with a game that caters to their online behavior, and game designers can access a conveniently networked mass of potential players. Spymaster quickly reached a broad audience by using the Twitter API to support game play. (Its automated tweets also ended up annoying plenty of non-players, but I’ll get to that later.)
After a week and a half of playing, I reached level 21. Simple tasks like forging passports and bribing a mob boss evolved as I leveled up. My modest spy ring of 130 included 24 spymasters, meaning that of the 130 people following me on Twitter, 24 are also playing the game.
The clever spy theme aside, I wouldn’t play Spymaster this persistently if the other players weren’t real people. Game play consists of one-button actions around simple strategies. There isn’t much incentive to keep playing, aside from the occasional assassination attempt on my spy ring. That’s when I get to assess the damage by reviewing the attacker’s stats; spy ring size, level, attack sum, etc. Reputation motivates me to play, as I watch others and they watch me.
I do the same thing on Twitter. It’s hard not to size someone up based on their (ratio of) followers or their retweets. Yee’s assessment of why people are drawn to “alone together” experiences holds up even when applied to Twitter’s more practical potential for conversation and exchanging information. Twitter offers “…an audience, a sense of social presence, and a spectacle.”
If similar phenomena are driving participation in both Spymaster and Twitter, why was there such a backlash when Spymaster activity spread across Twitter?
Some find the tweets annoying because they are automated. I would argue that even if Spymaster tweets where written by people playing the game, non-players would still be irritated. Real life and in-game roles may both be motivated by ‘alone together’ principles, but the standards for assessing and gaining reputation in each role are dramatically different. When played out in the same space, they create noise.
What’s the solution? Segregation. Spymaster rages on, even though most non-players no longer receive tweets from the game. Tweeting activity adds a bonus to game play but is not essential to it. (I’ve turned that feature off.) Hardcore players are using Twitter accounts dedicated to Spymaster, an option not readily available for Facebook-based MMOs. Many spy rings now boast tens of thousands of members. The largest is over one million.
Meaningful connections over social networking sites, especially with brands, are incredibly difficult to achieve. Since social networking is influenced by “alone together” principles, successful social networking should take into consideration the three main incentives identified by Yee: audience, social presence, and spectacle. It’s worthwhile to establish or learn what the rules are for the particular reputation system you want to play, connect or perform in. Playing smartly to varying incentives can yield different results. The noise Spymaster produced left a bitter taste in the mouths of those who had no interest in playing, but creating a lot of noise effectively recruited a large player base.
