Emergent language in games

I have always been interested in languages and language development.  In one of my high school French classes, the teacher spent an entire class discussing the phonetics of the French language and how the words and sounds originated.  That lesson hooked me on language development/etymologies.  If I had known how to make a career out of that, I probably would have.  In a way I did, but rather than focusing on human languages, I learned about computer languages.

In college, I started playing World of Warcraft.  It was the first computer game I had played in a long time (having moved away from PC games and on to console games) and I was amazed at its breadth.  One part of the game that threw me, however, was the global chat in cities.  There were hundreds of people conversing – some trying to sell items, some trying to buy items, some just being silly – and yet I could not understand anything they were saying.  It seemed as though everyone was typing in code, a code for which I had no key.

I slowly began piecing together the strange new language, asking in-game friends for help when I could not decipher what I read.  Every now and then I would stop to think about what was going on and was amazed.  Here were people from all around the world, communicating effectively by adjusting the English language as necessary to quickly express their needs.  Take, for example, a party looking for more members to go fight in a dungeon named the Deadmines.  The party still needs a warrior class player (for taking the heaviest damage) and a distant damage dealer such as a hunter to round out their group.

They could type something like this into the chat window: “Need two more players for the Deadmines – melee and distant,” but that is lengthy and ineffective at attracting the types of players they need.  Instead, what is seen in the chat window is more like this: “LF2M VC tank and DPS.”  This translates to “Looking for two more players (LF2M), Deadmines (VC – called VC because the end-boss in the dungeon is named VanCleef), melee damage dealer (tank) and distance damage dealer (DPS – stands for Damage per Second, it is the statistic that distance damage dealers focus on the most).”

Without some knowledge of the lore of the game and the mechanics of the game, this phrase is impossible to decipher.  I did not yet realize that I was growing fluent in an emergent language.  What brought my attention to this fact was an article I read about two years after starting WoW.  The article was about a school for deaf children in Nicaragua.  The teachers struggled to get anything across to the children, because they had no language with which to communicate.  Soon, however, the teachers realized the children had begun to craft their own sign language – one that was as complex as any spoken language.

As I read the article, I saw similarities between the deaf children in that school and the players of World of Warcraft.  These were people from all around the world.  Some were native English speakers and some were not, however all were able to communicate through text alone using this hybrid language that mixed English with WoW gameplay.  What the Nicaragua students showed scientists was that humans have propensity for complex language.  What WoW players were showing me was that games could be used as a flash point for developing new languages.

Part of what makes the language in a game like WoW unique is that it evolves so rapidly.  All languages evolve, but it takes long periods of time of increasingly frequent usage for new words to be added or for definitions to be updated.  However, in game languages new words or phrases spread quickly – like a viral video online – and soon become common vocabulary.  Words like pwn did not exist until someone made a typo one day.  Similarly, the language updates itself based on additions to the game as well as internet video fame.  One of the most infamous World of Warcraft videos is about a character named Leeroy Jenkins.  In-game, it quickly became an insult to call someone Leeroy or Jenkins.

I am curious about the spread of these game languages.  World of Warcraft is the only MMO I have played, but I am sure the players of this game were not the first to invent the language.  As players leave the game and start to play a new MMO, they probably take these language conventions with them.  While the basic structure of the language would probably remain mostly intact, the content must change depending on the context.  I think it would be interesting to study what (if anything) is similar cross-game and what is different and why.

Humans are social creatures and games are social spaces.  With humans’ inherent ability to develop and learn complex language, could games be utilized to facilitate cross-cultural communication in a way that would develop a global language?  I think it would be fascinating to create a game that would do just that and then study the language that emerges.  I think it would be useful not just to linguists and psychologists, but also to game developers who could use those techniques to create games that harnessed the power of the human brain and built upon this basic structure that we typically take for granted.  Also, it would just plain be DI (see below)!



Here is a link to the article I referred to above about the language developed by deaf children in Nicaragua:
http://www.damninteresting.com/the-birth-of-a-language
DI = Damn Interesting

Complex character development in video games

I have been considering the difficult nature of making a developed, deep, and emotionally compelling character within the video game space.  Almost all game characters (if not all) are defined by the interactions the players have with the game, by the game mechanics.  A character’s motivations, therefore, are simplified to flow with the limited interactions possible through a video game controller.  This simplification due to interaction constraints nearly eliminates user-influenced personality traits, values, and motivations.

The result of this game mechanic-driven story is that players can only experience the game in one pre-scripted way.  Not that this creates a bad experience, by any means!  In fact, one could say some people play video games to experience this other kind of life – so that they might be able to live vicariously through the main character in the game.  Games like the Uncharted series would fall under this category – the player does not make choices about Nathan Drake’s personality, about his desires in the game.  Rather, Drake has been equipped with very specific skills that translate well into controls, and those interactions help to define his character.

What would happen, though, if games were able to take the player’s actions into account, if the game reacted to the emerging personality that the player generates through play?  What if the player’s choices in the world, big or small, reverberated through the game space from that point forward?  Could this kind of game be possible across genres, across even platforms?  I am not sure about that, but I think the best place to start this form of character development is in an RPG.

One reason I think RPGs are the best place to start is because they are already knocking on this character development door.  Players customize their characters by selecting playing classes, races, and even looks.  Through this customization process a character is being born.  Another reason the RPG is a good jumping board for serious character development is that it is already an extended, very involved game experience.  Most experienced RPG players would not bat an eye at a game with over 50 hours of game-play involved.  In order to develop deeper characters, players will have to invest more time rather than less.  So again, the audience base is already in place for such an involved experience.

A third reason I think RPGs would be the right genre to start off with is because they already try to develop personalities in their games.  However, this typically happens through some form of multiple-choice interactive cinematic.  Games like Dragon Age give the player the option to choose how to respond to the NPCs during the cut scenes.  Depending on these player responses, the appropriate cinematic will play, which makes it seem like the NPCs are reacting to the player’s choices.

Now, while I do think RPGs are on their way to achieving real character development, I also think the approach to this character development is backwards.  Creating an RPG is based around how to tell the best story possible.  In generating the interactive process for telling a story, I think the game developers added interactive cinematics for the purpose of giving the player a more personalized experience.  The side-effect of these interactions was that characters in the game developed small personalities.  To make the choices clear and unique, the developers of the game simplify the player’s choices into very different traits – aggressive or passive, inquisitive or focused, casual or demanding.

It is through these choices that players can derive a personality for their character.  However, what would happen to the RPG experience if the developers focused more on rich character development to make a more compelling game than on mechanic-driven stories?  I think the story told through a character-development method would be enhanced exponentially – if the players were able to feel more connected to the character, the story will carry a much greater impact.

But how can the character be developed entirely by the player, without the overt guidance of those select few dialog choices?  If done, I think it would have to emerge as the player interacts with the world.  The game would have to track not just if the player completed a quest but how the player completed it.  This means that there would have to be multiple ways to complete quests.  Take, for example, a quest to retrieve some diamonds from a nearby town.  One way to get the diamonds would be to kill everyone in the town until you find the diamonds.  Another way would be to enter the town and talk to the locals, gathering information about where the diamonds are stored.

Perhaps there is even a third way to retrieve the diamonds, by sneaking through the town searching people’s homes or pick-pocketing folks on the street.  Each of these solutions is representative of different personality traits and even different values, but rather than stating these traits overtly, the game learns based on how the player interacts.  To make actions in the game feel important, they would have to carry repercussions in the game.  Once an action has been done, the game must change from that point forward in some way.  These changes do not all have to be big, story changing events, but the AI in the game must react to the player’s choices in some way, through NPC actions or perhaps even through quest distribution.

In the diamond example, the player to tears through the town killing all who stand in the way would gain a fearsome reputation.  Not only would NPCs show fear when looking at or speaking to the character, but they might even begin to offer information without having been asked, for fear of feeling the character’s wrath.  The player who chooses a more diplomatic approach would be known as a character who can be reasoned with – the character might be well-liked across the land, though some NPCs may try to take advantage of this characteristic by lying or sneaking.  Finally, the sneaky player may be known to value life enough not to kill needlessly, but not so much that killing is out of the question.  This character would likely not be trusted by many, but also would not be crossed readily by NPCs.

Essentially, one’s actions in the game result in very real consequences.  The game would evolve as the play progressed and the story would ultimately be about this character’s journey through the space.  I think this highly reactive AI should be applied to more than just quest solutions also.  Take World of Warcraft as an example.  In that particular game, players can build reputation nwith any number of factions, earning achievements along the way.  Other achievements can be unlocked through simple tasks like world exploration.

These kinds of achievements result in character titles in World of Warcraft (i.e. Meadie the Diplomat or Iceman the Explorer).  The titles show other players of the game what kind of player you are, but they have little effect on the AI of the game.  What if the game itself reacted to these achievements, though?  What if you explored an entire world map and discovered all the corners of the world and then the NPCs addressed you with reverence toward this world explorer accomplishment?  What if they gave you quests tailored to your accomplishments – for the world explorer, quests might be require more traveling through the world.

I feel that this extra kick would push RPGs even further into the realm of complex character devilment than they already are.  This development process could potentially continue indefinitely, especially in a game like World of Warcraft where there is no real end to the game.  In this case, players would have the opportunity to change their character’s personalities and motivations over time by simply changing how the player responds to the game in certain situations.

Characters who usually deal with a situation diplomatically could suddenly lose patience and kill lots of NPCs.  This sudden change would cause a stir in the game – NPCs would look differently at the character after that event.  Perhaps if that reaction was not repeated frequently, the NPCs would mostly forget about the incident.  However, the event would still affect the game, maybe by giving pause to NPCs who once thought they could easily swindle the once-pushover diplomat.  Basically any action ntaken in the game would have to affect the game.

I do not know if this kind of AI is even possible – I do know it would be a monumental feat to build it.  I also know that I, for one, would be much more invested in a game that took my actual style of play into account, rather than forcing me to simplify my reactions to dialog choice 1, 2, 3, or 4.  I think interesting things can happen when this line between what is essentially a story machine and a linear story begins to blur.  I think by approaching games from the perspective of developing deep characters rather than purely simple characters that serve the purpose of driving a story along, that line may just start to blur.

A New Perspective

Creative thinking is what defines most of the products we see on the market today - someone somewhere was thinking in new ways about how to solve a common problem.  To most of us, the brilliance of that one idea we see packaged so nicely is overwhelming.  We think to ourselves, "I would never have thought of that!" or "That guy must be a genius!"  The problem with this way of thinking is that it originates from seeing a polished final product, not the messy iterations that came before.

I recently worked on a game design exercise where I was to redesign the game of Hopscotch.  At first, the task seemed monumental.  "What's wrong with Hopscotch the way it is?" I thought to myself.  "People have been playing it for hundreds if not thousands of years.  How can something that tried and tested possibly be improved?"  I was approaching the process in a closed-minded way.  I was allowing my experience and familiarity of the game to block my creative thinking.

Instead of trying to come up with new ways to play the same game, I tried (at the recommendation of the instructor) to think of problems that my ideas for Hopscotch might try to solve.  What I found after approaching the problem in this way was that the ideas for new designs started flowing, much more easily than before I had defined the problem.  This got me wondering what would happen if I faced all the challenges in my life the same way.  How many more problems could I solve simply by changing my approach, by changing how I thought about the problem, by changing my perspective?

This phrase "change your perspective" comes up frequently in game design, and for good reason.  To design a game for a specific audience, you must think about the game from that audience's perspective.  However we don't frequently think about using this solution to our own problems because hey, my problems are centered around me and I'm the expert on me, not someone else!  Yet changing your perspective can mean more than just looking through another’s eyes.

Changing your perspective about a problem could be as simple as restating the problem in a new way.  If the front door is locked, stop walking into it.  Go around the house and try the back door.  That is assuming, of course, you’ve seen the front door.  No problem can be solved without first clearly defining the question.

As with “fixing” Hopscotch, I had to first think about the game at its core.  “What is Hopscotch?”  Often our real world problems are much more complex than a simple child’s game.  They have intricately intertwined pieces forming a seemingly insurmountable mountain of a problem.  The only way to solve these problems is by breaking them down – by separating out each of the pieces and considering them individually before recombining and looking at the larger picture.

You might find you can eliminate some of the complexity by solving one of the smaller problems within the larger set.  You might also find that new solutions present themselves by fitting the pieces back together in a new way.  Perhaps you’ll find that two individual issues you originally thought to be unrelated are actually intimately connected and can (or must) be solved together.

I think applying this thought process beyond game design might just be the key to solving some of life’s hardest problems.  Too frequently we grow too close to our problems.  We get too invested in them and we ourselves stuck looking through the foggy glasses of old thinking.  But instead of continuing to stare at the problem through these old glasses, we could adjust the lenses we are looking through – we could replace the glasses – to see the problem in a different light.  I am not suggesting that this is easy.  I am suggesting that if we can achieve it, we might just be able to find our most creative solutions where we were least expecting them.

This is going to take practice; it will require a lot of work and a lot of effort.  I am going to try thinking about everything in my life in this manner, even everyday things that I usually would not think twice about.  This lesson of game design is too important to keep stored away only for use in game design.  It is a lesson in thinking, a lesson in living, it is exercise for your brain, and it opens a world of creative thought that people once believed to be reserved for a brilliant few.  I believe if a person can master this approach to problems and balance it with good communication then he will find no task – game or otherwise – is too big to tackle.