Competitive versus Casual

I happen to follow game development quite a bit. One of my most anticipated games is a little gem called Natural Selection 2. It's based off a Half-Life 1 mod called Natural Selection and perhaps is best described as playing StarCraft in first-person inside buildings. It falls into the elusive FPS/RTS hybrid genre where players fight it out in first-person as a team, but the team progresses with technology, map control, and resource harvesting. It has a fairly strong competitive feel since it came from the same era as Counter-Strike where twitch was king, movement was fast and furious, and we had no stinkin' hide-and-heal mechanics.

As a frequenter of the forums there's been a recent surge of Competitive versus Casual argument running through many threads. It's quite the age-old argument and has played out on many other forums as well including the StarCraft2 forums, the Heroes of Newerth Forums, and so on. Basically the argument is as follows:

1. Competitive players feel that their voice should be heard and given more weight, especially for elements like game balance. Note that these tend to be a minority of the total player base, but are the ones who spend the most time exploring the intricate framework of the game to gain every advantage possible.
   
2. Casual players (or those representing them) believe all players have equal voice, especially when it comes to what is fun.

Since NS2 is trying to appease the casual players (easy to learn) AND the competitive players (hard to master), finding the balance point is extremely tricky.

Perhaps the classic clash point has to do with a mechanic called bunnyhopping. Originally a glitch in the game engine, players found that there is no limit to your speed while you are in the air. Also, since turning and strafing tended to give a little extra speed, as long as you minimize time on the ground you could reach speeds up to twice as fast as your ground walking opponents. Not to mention constantly bouncing along makes you a harder target to hit.

This mechanic became a requirement for competitive play of many games, NS1 included. Many competitive players want to keep it in because of its increase to the skill ceiling. It adds a huge amount of mobility depth and a nice learning curve. You can always get better at it, and being better equates directly to better performance.

The more casual crowd abhor it. The main reason is because it feels like a gimmick. In order to learn this trick you have to be taught it, either via research or from a friend. It's a non-intuitive way to gain a huge advantage and the jump in performance from not knowing how to execute the move to executing it was huge. It is perhaps the largest barrier in order to enter higher level play.

Most agree that if there was a way to keep the mobility and dynamic properties of bunnyhopping while removing the barrier to learning it then it would be a worthy mechanic to include. The real question left unanswered is what to use to replace it? And so a few weeks later the arguments start all over with no solution.


Coming back to my original point, who should the game developer listen to? We have an obviously binary choice, bunnyhopping is either in or out, and two camps with strong, and very valid, views.

Remember, the competitive players are small in number, but influence the game community in a huge way. Without a competitive scene, most games dry up due to lack of interest, lack of direction, and lack of publicity. They also may feel a little entitled to acknowledgment since they poured so much time into becoming a pro gamer. Plus, you want competitive players around to keep an eye on balance, to find and report exploits for you, and to help set the tone for strategies. Taking a look at perhaps the most popular strategy game ever StarCraft the fact that US players would regularly watch the Korean leagues to pick up tips, strats, and to be entertained should illustrate just how powerful a vibrant competitive scene is. In real life sports, how well do you think a game like football would do if there wasn't the college league and the NFL to get people pumped up and give role models?

However, also remember the more casual players. There are more of them and they make up the bulk of your playerbase. Having an isolated set of pro gamers only makes it difficult for new players to join in. They join a game, summarily get crushed by all the long time veterans, and summarily leave. Without fresh blood, the community eventually withers and dies. Plus, new gamers are revenue for the company. You want you game to be bought by as many players as possible. Sure some communities live on in the nether regions of the internet surviving solely on a small clump of dedicated players (see many, many examples from the MMO industry) but that should be after a long prosperous period. That shouldn't be your starting point at launch.


Personally, I'll quote myself from the forum to give my view:

Neither the "competitive" players nor the "casual" players should dictate a game like this. They both have merits as well as huge blind spots. Also, this game is not being designed for one at the exclusion of the other (unlike say Farmville).

That being said, there are many parties who should be listened to for specific things and all opinions weighed. Competitive players have a very strong sense of balance, counters, strategic development, and what it takes to keep competitive players interested. Casuals have a stronger idea of a new player's experience, which is what you need to consider when trying to engage new players to join your player base. I for one almost never listen to casual players about balance, they just don't see it the way I do or those I respect do. However, I also listen intently when they talk about the entry barriers or basic gameplay transparency because they're the ones who have trouble with it first hand.


So, in general, no one should be the sole voice for the game. No one should be prematurely excluded. However, certain parties excel at certain things and that should still be taken into account.

Aw, a shiny little compromise.

Too bad the two ends of the spectrum (or at least their vocal representatives) continued for 3 more pages after that jabbering at each other, eventually degrading into insults.