Thoughts on the MTS beta, and how rewards shape player behavior

[SphinxofBlackQuartz]

This post is prompted by discussion in this thread, but I decided to spin off a new thread since it's a tangent to a tangent.

First and foremost, thank you, Egosoft, for your hard work, dedication, and creativity on X4. It's a phenomenal achievement, and it has brought a lot of pleasure to a lot of people — and, not least, to me personally.

I've been enjoying the MTS beta, but based on discussion in the forums, I'm beginning to think the whole idea of competitive season rewards might be a misstep. A lot of folks seem to feel compelled to spend more time and energy than they want, or to play the game in ways they don't enjoy, due to FOMO (fear of missing out). To address this, I suggest perhaps season rewards should have a very broad and flat reward curve.

For example, and I'm just pitching ideas off the top of my head:

• Everybody who participates gets the most significant reward (say, a new spaceship and 10 copies of an nice skin).
• Consistent participation also gets you 10 copies of a second skin and two more copies of the same ship.
• The top 30% performers get maybe 5 copies of a super-deluxe skin. Nothing unique in this tier that isn't strictly cosmetic.

With a flattened reward curve, there's far less incentive to grind arduously, or even to attempt to keep up with those who grind arduously. You'll get most or all of the Cool Stuff just for engaging consistently with the MTS content.

Even then, I understand some folks will still spend a lot of time and energy on MTS, to the exclusion of other activities, and will want to be recognized for it. I suggest the way to address that is to improve the drops from missions and visiting vessels. Give 'em a chance of dropping skins or mods, mats for crafting elite gear, whatever. That way, if you really need to feel rewarded over more casual players, you can grind MTS missions and drop-ins to your heart's content, and get rewards on the spot.

Ultimately, I'm not really invested in the competitive element of MTS; X4 isn't really my go-to game for competitive experiences. What I've enjoyed most is seeing other players in my game — both allies and adversaries — plus a sense of playing with my friends and participating in a larger coalition. (And, of course, quick skill training has been nice too.) What I'd really love are better tools for connecting with other players — such as being able to ship hull parts to my friend as they build their first station, or even just see my friends tooling around "my" universe now and then.

If you made it this far, thank you for reading. I look forward to seeing where multiplayer team seasons take us next.

[Valkerion]

I am not sure if the devs even intended to create this "fear of missing out" atmosphere honestly, and may have just not known what they were even going to give us as rewards for each phase (and at the total conclusion if something special still awaits). Just having the rewards clear at the start would have given all players a much more relaxed mindset, for whether they want to achieve goals or not.

I have attached the ranked rewards preview for the weekly missions of DEATH STRANDING, as an example. There you see in advance what rewards you will get, so you know exactly what you want to try to achieve, and you can see your current ranking at all times compared to others. This may not be easily added to X4 but some aspect of it could, at the very least seeing what rewards are available to different ranks (leader, top 5, everyone else) etc.

I was happy to try the MTS beta for OP1 and even OP2 as it fell off in my team, and then when OP3 launched I was alone from start to finish, and grinded to the very final reward tiers alone. That was not enjoyable at all, and hardly worth the hundreds of hours of effort, running macros on my pc, and being unable to really do anything else while my game had to get clicked on every ten minutes constantly. In OP4 I only really did this when I am at work or asleep, as I just didn't care to do that for another two weeks. My arguments in multiple threads have all been about the balance of the missions allowing players to min-max in this way, will see at least some players try to do so (especially when the goal is unknown).

Having a known goal : You know where you stand and don't get hit so hard by FOMO making min-maxers feel the need to spend all their time clicking buttons.
Having a FINITE goal : Whether you min-max or not, you can get to the finish line either earlier for hardcore players, or later for casual players, and everyone expends the same effort, not wasting hundreds or thousands of player's time.
Removing brane fuel : You would not have to balance missions for two different sets of time, rewarding (but also punishing min-maxers)
Making all missions 10x as long for 10x reward : Would vastly alleviate the current need to babysit clicking the game, saving over your game, and preventing players from doing anything else.

There are so many ways that we could remove the need to click buttons constantly if just one of the above was implemented for the future!

[SphinxofBlackQuartz]

I am not sure if the devs even intended to create this "fear of missing out" atmosphere honestly, and may have just not known what they were even going to give us as rewards for each phase (and at the total conclusion if something special still awaits). Just having the rewards clear at the start would have given all players a much more relaxed mindset, for whether they want to achieve goals or not.

I am quite certain the devs did not intend to create FOMO. FOMO is generally a design choice for online games with cash shops, whereas Egosoft isn't trying to sell us anything other than the next expansion. Trying to keep as many players as possible glued to their seats doesn't really serve their business model.

I'm frankly a bit surprised so many people are clearly feeling FOMO in this situation. As for me, I'd like to have a Yasur Mk 3 or Shark Regal or Tempest Fleet Issue or whatever the highest-tier reward is, but I plan to lose absolutely zero sleep over it. And just to be clear, I'm not criticizing people who do feel FOMO — it's an anxiety rooted deep in the way humans think and process, so rather than telling people "Chill out, it's just a game!" (which is unhelpful at best and damned condescending at worst) I think it makes more sense to change the rewards to shape behavior and reduce FOMO. Thus, this thread.

I have attached the ranked rewards preview for the weekly missions of DEATH STRANDING, as an example. There you see in advance what rewards you will get, so you know exactly what you want to try to achieve, and you can see your current ranking at all times compared to others. This may not be easily added to X4 but some aspect of it could, at the very least seeing what rewards are available to different ranks (leader, top 5, everyone else) etc.

More clarity on who gets what, and what bar one must clear, isn't a bad idea — though of course for a beta I imagine that's still very much in flux. That said, tiers of rewards for only the top 1% or top 10% still strike me as a bad idea, because we'll still have people who will grind away at the most mathematically optimal way to play — whether it's rewarding or not. A broader, flatter reward curve means one can answer the question "Have I done enough grinding?" in the affirmative much sooner.

I was happy to try the MTS beta for OP1 and even OP2 as it fell off in my team, and then when OP3 launched I was alone from start to finish, and grinded to the very final reward tiers alone. That was not enjoyable at all, and hardly worth the hundreds of hours of effort, running macros on my pc, and being unable to really do anything else while my game had to get clicked on every ten minutes constantly. In OP4 I only really did this when I am at work or asleep, as I just didn't care to do that for another two weeks. My arguments in multiple threads have all been about the balance of the missions allowing players to min-max in this way, will see at least some players try to do so (especially when the goal is unknown).

Having a known goal : You know where you stand and don't get hit so hard by FOMO making min-maxers feel the need to spend all their time clicking buttons.
Having a FINITE goal : Whether you min-max or not, you can get to the finish line either earlier for hardcore players, or later for casual players, and everyone expends the same effort, not wasting hundreds or thousands of player's time.
Removing brane fuel : You would not have to balance missions for two different sets of time, rewarding (but also punishing min-maxers)
Making all missions 10x as long for 10x reward : Would vastly alleviate the current need to babysit clicking the game, saving over your game, and preventing players from doing anything else.

There are so many ways that we could remove the need to click buttons constantly if just one of the above was implemented for the future!

Known and finite goals I definitely agree with. I'm not so sure about the other two items. Removing brane fuel would have deeper gameplay implications, particularly for more casual players; I tend to harvest it during inactive periods, e.g. while I'm sleeping or working, so I can complete more missions while I'm actually playing. Longer missions, even if they provide greater rewards, might be effectively gated off from casual players with limited playtime.

Thank you for your feedback. Definitely some points to consider in there.

[Valkerion]

More clarity on who gets what, and what bar one must clear, isn't a bad idea — though of course for a beta I imagine that's still very much in flux. That said, tiers of rewards for only the top 1% or top 10% still strike me as a bad idea, because we'll still have people who will grind away at the most mathematically optimal way to play — whether it's rewarding or not. A broader, flatter reward curve means one can answer the question "Have I done enough grinding?" in the affirmative much sooner.

As one addendum to this, I don't mean to say we need the same reward scales at all, just showing how there you can see what tiers there are and exactly what rewards you get in each tier. Compounded on that, if I were to make an attempt on that ranked mission, I would see exactly where my current score lies in what tier. An idea of how we could be shown the tiers of rewards, could work the same way if the reward scale is only for a few tiers. And considering team leader/coalition rewards differences, so far we have only gotten team ranked rewards where we were competing against our own teams, would have been VERY simple to implement that one, where right now we can't see anything about how we compare to our teammates, only the order of who has the most points. No way to see how many points our teammates have.

[Panos]

how rewards shape player behavior

Are we dogs that need to "shape" our behaviour with treats/rewards?

[SphinxofBlackQuartz]

Are we dogs that need to "shape" our behaviour with treats/rewards?

No, of course not. But rewards and win conditions do shape how people play games. Even the ways a game communicates events to the players — such as music stings and obits — affect how players engage. And if an activity is un-fun, or even actively miserable, but provides a highly-desired reward, some players will do it anyway. They'll just hate every minute of it. (Anybody else remember the original sov system for EVE Online? Shudder.)

This thread was prompted by a number of players who felt the existing mechanics and rewards of MTS not only rewarded — or even mandated — actively un-fun play, but reduced the players' ability to engage with the more fun aspects of the X4 we know and love. I'm merely thinking out loud about possible ways to address that.

[LennStar]

how rewards shape player behavior

Are we dogs that need to "shape" our behaviour with treats/rewards?

No, because we are humans and our brain does that for us.

btw. you get what you measure. In the X4 solo every measure of success is strictly in your head. In MTS it's out there, it's unknown rewards and there is a gambling component with the success rates. Intentionally or not, it presses the buttons.

[Starlight_Corporation]

Got to say, for far the Venture mission aspect let me down more & more with every new operation. less longer missions, more short term ones, harder & harder to get brane charts to boost mission success. Killed dozens of venture ships last two days: zero brane charts. This operation just seems extremely stingy with them.
Operation is almost over & seems I won't get this operation skin after I failing a 53% success chance operation 6 times in a row (Secure our Advance -> can't get brane charts to up it & operation is almost over, so hoped I could get one success chance to up the Strategic advance % & then try the missions for the skins. Nope, no such luck.
Looks like I have to simply go for the skin missions at 30% & 20% success chance & hope for the best.

I'm sure it isn't by purpose, but it just so encapsulates so many terrible things from online gaming, without the good aspects. You put in alot of effort? Sorry **** you, your team didn't contribute/you didn't get lucky enough. Which translates easy in 'you didn't pay enough', should have bought the GOG version & others to get more venture docks then if you wanted to get it.
Does seem easy to monetize tho (sell brane fuel, sell Brane charts, etc), which is likely the purpose, bigger game companies have fallen for easy money.

Mind you there's good aspects in it too, but weirdly they diminished it too, hence I'm really not optimistic. Loved seeing the visiting ships from others, but became less & less & more & more Yasurs. Which are a pain to fight for me. Might be easy for folks wo enjoy combat, but I'm more a trader/build person & tend to leave the fighting to my NPC's flying combat ships.
The chat stuff is also fun, just a shame it is so limited. Only your own team. Who not your entire coalition, so you can know folks ingame & have a chat?
Yet, ventures just reinfoced my feels about multiplayer focus for the X series: don't, it ruins singleplayer & turns into a cashgrab (see Age of Empires Online & Settlers Online)

[Bawlislaf]

I'm sure it isn't by purpose, but it just so encapsulates so many terrible things from online gaming, without the good aspects. You put in alot of effort? Sorry **** you, your team didn't contribute/you didn't get lucky enough. Which translates easy in 'you didn't pay enough', should have bought the GOG version & others to get more venture docks then if you wanted to get it.
Does seem easy to monetize tho (sell brane fuel, sell Brane charts, etc), which is likely the purpose, bigger game companies have fallen for easy money.

While i agree with your assessment, i can't see Egosoft burn their decades worth of goodwill for an honestly inefficient cashgrab.
The series is too niche to monetise as a live game service in the first place and tacking on a half-baked browser game won't change that.
Anyway, i simply refuse to believe the current opportunities for p2w have been intentional.

But these concerns certainly highlight how outright incompatible with a competitive mode the X-series is.
Once again, i can only see multiplayer work on a small scale between likeminded individuals.

[Valkerion]

I'm sure it isn't by purpose, but it just so encapsulates so many terrible things from online gaming, without the good aspects. You put in alot of effort? Sorry **** you, your team didn't contribute/you didn't get lucky enough. Which translates easy in 'you didn't pay enough', should have bought the GOG version & others to get more venture docks then if you wanted to get it.
Does seem easy to monetize tho (sell brane fuel, sell Brane charts, etc), which is likely the purpose, bigger game companies have fallen for easy money.

While i agree with your assessment, i can't see Egosoft burn their decades worth of goodwill for an honestly inefficient cashgrab.
The series is too niche to monetise as a live game service in the first place and tacking on a half-baked browser game won't change that.
Anyway, i simply refuse to believe the current opportunities for p2w have been intentional.

But these concerns certainly highlight how outright incompatible with a competitive mode the X-series is.
Once again, i can only see multiplayer work on a small scale between likeminded individuals.

Whole thing would be vastly more interesting if we were all on one team fighting a xenon incursion or something, that was a real threat to our game with constant attacks and big threats. Not just some tiny side game for a standard save. Honestly, going big like that with a new mode for the game would be way more fun than what we have, clicker simulator fighting against our fellow players for points on scoreboard. We can only hope, otherwise I can only salute everyone who dumped hundreds, thousands of hours into MTS as I definitely go back to playing modded in the future. (My playtime from 300hrs X4 to 1500 from running MTS for two months, sheesh).

Way too much clicking menus for some paint jobs, the balance of time investment for the most minute of rewards I can't wrap my head around what the dev team was doing here.