"Why I Love Bees" Response

1.) In your opinion, what makes games fun?
To me, what makes games fun are their challenges and story elements. When I play a video game, I usually continue playing to see where the story will go or to overcome challenges to obtain goals. I enjoy getting immersed in new worlds and involved in character development. I often chose games that are basically interactive stories, and feel a bit distant from ones that aren’t story driven. However, I somehow find myself wasting several hours rolling up objects into larger objects for ‘Katamari’. I think the reason I end up playing somewhat “mindless” games like that is because of the challenge it presents.  If I know that if I roll up an object that’s ten meters wide in less than two minutes, I “win”, it makes me want to do it, for some reason. As long as there’s a challenge to overcome, I’m interested. I think there are other things to the Katamari games that make it fun, maybe the music and whimsicalness, and variation of challenges presented. Card and board games present the same sort of small challenges, and in those cases, I feel that it’s the competition that makes them fun. They’re shorter and you can get less invested in them than video games, but there are still smaller obstacles to be overcome.

2.) Which of these things (if any) were present in the I <3 Bees ARG? If not present, what made I <3 Bees fun?
In ‘I Love Bees’, there are obvious challenges that people had to overcome to obtain what they wanted. To “win” the game, they had to solve problems and puzzles. If the puzzles were too easy, it would probably not hold their interest for long, so they had to be difficult enough to be stimulating and challenging. Some of the people in the community called themselves ‘lurkers’ and thought they didn’t have much to contribute and didn’t like speaking up, but because they all wanted to figure out what was going on and why, everyone had to tell the community what they knew. The people that had difficulty communicating had to overcome that challenge if they wanted to reach the end goal. The game is also definitely story driven, it is described as “a Web-based interactive fiction that used websites, blogs, emails, jpegs, Mp3 recordings, and other digital artifacts to create an immersive back-story for…Halo 2”.

In your opinion, what makes games fun?

In my experience, the act of completing any kind of goal, whether self-created or preprogrammed. It doesn't matter what the goal is or what you've accomplished, instead it's the fact that you've received something in return for your efforts. In a game like World of Warcraft, you earn a new ability or new stat benefits for raising your experience. In Magic: The Gathering, you've compiled enough mana to cast a certain spell. In Minecraft, you set your own goals ("I'm going to build a mining outpost near that cave today") but receive the same satisfaction for completing them. In all of these instances, the return on investment, no matter how big or small, prompts me to continue playing and enjoying all that the game has to offer.

In addition to the goal-setting mentioned above, there are a few things that must be present for me to fully enjoy a game. One is a gripping/compelling/entertaining story. While I acknowledge that not all games need a story to be fun to play (chess, poker, Mario Kart), the presence of a guiding narrative helps me immerse myself into the game more fully. The majority of games place you right in the center of the story, usually having you play as the protagonist and experiencing a narrative on your own. Others place you in the center of the story, but produce additional storytelling material to tell more tales from different angles, fleshing out the world and making it seem like the world you're in is alive and there are things happening that you're not bearing witness to. Some even put the story in pieces and let you discover the narrative on your own.
The final thing that really gets me into a game is good art direction. Seriously. I spend a lot of time looking at what kind of creative work goes into big-name and small-name games, and the amount is pretty consistent. There's a lot of creative work that goes unnoticed by most, but it's something that really excites me about games and makes me feel like the designers really put their full creative effort into building an exciting world to play in (of course, this isn't the case for most board and card games).

I <3 Bees: What made it fun?

There were a lot of things that made I <3 Bees fun. But they could likely be boiled down to a few things: individual contribution, a large set of challenges, and immense return on investment. Though it took the collaborative effort of several hundred thousand individuals to complete the game, each on contributed to the problem-solving process in some way. This enabled every part of the group to feel like they had a part in solving the problem, an experience which lends immense satisfaction and a sense of pride. The large set of challenges prompted the group to explore every hypothesis and probable solution, a situation which allowed for every player to contribute something to the collective. And finally, the immense return on investment was the completion of one set of challenges and unlocking the next, which incited the collective to continue working together.
In addition, a couple of the things I mentioned above were present in the I <3 Bees game. The goals and completion thereof, and the gripping story. The reward for completing the goals was unlocking another small piece of the story, up to the point where players were putting together their own narratives based on the collective knowledge base.
In my opinion, the I <3 Bees game was a near-perfect massively-multiplayer game. It allowed for every player, regardless of skill level, to contribute to a mystery that seemed to have real-world implications. In the end, it ended up being a testament to what people can accomplish when rallied under a guiding task.

Anna Degnin - I Love Bees response

1)In your opinion, what makes games fun?

I'm going to address video games with this question, as these are the types of games that I am most interested in. For me, what makes a game fun is a combination of various things. The gameplay must be good, the quests shouldn't be repetitive, the game should be easy to learn and pick up (no cluttered UI, controls, etc) and the idea should be novel. These are what, to me, makes a game fun. However what makes a game good, in my opinion, is a plot and characters that make me react emotionally to the game. A game can be fun, but still be a bad game (I'm looking at you, Brink). But if a game is good, then it's fun just to experience it (For example, Heavy Rain, Last of Us and Zero's Escape).

2)Which of these things (if any) were present in the I <3 Bees ARG? If not present, what made I <3 Bees fun?

"Instead of telling a story, we would present the evidence of that story, and let players tell it to themselves." This is exactly what I like about games with good writing. They don't hit you in the face with their story, they let it evolve by itself, and you pick up on things along the way. 

An example of this would be when a game tries to explain its world to the player in too much detail. This shatters the illusion of the world; if the main character has lived in this world their whole lives, wouldn't they already know these things? The player should, in a good game, find out these things as they progress through the game, naturally and without being forced. This is of course very hard to do, because if you don't explain enough, you will frustrate and confuse the player. However, this is what I believe good games do, and it is what "I Love Bees" strove for.

This game is unique, full of story and driven ideas, and draws in the player seamlessly. This game is a brilliant idea, and I'm surprised it isn't used more in present day.

Ilovefunbees

What makes games fun?
The "fun-ness" of any activity (playing games included), is the perfect cross between one's skill set and the challenge that is presented. Also known as the "flow", this state of mind features time passing at a strange pace that to the player seems nonexistent. The player is given just enough challenge to their skill set that they do not feel discouraged by their inadequacy nor do they feel bored by the lack of challenge presented. This is where the most "fun" happens. Hours or perhaps days can go by without interruption as long as the player is presented with that which is slightly above their skills. As they learn, the challenges must become harder to compensate for the higher rank of skills knows by the player. It is games like Tetris which present fun in such a way. The game begins "easy", simply asking players to complete one full row of blocks, but as the pile of unfinished rows grows taller, they player must face the new challenge of less time available for thinking or the speed of the blocks falling. The saying "practice makes perfect" is applicable to games such as this, where the practicing of each level increases the players skills so that what once seemed impossible to the player now has a more likely chance of being playable or even beatable.

Ilovebees.com: Fun?
The game I Love Bees began very easily and very simply: as a website url. The first "level" in this game was that of getting to the game itself. Because the only advertisement for it was a blip of url at the end of the Halo2 trailer, those beginning the game had the challenge to get themselves to a computer and type in the words from the screen. That step can be done by the vast majority of those who would have witnessed the trailer. Once the challenge of level 1 had been completed, the rules were "there are no rules". There was no written levels to the game, nor was there a specific way to play it. But because all minds have their own way of gathering information, learning, and deciphering, I Love Bees was available for any and all to participate in. It was this open-ended way of forming the game and the allowance of any skill set to help in "beating" said game that made it "fun". To discover what had happened to the website, (the main objective of the game as asked on the website), people from all ages, locations, and educations could apply what they knew about the world in general to help fix the game. No one person could solve the game because no one person had all the knowledge in the world to choose what the possible outcomes of the game were. Through the forming of groups with those who had similar mind sets, each group would "have fun" using their own skill sets to formulate all possible ways and meanings that the website had been overtaken and what would happen when the countdown had finished. By posting their ideas and responding to others ideas, all possible outcomes were discussed so that when the final countdown ended, players were ready for anything, at the coordinate locations, with groups and phones and instant connectivity to others at other locations. It was because the players were overly ready for the ending of the countdown that the creators were able to extend the game by giving new chances for things such as combining pieces of heard information played out on the payphone, or delivering a spontaneous 5 worded message through all the coordinates. As the challenges grew harder, the players became more prepared and were able to handle the challenges as they approached. And even if one person's idea on what would happen at the end of the countdown was wrong, that player's contribution became part of the process through which the true answer was found, thus without their contribution the preparedness of the players would not have been up to par. It was the "fun-ness" of having all people from all skill sets able to contribute their ideas to the objective of the game that made I Love Bees fun.

Collective Intelligence in games

What makes games fun?
Well, I've always been drawn to the easy to play, hard to master games. For video games, I started off with a Sega Genesis and still play it fairly regularly because the games I have are simple to play. They keep me engaged in a way that I don't seem to find in newer console games. I still think story and visuals play an important role in making games fun, but it's the mechanic of the game that drives it to be fun and engaging. No different with card or table games. Anything that is easy to learn will hold my attention. If it takes more than a few minutes to understand the rules, I often lose interest. Simplicity makes it fun. Don't get me wrong when I mention simplicity though. I'm only referring to the basic mechanics of a game. It's the strategy and thought provocation behind the simple mechanics that make them fun. Hence, easy to play, hard to master.

Which of these things (if any) were present in the I <3 Bees ARG? If not present, what made I <3 Bees fun?
The mechanics of I<3 Bees were very simple: problem solving. You, as the player, contributed in a way you felt comfortable in, but the main goal was collaboration. The social storytelling and communication was what drove the game. There wasn't a right or wrong way to "play", as long as you were involved in some way. I really enjoyed learning about this experience and wish I had been a part of it. I don't know how I hadn't heard of it until now, but I'm really glad I did because the mechanic of the game is fascinating. I think they did a similar thing with Bioshock 2 by giving hints to locations at certain times, but it wasn't on such a large scale. Getting a massive amount of people involved to problem solve would be so much fun to coordinate and be a part of.

1)In your opinion, what makes games fun?

 

What do I think makes a game fun? I enjoy being a character in a story; to be part of a reality not necessarily tied to our own, because my reality is a daily routine of school then work then home. That gets mundane and overbearing very quickly. However, I can hardly call myself a gamer. I enjoy being a part of the culture as an apt spectator. I've learned many things about gaming through my husband, with whom I have spent many years experiencing different story lines, different game mechanics, and different multi-player matches with different people. And I agree with what he says is most important in the game: immersion. Because when I watch him play, I can feel myself being pulled into the story and the environment: I was there from the beginning to the end of Deus Ex: Human Revolution, I watched him play Fallout: New Vegas while we were vacationing in Vegas (we were even pointing out towns that were in the game as we were driving), and he told me all the war stories from EVE Online. What I find even more fascinating is the ability to interact with other people who we may never meet in our daily lives but may prove to be invaluable connections, or even friends. I also feel that if gamers ruled the world then we would settle disputes with a round of Battlefield 2 in match mode. Watching that action was some of the best entertainment I've ever experienced.

2)Which of these things (if any) were present in the I <3 Bees ARG? If not present, what made I <3 Bees fun?

The immersion with the story of I <3 Bees that the players found themselves in was incredible and inspiring. Here was a large group of people from all around the world who probably had other things to deal with who could have simply brushed it off and moved on to the next game release. But they were presented with a challenge and accepted that challenge. I feel that it was this challenge that urged them on and the mystery that enticed them to want to learn more. Even more, the tangibility of the challenge as it was brought into the world of reality enhanced the immersion.

Then there is the reward of a job well done; the reward of self-reassurance when an operation is successful. This combination of immersion, challenge, and reward, as well as an end goal, is what made I <3 Bees fun for the thousands of people who participated.

I < Bees ARG response

1.       In your opinion, what makes games fun?

I would be lying if I told you I was a really big gamer and I often found myself emerged in other worlds.  I don’t play games very often due to my busy schedule and lack of free time.  Even though I rarely play games I do appreciate what they do for our world and then unique opportunities they offer us. 

When I play games I enjoy the idea of problem solving as well as finding unique ways to reach your goals.  I also enjoy and appreciate the graphic visuals they display as I have always been fascinated seeing how creative game designers can be.  I am a very visual person and I think it is amazing to see how some people can just imagine their own worlds with unique creatures and environments and have the ability to make those things come to life.  I have great appreciation for what they can do. 

The last thing that I think makes games fun is the ability to connect and compete with people in your surroundings as well as globally.  I believe games allow people to interact with a great variety of people which is very unique in our world today.  I really enjoy the idea of competing against your piers instead of just the game itself.

2.       Which of these things were present in the I <3 Bees ARG? If not present, what made I <3 Bees fun?
I think that I < Bees ARG was a very successful game.  It incorporated two major characteristics in which I believe make games fun.  The first was obviously the idea of creatively problem solving.  The whole point of this game was to get users to decode parts of the story and to solve the game which was basically a giant puzzle.  The game involved the interaction with other users which allowed the puzzle to be solved.  I think it was very unique in how it required users working together with other users to solve the puzzle and come up with the solution.  I also believe this game was very successful because it did not force the users to decode the game because of a known reward or goal.  It encouraged them to work together to find out the point and goal of the game without them actually knowing what they were getting. 

I have never seen another game that is like I < Bees ARG which is in part why I believe that the game is truly spectacular.  I wish that I would have had the chance to be part of it back when it was running right before the release of Halo 2.  I think that combination of problem solving and the required gamer information exchange is what helps make this game so unique and so interesting. 

     I believe all good games should have some kind of strategy behind them. When you pick up some experience playing a game, you can make more educated decisions about how to make your next move and continue to improve. Chess is a good example, although it might not be considered 'fun' because it leaves nothing to the imagination.  Some games depend mostly on the rolling of dice or spinning of a wheel, which involves no strategy, but what they lack in strategy they make up for by using the imagination. The mystery of what will happen next keeps the player entertained and the storyline is what makes the game enjoyable. Then we have team-based games, anything from football to multi-player first-person shooters, where the fun lies in cooperation, teamwork and thoughtful decision making.
     The 'I Love Bees' game was a perfect combination of strategy, adventure and cooperation, although it wasn't thought of a game at first. Gamers in anticipation of Halo 2 had discovered this weird hacked website that included no explanation of what it was about; there were vague messages and number combinations that were a complete mystery. The participants were forced to make up their own strategies to weed out the clues. They put together theories about what these clues meant and divided themselves into teams in order to test them out. This problem solving became fun not because there was a definite goal to prize to be earned, but because the whole idea behind it was unknown.
    When the GPS coordinates were discovered, help was needed by people who lived close to these points were able to participate by scoping out the locations. Players that might not have had any insight about the meanings of the riddles could at least help out by scouting the area for clues in real life and reporting back to the forums. Areas of expertise required for solving riddles and moving forward in the game were all over the place and ever-changing, and players were always on their toes waiting for the next opportunity to participate or catch up on others' progress. The fact the game took place both in cyberspace and reality is very interesting and reminds me of the geocaching phenomenon. Hidden all over the world are objects, often little canisters with rolls of paper inside. There is a website that gives riddles to find these things, organized by GPS coordinates, and people set out to find them in order to sign their names or switch the contents of the canisters.
     The 'I Love Bees' designers were actually constructing the game according to the actions of the players in real time, prepared with a dozen routes that the game may take depending on the progress of the players at any given moment. Eventually the players realized that the 'I Love Bees' game was telling a sort of back story about the Halo 2 game that had lured them into the mystery, and the anticipation of the next sound byte made the game all the more fun.
     I had to reread the first six pages of this article a few times (and visit the website) to understand what 'I Love Bees' was all about. My interest in video games fizzled out for a while after the end of the 16-bit era, but if I had known about this ARG game I would have been all over it. It was a fantastic idea, but I think the main reason it worked so well was because no one understood at first what was going on, and the fun came out of exploring the unknown in a community of individuals that were all working together for the same reason.
  

"Why I love Bees" paper

1)In your opinion, what makes games fun?

The things that make games for me are ones that require me to think, one with somewhat challenging puzzles, side quests, a story line, interesting visuals, the ability to collect things, and the ability to interact with other people.

Not all games include all of these things, but I tend to find that the more of these things a game include, the more I like it. One of the reasons I love any of The Legend of Zelda games is because they contain a story line (usually somewhat predictable though) with a main quest, as well as a huge variety of side quests, a number of items to collect in various ways, tons of puzzles that are challenging but not so hard that I lose interest, interesting visuals, and the ability to interact with other characters. In some of the Zelda games you can do battles with your friends.

What I do not enjoy about games is extreme repetition, like games that require you to mash and build your levels in order to continue on and defeat enemies. It's especially boring when you have to continually fight the same enemies a hundred times over in order to level up. The lack of difference in actions, scenes, and characters really makes me want to drop my controller and do something else.

A continued change of stimulus is really what I think is best for any person in order to make a game more interesting. The more stimulus the better, that's what we humans seem to like.

2)Which of these things (if any) were present in the I <3 Bees ARG? If not present, what made I <3 Bees fun?

The I <3 Bees ARG had a TON of changing stimulus, which is why I think it was so successful. While most games, as discussed in the article, are sort of pre-built and pre-coded entirely, this was a game that entirely depended on the users and entirely changed because of them. Not one moment of the game seemed the same.

The game started off with a basic main story-line, though not quite as spelled out and obvious as most games. Once the users began to decode the story line, the rest of the story line really seemed to depend upon their own actions.

The game was entirely a puzzle. If the entire game was made for one person, it would have been nearly impossible requiring expertise in all areas that most likely the person didn't have. However, since the game was based upon the contribution of many users, any contribution of any size in any area broke the puzzles up among the users into more manageable sizes, skill levels, and areas of expertise. Those who were better at literally interpreting the GPS points were able to successfully go out to those spots, while others who were more mathematically skilled could solve the puzzle in a less literal way that the other users may not have been able to.

I'm not entirely sure about the visuals or side quests, but I think the puzzles in themselves created side quests such as users literally going out into the real world, finding these GPS points, and reviving phone messages on pay phones. Based upon the graphics I've seen from the first and second Halo game, I have no doubt that the graphics were probably satisfying enough.

I'm not sure about collection objects, but I know there was a ton to collect among all of the data, GPS points, emails messages, forum messages, etc. The users themselves even required the collection of new things that may not have been necessarily planned, such as the entire language of Flea++ which was decoded and collected into a cheat sheet. There was also the collection of the calling map users made to figure out where and how often calls were received called Axon Coordination.

Of course, the most important aspect to this game, in my opinion, was the interaction among all of the users. The game basically required this interaction in order to function. Users shared data, teamed up to collect data, devised plans, discussed problems, etc. Here was a great example of a spontaneous moment required users to quickly divide, collect data, and share it among each other in order to succeed:

"At the start of the game, phones were scheduled to ring one at a time, with 

enough minutes spaced out between them so that the D.C. team of players could move from one 

to the next, methodically answering all of the calls and collecting all of the content. By the end of 

the game, all dozen phones were ringing at precisely the same second, forcing players to divide 

and conquer, while communicating in real-time with each other via mobile phones to compare 

answers to the questions and report any live challenges that were given" (McGonigal 36).


Overall I think that playing the game would have been extremely fun. While it didn't contain anything like "character dressup" (as far as I know) or large bosses to defeat (again, as far as I know), the game was so brilliantly made and brilliantly conducted by users that the level of stimulus far exceeded that of any typical game with petty things like dress up and item collection and level mashing.

I believe it's all about the stimulus, and this game certainly had it.