When I set out to finish this post, that has been in the making for far too long, I had a feeling that it would lack a very important factor: timing. I asked myself “why would anyone care anymore? You already told people in private almost anything you had to say or comment about twitch plays pokemon“. But then I realized: Twitch still plays Pokemon.
While the viewership or excitement might not be the same, enough elements still remain to attract people to it. What annoys me a bit though is the fact that either my searching skills have deteriorated or that not many analyses have been made available and/or written for what a lot of people baptized as “one of the best social experiments ever made”. Even though the creator stated that he was more curious to see what happens than having an ulterior purpose, one can’t deny that this many viewers especially in the first days of the stream can form an excellent data sample. Of course there is no way for me to tackle every single game aspect in detail. What I will be doing is presenting some of my major observations. Note that my experience consists mostly of the first three games played.
The first thing that almost took me by surprise at first was people’s usage of democracy and anarchy modes. Let’s assume that bot and script usage did not favor any side to a major degree. While it certainly was a very entertaining “war” to spectate, it often looked very unreasonable. What I mean by that for example is how could a democracy mode that was established a couple of minutes ago turn to anarchy? How could 80% of the viewers suddenly be overcome by others in order to establish the 50% percentage needed for anarchy? Did they have a change of heart in just two minutes? I am the first to say that democracy mode is not nearly as entertaining as anarchy, but it was often chosen for the purpose of overcoming an obstacle. Was the obstacle suddenly rendered too easy to be bothered with, since democracy provided an assured victory against it?
Maybe I am off by a lot here and the bots really did alter votes to that extent, but I have experienced this phenomenon at least in a couple other games. Mister A., creator of TGTSNBN, always described it as such: “players will always complain and want something different”. I think he was close but not exactly on point. What players want is what people generally want: MORE. In the case of TGTSNBN that was better rules, or better crafting system, generally anything BUT what was currently in effect. In the case of twitch plays pokemon “more” can only be translated as “entertainment”. Democracy mode was annoyingly boring and on the other hand anarchy became too repetitive and tiresome. In their search for something better and more entertaining, viewers alternated between the two modes in order to stay watching.
If not that it could be that people wanted so much more, that they forgot that they needed to defend their currently preferred “mode” (does this sound familiar to something else maybe?) and just focused on using it to achieve their goal, either spamming random commands on anarchy or focusing on making the perfect moves during democracy. In the end as long as viewers knew what they wanted both anarchy and democracy worked just fine. Neither of them was the goal (although HELIXists and DOMEists would disagree) but just the medium to achieve the goal of fun, through random funny moments, lore building or the joy of accomplishment when reaching a goal.
Notice how I said “viewers” instead of “players” earlier? Well it turns out that only about 10% of viewers were actively engaged in command inputing and mode wars. This is probably the thing I expected most since I first stumbled upon the stream. I didn’t wait for the Greek Elections just to draw parallels to politics, but twitch plays pokemon is definitely a bright example that proves that anyone’s vote really counts. I’m not saying that this is the only way this whole experience should be enjoyed, just stating the usually overlooked fact that we can make a difference ourselves, instead of just leaving things be, under the control and influence of others.
Last but not least I couldn’t finish this piece without at the very least referencing the community part of the game. In an combined effort to try explaining the randomness or humoring needless repeating events, people came together and – at first unintentionally – started telling a story, a rich one at that. The first generation alone generated enough material to fit a book and a whole new religion, with angels, prophets, demons, traitors. Eventually a story was told, not by a single guy, not by rejecting plotlines or possible outcomes, not by rolling back events, but by accepting and trying to fit everything together. Even if the quality of twitch plays pokemon as a social experiment is somewhat arguable, no one can undoubtedly proclaim it as anything less than one of the most successful collaborative storytelling experiences.
TPP’s success is also indicated by the number of projects evolved from it. And I don’t only refer to the similar twitch channels that for the most part still run, but to the many projects and ideas such as this one here that were inspired or empowered by it. It is another step towards mass gaming that doesn’t require as much dedication (time/money), that can be enjoyed both as spectator or a player. Setups such as these can form communities by providing just enough freedom and letting them develop on their own. Twitch plays pokemon is a proof of concept on many levels, from storytelling to viewer/player interaction, and it is here to stay and evolve into much more.
Leave a Reply