This is Tech

For developers of online multiplayer games, a game is only as strong as its community.  The problem is that publishers can’t fully control the social aspects of their games.  So how does a game company foster the type of online community that provides the most value to players?

Terms of Service.

Community management starts with a publisher’s Terms of Service.  I discussed Terms of Service briefly in my previous article about virtual property.  In a multiplayer online game, the Terms of Service are the law.  They create the framework for what is and is not acceptable in the game’s community.  As game companies draft their Terms of Service, they need to make choices about the type of community that they are trying to create.  This article walks you through some of those choices.

How Will You Enforce.

Is your company prepared to ban players from your community if they do not follow the posted code of conduct?  How active a role will your company take in policing the community?  In large online communities, it is not practical for the publisher or developer to monitor and stop all offending or unsportsmanlike conduct.  In order for the terms to have a real effect on the nature of the game’s community, there must be consequences for failing to comply.  For serious violations, banning a player’s account is the most effective choice.  For more minor violations or simple unsportsmanlike conduct, incorporating penalties and rewards into game play is another solution.  If certain in-game items, arenas for game play, and matchmaking opportunities are only available to members of the community in good standing, players are penalized if they act in ways that ruin the game for others.

Complaint Based Systems.

Fully policing an online community is a difficult, if not impossible, and most companies have limited resources to spend on community management issues. The best mechanism for maintaining law and order without paying people to moderate the game is to build community policing mechanisms into your game.  If you make your rules clear and available, your players can be the eyes and ears of your policing efforts.  Most players want to preserve a good gaming environment, and are willing to complain when a player is clearly breaking the communities’ rules.  Complaint-based systems are becoming the standard for policing online communities, and incorporating some form of formal complaint system into your game gives a remedy to players that are affected by griefers and other negative elements of the community.
There are conflicting opinions on how best to respond to in-game complaints.  Some companies take a hard line and ban players from the game that receive too many complaints.  Other companies suspend a player’s account for a period of time or take an even more hands off approach.  Companies making this decision are typically torn between wanting to maintain a positive, fair and welcoming game community, and not being faced with continually making judgments on where the line is with respect to bad conduct in the game.  One solution that I have been advocating to clients is a reputation based filtering system as a means of automatic policing of an in-game community.

Reputation-Based Filtering.

In a reputation-based online community, individual players establish a conduct-based reputation through their interaction with other members of the community.  Complaints by other players negatively affect a player’s reputation.  Actions that indicate cheating negatively affect a player’s reputation.  Good feedback from a wide variety of other players positively effects reputation.  With a reputation system in place, players can set a threshold reputation for their matchups with other players.  Sensitive members of the community may only want to come into contact with players of their own reputation level and above.  Players that offend enough people in-game would find they no longer have access to the more upstanding members of the community.   The benefits of this approach are that it allows the community to police itself, and allows players to screen themselves from disruptive players.  This approach also avoids the complications of banning a player from a game all together.

Liability Issues.

When managing an online community, it is important for game companies to create policies that provide protection from liability based on bad actors within the community.  The best example of this is the implementation of a properly crafted DMCA Safe Harbor provision.  In some circumstances, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act can provide safe harbor from liability for contributory copyright infringement.  If your online community allows gamers to communicate with each other, post items of content or design in-game items, the concern is that copyright infringement by a player in-game, could expose the publisher to liability.  The DMCA can provide a defense against contributory copyright claims, but only if the game company takes some fairly specific measures.  First, a game company’s terms of service need to include a DMCA compliance notice and take down provision.  This language indicates who content owners should contact if they believe their work is being infringed in the online community.  Additionally, a company must file a form with the US Copyright Office identifying its copyright agent for notice and takedown purposes.  Among other things, it is essential that a company enforce its notice and takedown policy and act promptly in response to complaints.  Companies should also enforce a policy of banning repeat infringers.  DMCA issues are complicated, and game companies operating on-line communities should work closely with their attorneys to best position themselves to take advantage of the safe harbor that the law can provide.

DISCLAIMER: Please read the disclaimer language using the link at the top of this page, or click here. This article is not intended to be legal advice, and no attorney client relationship should be inferred from this blog. The law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and you should consult with an attorney before relying on anything you read here. This article and this blog do not reflect the views of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich and Rosati.

PREVIOUS ARTICLES IN THE SERIES:

UP NEXT: