For the past few days I’ve run the live video feed of “Twitch Plays Pokemon” in the background while I work. It’s an incredible opportunity to watch attempted mass collaboration in action. The project is described as a “social experiment,” as it offers a live version of the classic game Pokemon Red. Pokemon Red is a Nintendo Game Boy title that first introduced American gamers to a world where capturing cute creatures and forcing them to battle one another is a popular sport. The franchise is still incredibly popular (I’m currently playing Pokemon X, the latest version for the Nintendo 3DS) and the fundamental mechanics haven’t changed much over the years.
The twist on this version of Pokemon Red is in the controls: everyone in the chatroom can type commands to control the character on his quest to capture Pokemon. And I do mean *everyone* in the chatroom–as I’m writing this, over 80,000 people are also watching, and constantly typing commands that mostly have the character running in circles, with the start menu constantly popping up as various trolls interfere with any hope of progress.
My interest in the stream was renewed when Andrew Cunningham over at Ars Technica posted about a new update to the Twitch mechanics: it’s now possible for players to vote to put the game in either “anarchy” or “democracy” mode. Democracy mode is intended to make it possible for the players to make progress, as it makes decisions about which commands to follow based on which are most popular at the moment. However, since I’ve been watching this new mechanic, it seems like nearly half of the commands are either people trying to switch the stream to anarchy or democracy or people trying to make fun of the new system–I saw a few postings of “communism,” “theocracy,” “monarchy,” and “stop voting now” fly by amid the chaos.
As I’ve watched the game repeatedly get caught in standstills, saved only by sustained moments of collaborative effort that eventually dwindles, I realized that my fascination with this experiment is driven by its correlation with the very nature of online collaboration. Some of it is very familiar from conference planning, unconferences, and committee meetings: there’s even a page where dedicated players are tracking milestones and goals. The attempts to add more structure to the efforts of the players have instead thwarted the emergent behavior, a challenge familiar to anyone who has ever tried to bring a MOOC conversation back on track or get something accomplished in a particularly contentious committee meeting. The dynamics also remind me of the most painful stage of group projects, with too many leaders and no consensus. Yet despite these obstacles I suspect that player determination will win out and the game will eventually end in victory, and I enjoy watching to see those moments when collaboration wins out.
Have you checked out Twitch Plays Pokemon? Share your thoughts in the comments!
[Screenshot from Twitch Plays Pokemon]
