The Struggle of Playing with Friends

Words: 2120 Approximate Reading Time: 15-20 minutes

One of the most enjoyable experiences with consuming media is doing so with others. Sometimes those others may be friends, sometimes they may be strangers. A community participating in a shared activity gives it a unique feeling compared to partaking in that activity all alone.

But one issue that comes up with attempting to gather people together is…actually getting people together. With people having their own individual lives which include jobs and friends and family and other hobbies, arranging a dedicated time for people to hang out and play a game can be tough. And especially so if the game relies on continual progress. It might be one thing if people can jump in for a bit, play together, and then leave without having to worry about the next meetup. But when those sessions are built around the group progressing toward some goal, these social constraints can get in the way.

I’ve been thinking about this topic in playing with some friends and recognizing that there is a discrepancy between what we all want out of the game we are playing. We’ve chosen a survival crafting game, which as a genre tends to require a lot of time and repetitive tasks. And in turn that means everyone in the group needs to put in the time and effort to keep things going.

And one of the problems is that nothing about us really matched: our schedules were slightly misaligned, our knowledge of and objectives in the game were different, and what we ultimately wanted out of the game diverged in several ways. Which is not to say that hanging out with friends is thus horrible. But that there ends up being a bunch of factors that get in the way of the entire experience being…good.

And so in pondering this problem, I thought it might be worth talking about the ways in which these problems could be avoided. How understanding the different concerns and interests of the group and making sure that people are on the same page – and when they aren’t on the same page, how to manage it.

Time and Tasks

Perhaps the most obvious problem to consider when playing with friends is schedules. We all have things that we need to get done, whether it be working, sleeping, eating, socializing, and so on. Playing a game with friends can be something we enjoy and look forward to, but it is still something competing for our time. And other needs can win out.

And you can wind up with tension if those schedules differ radically. If one friend has a lot more time than others – by choice or by design – they can become restless in multiple ways. They may want to push forward in ways that others aren’t ready to do. They may want to play more because it is okay with their schedule.

And conversely, one friend may have a much smaller amount of time to play than others, slowing down the group. If some members of a group want to get together multiple times a week, and one member can only join once per week, then something has to give – either the rest of the group stays behind, or the one player has to catch up or be okay with missing out on events.

And how we choose to spend our time creates its own constraint. Even if we all have a bunch of free time, we may not elect to use that time for the same end. Perhaps I have several different games I want to play, whereas you would prefer focusing on one game for now. Even if we both started with the same amount of free time, the amount of time that can be spent on the game we’ve agreed to play then shifts. And this creates a strangely unfair outcome on both ends – one person needs to have a sub-optimal time to make the other person happy.

And speaking of different amounts of free time…

Progression

Some games – especially video games – allow for progression. It may be a character’s level, or equipment, or events within the game. And even if all those things are universal among players, the rate at which they get experienced will depend on how much time players put in.

For example, let’s go with a game in the genre that kicked this all off, something like Minecraft or Terraria. Those kinds of games generally have some kind of progression tree, where you acquire one material, make tools, and then spend time getting the next tier of materials and repeating the process.

But if now I have a bunch of extra time to devote to the game, then I might spend several hours mining for materials. And that might be enough to make equipment for you, as well. You now have lost out on the opportunity to do that material gathering yourself – you’ve missed out on a chunk of the game.

This may well result in some players progressing along the “normal” route, while others basically only experience important events. The ones who have more time do the hard work to prepare everybody else, and the ones who have less time have to miss out on the core gameplay. It creates both a burden for one group, and a gap for the others.

Alternatively, perhaps those players who have more time just focus on themselves. Maybe you can’t gather materials for everyone, you can only upgrade your own character. But even then, that progression can have detrimental effects on the group. If that person or those players push onward, then returning to play with their less-progressed friend(s) means that the experience is much easier. You now have all of this powerful equipment that trivializes encounters and can make it all rather boring. Alternatively, perhaps you put a cap on what people can do in their own time…but then you’re forcing people who want to play to not do so. Again, someone must have a sub-optimal experience to make the rest of the group happy.

Knowledge

And it is just as important to think about the power that knowledge conveys to players. Those who either have more time to learn about a game’s mechanics and progression, or have prior experience with a game, or are just more willing to look things up, they all get some kind of leg up on their friends. They can – and likely will – share that information.

Which in the abstract is fine. But if other players want to learn and experience these things for themselves, it creates an imbalance. From the perspective of the knowledgeable player, those who don’t yet know what they’re doing are probably being inefficient. They’re wasting resources or time or effort that could be better spent elsewhere. From the perspective of the newer players, those who do know what they’re doing ruin the sense of discovery that may come with the game.

And in groups this imbalance can be difficult to really address. Because the more knowledge you have, the more likely you are to just act on that knowledge. And the more others will likely copy you, because you know what you’re doing. Some players may simply feel led by the nose because they feel like their alternative is being left behind.

Conversations and Agreements

So we have these imbalances among players…how do we address them? Can group play ever be possible?

To which the answer is absolutely. But there needs to be an agreement going in about what each players wants out of the whole thing. Not everyone may be able to get everything, but by laying everyone’s cards in the open, it helps to address massive disparities.

Let’s start with time. Negotiating when everyone gathers together to play is only the start of the process. Will others be playing on their own time? How much? What does playing on their own time entail – will they be making a new character that is isolated from the group’s play, or will they be progressing in a group world? How much time does everyone have to play beyond those agreed times, either on their own or just hopping on to hang out with a couple members of the group?

This conversation cuts in both directions. Those who have more time may feel like they are becoming the “carriers” for the group – that they are devoting the effort that others aren’t putting in. Conversely, those who have less time may feel that they are being left behind – that they are being punished for not having as much free time as others. What matters in these contexts is not that people are being exploited or punished, but that the mere existence of the disparity creates this feeling of being exploited or punished.

How about progression? Because this is attached to the problem of time and effort. The more time a player puts into a game, the further they are likely to progress. But if an imbalance is going to show up, how does it get addressed? Again, knowing what various players want out of the experience is key. Are the people who have less time okay with just hitting the high notes and missing out on the basic elements of the game, or do they want to have a “proper” experience? Are the people with more time willing and able to hold back so that others don’t have to play catchup?

Progression is also a problem that cuts in multiple directions. The longer you extend a weekly meetup, the harder it is for each and every member of a group to keep to that schedule. Events happen that get in the way. Alternatively, those meetups may simply cut into time that a member might like to be able to use for other things – the faster the game is done, the sooner they can get back to those other things. But other members may enjoy the act of hanging out itself, and want to extend things as much as possible. And of course, trying to speed up the whole process places additional pressures on people to “hurry up” to make others happy.

And knowledge? This is going to depend on how much a particular player cares about the experience of learning and discovery. Some people are fine – especially in very convoluted games – to have things explained to them in clear and simple terms. Some people just want a task to perform. Others might find that learning experience fun, and would like to not have that joy stolen from them. Where an imbalance exists, it’s important for players to reveal their preferences and make the necessary requests.

This one does not create a conundrum between our core groups – the knowledgeable and ignorant players – but instead between the sub-groups of ignorant players. The ones who are fine with having things explained to them might prefer those explanations, and don’t want to be left in the dark. While the ones who want to discover things on their own definitely don’t want things explained to them. Whether you explain things or not, someone is going to be annoyed. Generally the way to address this is through separation of some kind – find a way to provide explanations to those who want them, and leave the others to their discovery. This process can never be perfect, because as I mentioned before knowledgeable players doing anything reveals information. But attempting to start from a point of respecting the wishes of these different groups can create a more enjoyable experience for everyone on the whole.

Concluding Remarks

I began this essay with the story about playing with some friends. And the reason I found myself ruminating on these topics is that these were things I wish we had talked about beforehand. I wish we had discussed the different constraints on our time. The different amounts of effort we were willing to put in. What we wanted out of this whole thing.

What might have happened had we had that conversation? It’s hard to say. Perhaps we wouldn’t be playing together at all. Maybe our preferences and schedules would be too divergent.

But I think that outcome would be ultimately better than a situation where everyone has to have a sub-optimal experience just for the sake of having a group experience. If there is a way to get people together, it should be done in a way which acknowledges and respects everyone’s time both collectively and individually. Especially in these contexts. Because the point of gathering people together to play a game of some kind is for everyone to have fun. If people aren’t having fun -or could be having more fun doing something else – then there’s a problem that should be addressed.