In Our Control: Games and Online Communities

In Our Control: Online Games and Communities
Sebastian Powell
Abstract
This paper sets out to discuss how online games fit in to the community mix, and also how much of an important role the Internet plays in facilitating the majority of communities. All the Internet has done is provided a place for all of the communities to come together from all over the world, sharing common experiences, talking to each other and expanding the potential reach of the community tenfold. Through the analysis of several different online games and how they directly relate to formation of online communities.

Introduction
Ever since the arrival of the Internet one argument has filled the airspace over the years. Has our generation- the millennials forgotten how to communicate with each other because of this highly digitized world we have grown up in? Many academics and parents alike believe that our generation is worse off because of our so-called obsession with the Web. But I will in fact argue that online millennials have had a positive effect on many facets of the Internet, and have only strengthened ties of existing communities. The Internet acts as a facilitator for many online happenings, particularly online games and the plethora of communities and sub communities that arise in these games. The most important thing, in the existence of a community is communication (Koivisto, 2003), with this I argue that many games, even including some major AAA single-player games have avenues in which communities can flourish on the Internet. I will also put forward how certain game mechanics in specific games encourage communication between strangers and friends alike, creating the argument that if the most important thing about a community truly is communication, then online games have communities in spades.

How WoW built strong online communities
Think of a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) and it’s likely the first game that comes to mind is the famous — or infamous — World of Warcraft (WoW). With a player base of around 5.5 million in 2016 (Statista, 2016), it has created numerous communities and networks. Particularly I will be discussing what has made WoW such a popular MMORPG for so many years, and why it is so culturally entwined the gaming world. As Preece (cited in Koivisto, 2003) states, another key feature of a community is that it consists of likeminded people, interacting with each other while aiming to complete their own individual role. This is key in understanding why WoW is particularly popular and has maintained a strong community player base over many years. The mechanics of the game allows players inside the community to truly flourish with their own unique role that is assigned to them either naturally or assigned to them by the leader of the specific community.

Challenging stereotypes through casual gaming
Previously in academia talks it would be easy to dismiss online games as mere time wasting offering no real benefits to the various groups who play. However now due to the explosion of online gaming applications on their smart phone it is no longer relevant to stereotype gamers as old men who live in their Mum’s garage, because according to studies conducted in South Korea (Soo-Hyun, Hyun, Ji-Won, Jo-Eun, & Dai-Jin, 2017) thanks to the inclusion of the online games on the smart phone it is reported that 67.9% of the population aged 10 to 65 played online games of some description. In light of this, it is clear to see how individuals in a community environment such as WoW can really find a sense of belonging and achievement seldom seen in their life previously. So, while yes, it is true that “the dark side of excessive gaming is evident” (Soo-Hyun et al., 2015) it is undoubtedly clear that relationships not only form in these online communities but existing relationships between people can flourish and form into something truly meaningful for the individuals, which has been facilitated by online gaming platforms.

Communication within online games
When gaming online, communication can take place in a number of ways. These include chat systems, emotes as well as many more obscure ways to communicate. However, many people still play solo, yet the sense of community is omnipresent as certain aspects of the game heavily encourage player to player interaction, be it trading with another player, or activating certain emotes such as a wave or a dance. There is always communication going on between players even if it is non- verbal (Koivisto, 2003). So therefore, the game mechanisms always give players a chance to have some form of communication, and thus always facilitates the building of communities. A key concept in the idea of community is that of social capital. This refers to the idea of pre-existing weak social bonds in which some people involved feel inspired by others in the community (Trepte, Reinecke, & Juechems, 2012). This is highly relevant when discussing not only WoW but many other MMORPG’s also. The idea of games being able to both bridge and broaden social capital is influential and possibly telling as to why communities seem to flourish so well on platforms such as WoW. According to Trepte et al. (2012) bridging social capital refers to weaker existing relationships that enhance a members’ perspective, and is regardless of race, age or ethnicity. A younger person for example could be playing WoW and fall into one of these groups completely by accident, and thanks to the global village we live in, it could have members from all around the world, all with different backgrounds, beliefs and most importantly (for some) advanced levels of in game skill. All these elements that a young person could be exposed to benefits them in both the long and short term in terms of social skills and also enhancing their gaming ability.

The power of online games to be able to bring seemingly unrelated people around a common goal is truly powerful. It is also evident not only in MMORPG’s but in the single player game communities as well. Firstly, Koivisto (2003, p. 4) makes the emphatic statement that “limiting communication always hurts the community,” if this is indeed the case then what about the AAA single-player games that feature a huge player base? When the original Xbox was released side-by-side with a curious science fiction first person shooter (FPS) named Halo: Combat Evolved, no one could’ve truly predicted how well the two were going to be received, and with around 5 million copies sold to date it is clear to see how the game has become a cultural icon for many throughout their childhood and indeed into adulthood, also (Leeson, 2011). This game offered an immensely powerful and thoughtful single player campaign, as well as an ever-presently fun multiplayer department. In today’s gaming industry, it is a rarity for console players to find big budget games that satisfy both their story telling needs in the campaign, and their competitive needs in multiplayer. EA’s Star Wars Battlefront 2 and the plethora of criticism it faced upon release, particularly in terms of its half-finished single player campaign that the developers originally planned to finish later and add as downloadable content (DLC), is an example of this.

Communities surrounding online games
When gamers find a modern, high quality, single-player game, such as Wolfenstein: The New Order by Bethesda Studios (where players take control of an American soldier in an alternate reality narrative in which the Nazi’s have won World War 2 and are now culturally oppressive and technologically advanced), where do they go to satisfy their need to share their experience with other players? Social Networking Sites (SNS) such as Reddit, Facebook and IGN to name a few. The communities created on these platforms allow technically ‘offline players’ to go online and share screenshots, ask questions and share hints and tips. The point is, just because the game itself doesn’t necessarily offer avenues of communication, the Internet and its different features alone allow communities to form and flourish, with the game Wolfenstein: The New Order simply acting as the catalyst for the community to form.

Modding communities
Secondly, particular games allow players in their single player community to create their own content and share it for other people to play. This is particularly relevant in Sid Meiers’ Civilisation VI, in this particular case I will discuss the main PC version of the game, and not the iOS version offered on the Apple App Store. This game is launched through the facilitating platform named Steam. As the title alludes, in Civilisation VI players take the helm of a historic civilisation on a random map and build the civilisation up through the ages, facing other civilisations along the way either going to war with them or finding diplomatic peace. Assuming that because an online game takes on average 5-8 hours according to Reddit user Camomilk, we will say that to best experience a match is to play against the built-in A.I, which would then categorise this game as a preferably single-player game. Steam offers a “workshop” section in which players such as myself who desire fun modifications that would otherwise never be seen to be released by developers, can go and download modifications made by other players in the Civilisation community. One notable example is a mod that allows players to take control of the Third Reich as Adolf Hitler, while it sounds admittedly grim the realism and enjoyment that players find in these mods enhance the game to another level. This ultimately links back to my original point, just because the players are technically playing solo, they are still communicating with each other and encouraging the user created content even further. As Koivisto (2003) states there are many other ways that players can communicate with each other, such as in-game emotes, character proximity or even certain actions can communicate a message. Therefore, the act of playing on a map or a game type that another user has created directly forms avenues for communities to be created. User created content is by no means unique to Civilisation VI, in fact another game named Far Cry 5 by Ubisoft studios employs the idea of user-created content on a massive scale. In their Arcade mode which is where the players go to escape the single player and jump into competitive multiplayer. It is particularly unique in the way that every single map that is offered to play has been created on the map creator by other players in the community. And while it has its shortcomings such as some very average and wacky maps, in general the maps are good enough to play. Which means the community on the Far Cry 5’s arcade is completely self-sufficient; the players create the maps and game types; the players then play and either like or dislike the map. Through user-created content it is clear to see how it is not just the standard form of communication that forms communities, there are a plethora of ways that players can talk either in game or on the Web through facilitating platforms.

Conclusion
As opposed to viewing the Internet as something that hinders our ability to communicate with each other, it should be seen as a tool for all kinds of communities to expand their existing notions of what a community is. The Internet gives everyone the rudimentary ability to communicate with each other, it doesn’t take it away. One needs only to look at the amount of Reddit users to see that the Internet is a communication platform, so to say that today’s generation is worse off because of how digitized we have become is simply plain wrong. And nowhere is this more evident than in the world of online gaming, there are always ways to communicate with people from literal conversations to more ambiguous signs and emotes. It is clear to see how if anything, community ties are stronger than they’ve ever been.

Camomilk. (2016, December 5). How long do multiplayer games take? [Blog      comment]. Retrieved from https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/how-long-do-multiplayer-games-take.606766/.

Koivisto, E. (2003). Supporting Communities in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games by Game Design. Paper presented at the Digital Games Research Association Conference. http://www.digra.org/dl/db/05150.48442.pdf.

Leeson, D. M. (2011). Northrop frye and the story structure of the single-player shooter. English Studies in Canada, 37(2), 137-152. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1024140325?accountid=10382

Soo-Hyun Paik, Cho, H., Ji-Won, C., Jo-Eun, J., & Dai-Jin, K. (2017). Gaming device usage patterns predict internet gaming disorder: Comparison across different gaming device usage patterns. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(12), 1512. http://dx.doi.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.3390/ijerph14121512 Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1988593120?accountid=10382.

Trepte, S. Reinecke, L. and Juechems, K. (2012). The social side of gaming: How playing online computer games creates online and offline social support. Computers in Human Behaviour, 28. 832 – 839. DOI: 10.1016/jchb.2011.12.003.

 

Virtual Gaming Communities: In the Realms of the Everlasting Alliances

Abstract

In the past decades, online gaming has instilled itself in a prime spot in the entertainment industry. With millions of gamers all around the world, the focus is on the numerous online gaming communities growing exponentially and the social capital they bring along. This study aims to deconstruct the online gaming experience by using First-Person Shooter games (FPSGs) and Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing games (MMORPGs). These two distinct gameplays have huge fan followings and the online game spaces have allowed interactive and long-lasting bonds amongst the players. Further research is done to understand the online gaming communities as “third places”, how virtual identities have a positive impact on one’s sense of self and also how virtual communities promote social engagement by blurring geographical, physical, religious, ethnical, cultural, and temporal boundaries amongst others. There is no denying that online gaming has brought about a revolutionary means of developing virtual communities and promoting digital identities and these communities are here to stay.


 

Virtual Gaming Communities: In the Realms of the Everlasting Alliances (Click for PDF)

  

New media including the Internet and video games have become one of the topics widely discussed and researched, in the past decades, by scholars and academics. Online gaming platforms have provided alternate spaces for communication, cooperation, social interaction and forming relationships which overcome mere physical and cultural boundaries. Some of the underlying studies have focused on the accumulation of social capital derived from online gaming and the communities formed within the realm of gamers. A fascinating side of the digital gaming culture, namely, the motivation of the gamers to stay loyal or committed to certain guilds (Hsiao & Chiou, 2012, p. 75) – online gaming communities – is also looked at to better understand social gaming experiences.  This paper digs deeper into the theories put forward by previous research on how online gaming communities are presently referred to as “third places” (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006, p. 889) that aim to promote connectivity, social engagement, collaboration and integration whilst influencing the concept of identity on a personal level, and in terms of group identity. These types of mediated communication and communities have increased the social capital among gamers without disrupting society or alienating non-gamers.

Based on Baudrillard’s frame of work (1995, p. 6) and with the backing of Frostling-Henningsson (2009, p. 557), it is reiterated that virtual communities, part of the computer-generated virtual worlds, are but extensions to reality itself: hyperrealities. The paper will firstly focus on deconstructing First-Person Shooter games (FPSGs) and Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing games (MMORPGs) in order to showcase how online gaming has instilled meaningful communication and long-lasting virtual communities without catering for prejudices, stereotypes and discriminations. Next, the various motivational factors which attract gamers and keep them coming back for more will be looked at while underlining “the relationship between the psychological needs of the user and the social gaming situations provided by the virtual environment…” (Di Loreto & Gouaïch, 2010, p. 1). Thirdly, this exposé will address the perception of self and others as virtual identities through the online gaming communities. Needless to say, that the social capital gained through playing online games and integrating gaming communities allows for a growth in a player’s network and develops a sense of loyalty amongst gamers. Online communities have persevered throughout temporal and spacial dimensions given their intangible and unrestrictive characteristics. Digital gaming platforms have but reinforced and strengthened the lifespan of these virtual communities whilst enabling gamers to identify themselves freely and assert their virtual self with conviction.

 

Digital Gameplay Experiences

Understanding FPSGs and MMORPGs

As mentioned at the beginning, “the desire to play is triggered by the interaction between personal and environmental factors” (Di Loreto & Gouaïch, 2010, p. 1); in this case, FPSGs and MMORPGs are the environment and more specifically, Call of Duty and World of Warcraft respectively. The online gaming platforms mentioned are two of the most popular games in the world and ranked amongst the best in their respective genre. Millions of players log in daily and as pointed out by Koivisto (2003, para 5), the interaction between players is the turning point that impacts on the gaming experience of the gamer. This interaction can be both verbal and non-verbal communication, without exiting the realm of the gameplay; some of FPSGs’ and MMORPGs’ non-verbal communication would include character’s clothing and accessories, the actions undertaken, the in-game guilds chosen, and the way players’ chosen characters move in a given scene. On the other hand, the online aspect of gaming allows for an optimum use of technology and the Internet in terms of verbal communication. The latter can be either synchronous or asynchronous and one-to-one or one-to-many communications.  Gamers constantly maintain contact and follow each other’s progress in the game through private messages, group chats, in-game chats and conversations, system broadcasts, discussion forums.  

World of Warcraft is a MMORPG taking place on a fictional and fantasy world called Azeroth whereby the Alliance (heroes) and the Horde (villains) are fighting the ultimate battle. The appealing features of World of Warcraft include attractive graphics and audio, action sequences, narratives, and character customisations – such as name, gender, race, class, faction, and so on. World of Warcraft’s storyline highlights how “players create an avatar that evolves and interacts with other avatars in a persistent virtual world” (Billieux et al., 2013, p. 1). World of Warcraft can be played in three different dimensions, namely, “player versus player (PvP), player versus environment (PvE), and role-playing (RP)” (Williams et al., 2006, p. 342).  Role-playing allows gamers to follow their chosen and customised characters, alongside other members of the same guild, throughout quests and adventures as they defeat enemies, acquire new skills and gain new levels. Williams et al. (2006, p. 340) explains how World of Warcraft is equivalent to “a vibrant third place”, housing and inspiring social bonds no matter how impersonal or meaningful they can become. The in-game experience amounts to life-like experiences that allow for “social interaction and relationships” (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006, p. 889).

Moving on to the example illustrating FPSGs, Call of Duty, this game franchise allow players to live through a series of missions and challenges by enacting a character. And as the genre of the game suggests it, the main objective of the chosen character is to shoot other characters. Frostling-Henningsson (2009, p. 557) explains how the virtual world of Call of Duty transports the gamers to a fantasy world which aims to make “the impossible possible”, that is shoot and kill people. FSPGs offer a more intensive gameplay as gamers could play synchronously in cyberspace. Shooters usually play in teams or groups of the same online community (guild) competing against each other. The game design and the narrative of the FSPGs are constructed far from the reality and its occurrences; a motivating point for gamers to take out their frustration (unleash their wrath) in the virtual world whilst knowing that such behaviour is condemned in real life. From Frostling-Henningsson’s (2009, p. 562) point of view, playing FSPGs “can be interpreted as a way of connecting to people, connecting as ‘brothers in blood’”.

Online Gaming Communities: An Insight

With millions of gamers around the world, the focus is on the numerous online gaming communities growing exponentially and the social capital they bring along. In retrospective, it is very clear that “online gaming was first and foremost about communication” (Frostling-Henningsson, 2009, 558) and the Internet greatly facilitated this worldwide connectivity. The two distinct online games mentioned above have huge fan followings with online game spaces which have allowed interactive and long-lasting bonds amongst players. Online communities create bridges to overcome physical distance and time disparities for gamers to mingle, share and interact with each other. This continuous increase in social engagement is the foundation of strong and long-lasting online gaming communities. Trepte et al. (2012, p. 832) highlight the fact that socialising is the strongest pull for gamers to start engaging in a particular online game. Following the same line of thought, online gaming communities regroup players in in-game guilds and teams; and studies show that “social online gaming could accordingly strengthen existing friendship ties and create new ones by providing a shared focus of activity” (Domahidi et al., 2014, p. 109). Meng et al. (2015, p. 19) address the “multimodal connectedness” that exists amongst players given the numerous communication channels available to them via the gaming platforms. The study about “multimodal connectedness” brings forth the use of various in-game communication channels to increase trust amongst gamers and therein encourage community-building.

In-Game Friendships

When it comes to socialising on online gaming platforms, Kowert and Oldmeadow (2015, p. 556) point out that gamers acquire “a sense of closeness, belonging, and security” from the attachments from other members in the online communities. The popularity and accessibility of online video games have been associated to the increase of a player’s social circle. Engaging in social gaming undeniably facilitates interactions between a player and his entourage that gradually lead to friendships. As explained by Kowert et al. (2014, p. 385), gaming community members are not just online acquaintances, the relationships are meaningful and as real as ever:

“One’s co-players are often more than just individuals who help achieve in-game instrumental goals. Co-players often become close, trusted friends and valued sources of online advice”.

Furthermore, Trepte et al. (2012, p. 838) reveal how online gaming proves to be “a valuable social resource” that offers potential for offline friendships from the social capital gained by gamers online. Another important aspect of forming attachments, specifically friendships in gaming communities, is how “socially phobic players may employ online games to satisfy social relational needs while avoiding stress experienced in offline social environments” (Sioni et al., 2017, 12). This clearly depicts the positive impacts that online gaming communities have on players and their self-perception. As friendships and bonds are formed in the digital world, people grow closer emotionally and allow for the perseverance of online social support.
Social Virtual Identities

Digital self-production is the primary asset for someone to belong in an online community. In order to be properly represented and recognised online, a player ought to build an image of himself or herself through their characters in a game and the roles they carry out, which is referred to as an avatar. In some cases, this simulated version of a gamer becomes as real as life itself. MMORPGs give players the chance to overcome any sort of boundaries, socially and culturally, and also enhance their self-esteem (Sioni et al, 2017, p. 11). Developing a virtual identity is subjective yet gamers also have a group identity when they form part of a particular community. Fraser et al. (2014, p. 523) similarly advocates that “an individual’s differentiation and integration within a group structure shape the individual’s identity development as it relates to and influences their group identity”.

In some instances though, worried parents, teachers, and the media amongst others have brought up a lot of concerning issues about whether or not online gaming could be addictive and harmful when it came to young adults and teenagers. The media primarily associated the violence in games to teenagers’ aggressivity and unwillingness to follow societal rules. The information gathered from the study about Internet gaming disorder carried out by King et al. (2016, p. 493) explain that understanding the profound gaming behaviour and how withdrawal symptoms from online gaming could be summed to the simple fact that the players would feel bored, miss their online friends and even lack mental stimulation. No serious case of addiction to gaming has been reported and researchers still find themselves uncertain to characterise online gaming using addiction or violence concepts. On the opposite hand, some studies mention how “virtual worlds hold great potential for the psychological growth of its users” (Kowert & Oldmeadow, 2015, p. 557).

The above argument all but reaffirms the notion that social virtual identities are growing exponentially and they undeniably hold quite an importance in online communities. Williams et al. (2006, p. 358) demonstrate in their research the lengths gamers, specifically in MMORPGs, would go to maintain their virtual identities, acknowledge the other online personas around them in the digital world and thus creating the adequate platform for emotional and social support. The latter further show how online gaming communities empower gamers to construct their own identity virtually and reap the benefits in terms of “psychological growth” (Kowert & Oldmeadow, 2015, p. 557). The online communities also bring forth Belk’s (2013, p. 477) concept of “extended self”; whereby gamers are presented with an opportunity to re-invent or embody a virtual identity. Individuals hold their online avatars vigorously close to their hearts. In the case of MMORPGs, “the player is the character. You’re not role-playing a being, you are that being; you are not assuming an identity, you are that identity; you are not protecting a self, you are that self” (Bartle, 2004, p. 155). Gamers get so immersed in their virtual identities that everything in the digital world becomes as real as reality itself be it the gameplay or the relationships and the communities they belong to therein, the assertion of a group identity.

Conclusion and Discussion

In this study, a deeper analysis of the function and dynamics of online gaming communities has been carried out. It is crucial to point out the qualifying features of these virtual environments: first and foremost, online communities ease interaction and communication without any time or space constraints and secondly, they give members a sense of belonging that transcends any social awkwardness or any phobias gamers undergo in real life on a daily basis. Steinkuelher and Williams (2006, p. 903) note that online communities’ “relationships can broaden social horizons or world-views, providing access to information and new resources”. Additionally, there has been numerous research conducted on how online gaming and the virtual identity have positively impacted on a gamer’s personal opinion of himself (Sioni et al., 2017, p. 15). Player-to-player interactions have encouraged collaboration, participation, teamwork and even friendships in both FPSGs and MMORPGs; this clearly shows that the social aspect of online gaming platforms and online communities motivates gamers while allowing a continuance to the gameplay. Personalised avatars and screen names are the stepping stones into the aesthetically pleasing virtual world that is online gaming. A player’s expertise increases accordingly with his time spent in the game and on the online communities. The learning curve for a gamer happens alongside other players and no one is left out. Gaming communities provide both online and offline support as research has shown. A recurring point in several studies is that newbies start playing an online game – whether out of curiosity or boredom or on someone’s recommendations – but ultimately stick around on the virtual platforms because of the interactive guilds and gaming communities. There is no denying that online gaming has brought about a revolutionary means of creating and maintaining virtual communities along with long-lasting ties amongst gamers; and these communities are here to stay.

Virtual Gaming Communities: In the Realms of the Everlasting Alliances – Click for PDF


 

References

 

Bartle, R.A. (2004). Designing Virtual Worlds. Berkeley, CA: New Riders. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/JLKgTK

Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press. Retrieved from  https://goo.gl/GffKh9

Belk, R.W. (2013). Extended Self in a Digital World. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477-500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/671052

Billieux, J., Van der Linden, M., Achab, S., Khazaal, Y., Paraskevopoulos, L., Zullino, D., & Thorens, G. (2013). Why do you play World of Warcraft? An in-depth exploration of self-reported motivations to play online and in-game behaviours in the virtual world of Azeroth. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 103-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.021

Di Loreto, I. & Gouaïch, A. (2010). Social Casual Games Success is not so Casual. Research Report #RR – 10017, 1-11. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/fj6WgK

Domahidi, E., Festl, R., & Quandt, T. (2014). To dwell among gamers : Investigating the relationship between social online game use and gaming-related friendships. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 107-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.023

Fraser,J., Shane-Simpson, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2014). Youth science identity, science learning, and gaming experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 523-532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.048

Frostling-Henningsson, M. (2009). First Person Shooter Games as a Way of Connecting to People: “Brothers in Blood”. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 557-562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2008.0345

Hsiao, C.C., & Chio, J.S. (2012). The effects of a player’s network centrality on resource accessibility, game enjoyment, and continuance intention: A study on online gaming communities. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11, 75-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2011.10.001

King, D.L., Kaptsis, D., Delfabbro, P.H., & Gradisar, M. (2016). Craving for internet games? Withdrawal symptoms from an 84-h abstinence from Massively Multiplayer Online gaming. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 488-494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.020

Koivisto, E. (2003). Supporting Communities in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games by Game Design. Paper presented at the Digital Games Research Association Conference. Retrieved from http://www.digra.org/dl/db/05150.48442.pdf

Kowert, R., Domahidi, E., Festl, R., & Quandt, T. (2014). Social gaming, lonely life? The impact of digital gameplay on adolescents’ social circles. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 385-390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.003

Kowert, R., & Oldmeadow, J.A. (2015). Playing for social comfort: Online video game play as a social accommodator for the insecurely attached. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 556-566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.004

Meng, J., Williams, D., & Shen, C. (2015). Channels matter: Multimodal connectedness, types of co-players and social capital for Multiplayer Online Battle Arena gamers. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 190-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.007

Sioni, S.R., Burleson, M.H., & Bekerian, D.A. (2017). Internet gaming disorder: Social phobia and identifying with your virtual self. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 11-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.044

Steinkuehler, C. & Williams, D. (2006). Where Everybody Knows Your (Screen) Name: Online Games as “Third Places”. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 11, 885-909. http:// dx.doi.org /10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00300.x

Trepte, S., Reinecke, L. & Juechems, K. (2012). The social side of gaming: How playing online computer games creates online and offline social support. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 832-839. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.12.003

Williams, D., Ducheneaut, N., Zhang, L., Yee, N., & Nickell, E. (2006). From Tree House to Barracks: The Social Life of Guilds in World of Warcraft. Games & Culture, 1, 338-361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1555412006292616

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Gaming Communities changing the way we interact

Gaming Communities PDF

Madison Matta

 

Abstract

Gaming communities have radically changed the way people interact with one another and its instant nature, allows people to interact and also escape in a way they could never do offline. Although online gaming has been questioned over whether it’s a legitimate community, we see that it has many similar attributes of a physical community and also many advantages, such as no geographical boundaries. Gaming communities can be seen as a ‘third place’ in which people interact in a way that they are unable to in their first place (home) and second place (work). All these concepts will then be explored in the Massively multiplayer online game World of Warcraft, a game which has substantial communities within the game and uses other mediums. It will also explore how gaming capital can directly translate to social capital and what it means to have ‘gaming capital’.

 

Gaming Communities changing the way we interact

Gaming communities have radically changed the way people interact online and its instant nature for people globally allows people to interact and ‘escape’ in a way they could never do offline. There have been many arguments against the legitimacy of gaming communities and whether they should be classified as ‘real communities’. Critics of online communities write that “life on the net can never be meaningful or complete because it will lead people away from the full range of in person contact. Or, conceding half the debate, they worry that people will get so engulfed in a simulacrum virtual reality, that they will lose contact with “real life’ (Wellman & Gulia,1997). This paper will argue that gaming communities are genuine communities which allow gamers to engage with each other in ways that offline communities never could, creating an ‘escape’ for those who struggle with being a part of offline communities.

 

Gaming as a community

For a long time, there was questions over the legitimacy of online communities and their realness from scholars, “while all this razzle-dazzle connects us electronically, it disconnects us from each other, having us “interfacing” more with computers and TV screens than looking in the face of our fellow human beings’ (Fox, 1995, p. 12). This is simply untrue, and just like in a real life community we see different types of virtual communities are emerging and at the forefront of these is the gaming community. There are many elements that make up a gaming community, A community is a group of people who come together to share similarities and interests. Preece defines online communities as “people who interact socially as they strive to satisfy their own needs to perform special roles. They also have a shared purpose, an interest or need, information exchange, or service that provides a reason for community. A community has policies, rituals, protocols and laws that guide people’s interactions. Computer systems support and mediate the online communities.” (Preece, 2000). All of these elements Preece associates with online communities, particularly the shared purpose and interest, are integral parts of the gaming community. People who are part of online gaming communities all have the shared interest of the game and the games proved a reason for community. These are all factors that make up the vast world that is the gaming community.

 

How gaming communities differ from offline communities

The major differences of gaming communities when compared to offline communities are what makes them such a popular alternative for people who struggle fitting into physical communities For example, being able to interact with someone from the other side of the world in a game, or being able to switch off and stop interaction whenever they want and being able to find people with shared interests because you have so much more reach. Within each game there is a community of people with at least one common interest, the game itself, and the community is only limited by a person’s access to that game. With no physical space needed to form the community gamers socialise with each other through the medium of the game, many games encouraging communication from players and teamwork to succeed. With no real restrictions on members of the gaming community they “attempt to break through some of the boundaries of race, gender, ethnicity, and geographic location established in physical communities” (Gross, Katz and Rice, 2003). Gaming communities are absent of any real institutional authority and emerge from technology, compared to offline communities which will often have institutional authority and have physical borders and exclude people gaming has a voluntary participation by its members (Katz et al., 2004).  This voluntary participation from members and no physical borders are the main reasons the gaming community allows people to interact in a way they could never do in a physical community. People from all different parts of the world, from all walks of life, are brought together in way they never could before, and use these new formed relationships to engage with the game by playing, chatting and connecting with other platforms created by the game.

 

Gaming as Third Place

‘Third Place’ refers to the social surrounding which is different to your two usual surroundings, those usually being home (first place) and work (second place). Ray Oldenburg’s book ‘The Great Good place’ talks about the theory of Third Place stating that “individuals may belong to several formal organizations but if they have a third place it is apt to make them feel more a part of the community than those other memberships” (Oldenburg, 1999). The gaming community provides a ‘Third Place’ for its members and allows interactions with it fellow members in a way that communities at home and work cannot. In the reading ‘Online games as ‘third places’’ they explore gaming as the ‘third place’ in Massively multiplayer online video games (MMO). They explore how “By providing spaces for social interaction and relationships beyond the workplace and home, MMOs have the capacity to function as one form of a new “third place” for informal sociability much like the pubs, coffee shops, and other hangouts of old.” (Steinkuehler and Williams, 2006). All of Oldenburg (1999) criteria of the third place are met by online games, such as a neutral ground, communication, easy access and a home away from home. Although there are arguments against a game being a ‘place’ it is a space where people can come together to interact and a form a community and that’s why gaming is an example of a ‘third place’ for so many people around the world.

 

World of Warcraft

If we now look specifically at the game World of Warcraft (WoW) and how it changed the way people interact and allows people to interact in a way they could never do offline. ‘World of Warcraft (WoW) is one of the most popular massively multiplayer games (MMOs) to date, with more than 6 million subscribers worldwide’ (Ducheneaut Yee, Nickell & Moore, 2006), players can play against the environment or they can play against one another, players can also choose to role-play. The journal article ‘the social life of guilds in World of Warcraft’ explored the social dynamics of the game and its players. There studies discovered that “players were found to use the game to extend real-life relationships, meet new people, form relationships of varying strength, and also use others merely as a backdrop. The key moderator of these outcomes appears to be the game’s mechanic, which encourages some kinds of interactions while discouraging others.” (Williams et al., 2006). This shows that MMO such as WoW are so popular not just because of the gameplay but because of the relationships they can facilitate through the games mechanics. When people of shared interest are coming together to discuss create and play, they are fulfilling the elements scholars define to be what is needed for a community. Which further proves how games are radically changing the way people interact. When studying the relationships within the guilds, they found that they meant far more then the functional purposes they posses in the game (Williams et al., 2006). The studies found that “In nearly every social guild that lasted more than a month, members and leaders were aware of the need for a certain level of maturity, responsibility, and player welfare. This level of what can only be described as caring is remarkable given that the game is centred ostensibly around functional, not psychological or social goals. It is clear that social guilds go well past the game’s goals in creating and maintaining communities.” (Williams et al., 2006). All their findings found the MMO of WoW to be a game where the games format encouraged interaction and successfully developed relationships and attributes of a community.  Concluding that “WoW is in fact a vibrant third place, populated with a range of social experiences ranging from ephemeral impersonal groups to sustained and deep relationships that extend offline.” (Williams et al., 2006).

 

Online gaming and Social Capital

 Social capital is a form of cultural capital where social networks and groups are central to your influence. Social capital, is an integral part of analysing relationships and personal interactions and can be seen in gaming communities like World of Warcraft. The gaming mechanics for MMO affects how important it is for the players to co-operate and compete with others and how useful it is to form different kinds of sub-communities with people of greater ability establishing a higher social capital in the gaming communities. This bridging of social capital into the online gaming communities can be have positive affects on an individuals overall social capital. The journal article “Gaming Social Capital: Exploring Civic Value in Multiplayer Video Games” looks at gaming social capital and “Theorizes that gamers who develop ties and work together with a community of fellow gamers build gaming social capital, one’s sense of belonging to and participating in a gaming community which can be leveraged for individual benefit or collective good. In other words, the concept of social capital recognizes that there is some value inherent in one’s connections to other community members” (Molyneux, Vasudevan & Gil de Zúñiga, 2015) This further proves the value of being in a gaming community and why online gaming is a ‘third place’ for people to interact and react to others, with the study finding that “multiplayer video games are indeed associated with forming social ties within a community of gaming peers, a concept we call gaming social capital. This concept is distinct from but theoretically and empirically related to broader face-to-face social capital. Results suggest that gamers who develop gaming social capital are likely to develop face-to-face ties with others in their real-world community. Thus we observe a spill over effect from gaming social capital to social capital in the real world.” (Molyneux, Vasudevan & Gil de Zúñiga, 2015) This development of face-to-face ties and a spill over of social capital in the physical world shows how influential the interactions which take place online in video games can be.

 

Online Gaming communities have radically changed the way people can interact with one another and allows people to network in a way they could never do offline. Although there are arguments against the value of virtual communities and its ‘razzle dazzle’ from scholars such as Fox, its been proven that the attributes of a virtual gaming community have many advantages over physical communities, such as successfully breaking down boundaries of race, gender, ethnicity, and geographic location established in physical communities” (Gross, Katz and Rice, 2003). Gaming is a ‘third place’ for many people and it allows people to interact in a way that there first place (home) and second place (work) don’t allow. The MMO game World of Warcraft is an example of a third place and the interactions that take place. The way these gaming communities grow as a ‘third place’ then begins to establish an order of social capital within its members.

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 

References

Ducheneaut, N., Yee, N., Nickell, E., & Moore, R. (2006). Building an MMO With Mass Appeal. Games And Culture1(4), 281-317. doi: 10.1177/1555412006292613

Fox, Robert. 1995. “Newstrack.”communications of the ACM 38 (8): 11-12.

Gross, M., Katz, J., & Rice, R. (2003). Social Consequences of Internet Use: Access, Involvement, and Interaction. Contemporary Sociology32(6), 691.

Katz, J. E., Rice, R. E., Acord, S., Dasgupta, K., & David, K. (2004). Personal Mediated Communication and the Concept of Community in Theory and Practice. In P. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication and Community: Communication Yearbook 28 (pp. 315-371). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Molyneux, L., Vasudevan, K., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2015). Gaming Social Capital: Exploring Civic Value in Multiplayer Video Games. Journal Of Computer-Mediated Communication20(4), 381-399.

 Oldenburg, R. (1999). The great good place: Cafés, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community. New York: Marlowe: Cambridge, MA : Da Capo Press.

Preece, J. (2000). Online Communities: Designing Usability, Supporting Sociability. 100(9), pp.459-460.

Steinkuehler, C. & Williams, D. (2006). Where Everybody Knows Your (Screen) Name: Online Games as “Third Places”. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 11(4), article  http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00300.x/full

Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Net Surfers Don’t Ride Alone: Virtual Communities as Communities. In P. Kollock, & M. Smith (Eds.), Communities and Cyberspace. New York: Routledge.

Williams, D., Ducheneaut, N., Zhang, L., Yee, N., & Nickell, E. (2006). From Tree House to Barracks: The Social Life of Guilds in World of Warcraft. Games & Culture, 1(4), 338-361.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Symbiotic Relationship Of Online Gaming and Community Building

Written by Callum Duffy, Curtin University

 

Abstract: This paper largely focuses on the relationship between Online Gaming and the various Communities formed because of it. Specifically analysing communities found by using ‘Overwatch’ as a prime example, the main argument presented is that various communities focused on a single, core aspect unifying them all are more or less interconnected individuals with similar general interests in regards to this core aspect, and thus have the potential for collaboration and dialogue between each other.

 

The relationship between communities and online gaming is, at its very core, a relationship that is symbiotic in nature. In relevance to this, this conference paper will focus primarily on the formation of communities in regards to online gaming, the variation of interests within formed communities and how these vary and diverge into different niche communities, the formation of friendships between members existing within the same community, and how these communities still relate to one another in regards to a singular, dynamic interest. For this conference paper, we will specifically be looking at the various communities that are brought together by the popular FPS game produced by Blizzard entertainment, ’Overwatch’.

 

A community, as defined by Gusfield (1975) focuses on two primary concepts when defining community, The first of these concepts focusing on the geographical sense of community, etc. neighbourhood, town, city. The second is relational, concerned with quality of character of human relationship, without reference to location (p. xvi). In regards to online gaming, the second definition of community provided by Gusfield is an accurate definition as to what an online gaming community is, as the relationships formed through online gaming isn’t limited by the boundaries of geographical location, as the online medium allows player to connect with each other and form relationships/communities with one another. In relation to this, Overwatch allows players from all over the world to play against one another as it isn’t limited by geographical restrictions, this allowing players to connect and as a result allowing the formations of communities, regardless of geographical location. Overwatch itself particular is a game with various communities that have been formed from it’s large, generalised community of those who play the game. I will focus on 3 different communities within the generalised player community, these being the casual, competitive and e-sport based Overwatch communities. It’s important to note that these 3 chosen communities do not accurately represent the different niche groups that exist with the generalised Overwatch player base community, rather, they represent the shift in community based priorities in relevance to Overwatch as a whole, and the interests that each group prioritises.

 

There are various communities within the game Overwatch that cater to the various players that play Overwatch. The casual Overwatch community represents the approximate majority of those who play Overwatch, and those involved within this community simply play the game for relaxation and enjoyment within their leisure time, and build friendships with the players that they meet in game, or through other communication mediums that allow members of this community to collaborate and share information. With this in mind, the primary methods of communication for those in this community are either the in-game voice chat, where individual players can speak to other players on their team, or Youtube comment sections, where they can leave comments under videos that appeal to them and their interests in relation to Overwatch. The ‘competitive’ Overwatch community focus primarily on the competitive game modes that Overwatch offers, where players get ranked based on their skill level. These players seek to improve their skills in playing a particular character, or acquire better game sense through more playtime and experience. More often than not, individuals that associate themselves with this community in particular diverge into different, niche communities that focus on the fundamental principles that the members of this community share. For example, if a player involved in the competitive community plays a particular character mores than others, he/she may also be involved in a sub-community that focuses on playing that particular character, certain exploits that players can use to better play that character, or a generalised appreciation community focusing on that character. The competitive Overwatch community uses a variety of ways to communicate, including the aforementioned methods that the casual community uses to communicate with. However, a difference in the communication side to this community in particular focuses on the application of the official Overwatch forums. These forums allow players to commentate on the state of the game overall, communicate with game developers and ask/answer questions, and communicate with like-minded players on specified topics. Finally, Overwatch’s e-sports community focuses on the ‘professional’ side of play, with professional Overwatch players receiving sponsorships, business deals in the form of contracting to an e-sports team, and being a general figurehead/role model for all Overwatch players. This community represents a minority within the Overwatch community, as the majority of Overwatch players do not associate themselves with the professional side of the game.

 

E-sports in particular, is arguably the most niche of communities that Overwatch offers. E-sports in itself is defined as “an area of sport activities in which people develop and train mental or physical abilities in the use of information and communication technologies” (Wagner, 2006). Individuals can be associated with E-sports as a competitor or more often than not, simply an observer. This is where the divergence of communities within the game Overwatch begin to reassemble into an amalgamate of individuals with similar interests. Namely, the aforementioned competitive community begins to shift towards a larger involvement in the e-sports community, be it as a spectator or an actual competitor. Overwatch itself has its very own e-sports tournament labelled ‘Overwatch League’, this league hosts various international teams, and has a central presence within the game itself. Overwatch allows player to purchase cosmetic items that represent these teams in game, in a fashion similar to that of a football jersey. With this in mind, this further strengthens the idea of merging different communities within Overwatch, as casual players have access to e-sports related cosmetics, and resources allowing them to further explore the professional Overwatch league.

 

The casual community found within Overwatch however, is the broadest of these communities that the vast majority of the player base fits into. Where casual players might play the competitive modes that Overwatch offers, they still see it as just a game, and don’t necessarily focus on the same aspects the the competitive communities of Overwatch may focus on. The formation of online friendships between individuals within this community are genuine and are capable to exist in an offline setting also. As said by Domahidi, Festl and Quandt (2014), “ Players with a pronounced motive to gain social capital and to play in a team had the highest probability to transform their social relations from online to offline context. We found that social online gamers are well integrated and use the game to spend time with old friends—and to recruit new ones”. With this in mind, the idea that communities are capable of bringing likeminded individuals together  is solidified and proven. This is regardless of how niche a community may be, as for example, a casual player may be persuaded to become a part of a competitive community via friendships made online, or a simply change in opinion towards the game as a whole.

 

With the aforementioned in mind, the various communities that are found within Overwatch are capable of interacting with each other through various different means. Specifically mentioned before were the official Overwatch forums as a large medium used by those involved within the competitive Overwatch community. Youtube however, is the biggest way for the general Overwatch community members to gather information. Be it through the official PlayOverwatch account that posts official trailers, development updates and short animated films, or fan accounts that post game commentaries, professional game analysis or funny meme montages; Youtube is a medium that allows the vast majority of the generalised Overwatch community to interact with one another. Specifically, Youtube is a medium that connects well with younger audiences that have grown up in a digital era, specifically teenagers, which in itself can be considered a sub-community of Overwatch. Youtube content creators can be seen as social influencers that shape the foundation of the decision making process of their audiences, and there is no better example of this than the relationship between these social influencers and their teenage audience. As put by Chua & Banerjee (2015) “personal opinions and experiences have become one of the most valuable sources of information to assist users in their purchase decision-making process”. When the opinions of a professional Overwatch player is shared through Youtube, and reaches the screen of a fan of said influencer, there is a great chance that said fan will copy and follow the personal opinion and review of the influencer in question. Once again we see the merge between communities found within the general Overwatch community, in this case we see the casual, teenage audience form their own opinions and ideas on a particular idea based on the influence of a social influencer, more often than not in this case a competitive, celebrity figure that belongs to a niche community of Overwatch entertainers.

 

Thus, we are presented with a correlation between the various niche communities that belong to the generalised Overwatch community as a whole. This correlation is that the various niche communities influence one another, to the point where the divergence of these communities merge back together into a singular entity. This singular community is characterised and stereotyped to have specific traits shared amongst the members of this community, and with Overwatch in particular this generalised trait would be toxic gameplay that certain players bring to the table. This is recognised even by the developers of the game in question. In a video posted to the PlayOverwatch Youtube account, lead developer Jeff Kaplan addressed the audience about the increased negative social interactions that occur between player of the game, and the steps that the team are taking to rid toxicity from the game. In the video, Kaplan states, “We have taken disciplinary action against over 480,000 accounts, and 340,000 of those were a direct result of players using the reporting system. So you can see, the vast majority of actions we take are because players have said hey, there’s another player here doing something very bad and I want to see some action” (PlayOverwatch, 2017). In regards to this video, we can see that the Overwatch community are characterised by being toxic in game. However, we can also see that this is a big problem that many individuals both inside and outside of this community want to see be dealt with.

 

We can see that Youtube is the primary medium being used to address the various Overwatch communities in question. The social influencer of the video being lead developer Jeff Kaplan is a figurehead that the majority of the player base look up to, and hearing him say that reporting toxic behaviour in Overwatch is a good step to ridding the toxicity problem in Overwatch makes the communities in question listen to this, and thus form their own opinions and ideas behind this. This in turn changes the overall attitude and behaviour within the various communities found in Overwatch into an attitude that is committed to neutralising and reducing bad player behaviours within the game. This video and the reactions of the individuals within the specific Overwatch communities that this video targets is a clear cut example of how various, niche communities still relate to one another via a singular purpose, and how the power of social influence has the ability to change specific attitudes and form opinions within communities.

 

Overall, there is a distinct correlation between online gaming, and the formation of communities and the individuals that associate themselves with online games. The various opinions, thoughts and values that are shared between members of online game communities are generally shared, with a few principle outlying values creating certain niche communities within a generalised community focusing on an online game. These opinions, thoughts and values are subject to change with the input of social influencers altering these already existing opinions, thoughts and values, and thus influence which type of community an individual may choose to associate themselves with. However, the already underlying thoughts, values and opinions that represent the entire, generalised community still exist between various niche groups, and thus allow collaboration and unity between these groups whilst retaining a sense of uniqueness present in the various niche groups found within a community.

 

 

  • Chua, A. Y., & Banerjee, S. (2015). Understanding Review Helpfulness as a Function of Reviewer Reputation, Review Rating, and Review Depth. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(2), 354-362.
  • Domahidi, Emese & Festl, Ruth & Quandt, Thorsten. (2014). To dwell among gamers: Investigating the relationship between social online game use and gaming-related friendships. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 107–115. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.023
  • Gusfield, J. R. (1975). The community: A critical response. New York: Harper Colophon.
  • McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 6-23. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e5fb/8ece108aec36714ee413876e61b0510e7c80.pdf
  • PlayOverwatch (Official Game Development Youtube Account). (2017, September 13). Developer Update | Play Nice, Play Fair | Overwatch [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnfzzz8pIBE
  • Wagner, Michael. (2006). On the Scientific Relevance of eSports. 437-442. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220968200_On_the_Scientific_Relevance_of_eSports
  • Warmelink, H., & Siitonen, M. (2011). Player Communities in Multiplayer Online Games: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. Proceedings of the 2011 DiGRA International Conference: Think Design Play, 6, 1-21. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3acd/d7a7402cf8c517350f9f6041c29e4b0f34ed.pdf