ABSTRACT: With the advent of Internet-related technology and computer-mediated communication, the way that communities come together and interact with each other has changed radically. We now have infinite online mediums, used to chat, find support or make friends. The community surrounding the casual mobile game Pokémon Go is a great example of a community that comes together both online and offline. This paper will examine the ways in which the Pokémon Go community form a ‘third space’, both on and offline, and look at the civic, social and health opportunities that can arise from such a community.
KEYWORDS: Pokémon Go, casual mobile games, third space, computer-mediated communication, online community, online games, weak ties
Pokémon, of Nintendo fame, is a hugely influential franchise. With over 20 years of history including numerous video games on Nintendo’s many platforms, anime shows and movies, a popular trading card game and more, Pokémon is set in a modern fantasy world, filled with creatures that players can capture and train as they travel about the world. The Pokémon franchise has remained successful with the July 2016 release of Pokémon Go, a ‘location-based augmented reality game where players explore their actual surroundings to capture and evolve creatures in the real world (Niantic, Inc., 2016). Pokémon has always been designed with a community spirit in mind, be it through trading creatures or battling against another player. These elements of the original Pokémon games are present in Pokémon Go. Players can gather at areas frequented by Pokémon, battle gyms or complete raids together. Communication between players is mediated by platforms such as Facebook groups or Discord channels, and, as players become closer to each other, personal online chats and messaging. As Mims (2016) points out, the game is a ‘stealth social’ game – while not explicitly for bringing people together, it does so anyway as those playing it share ideas, tips and progress. This paper will argue that the Pokémon Go is a great example of both a virtual and physical ‘third place’, and that the game has the ability to move a virtual and online communities offline and into a physical setting. It will examine the definition of a third place and how it relates to both the community and the vehicle of the game itself, and how the game can help bring community together and provide civic, social and health opportunities. The game has the possibility to provide great community support and strength.
As a group that engages via computer-mediated communication (CMC), as well as offline and in ‘real life’, the Pokémon Go community can be seen as inhabiting a virtual ‘third space’. Sociologist Ray Oldenburg introduced the concept of the third space in 1999 as a way “to describe the public spaces used for informal social interaction outside of the home and workplace” (Soukup, 2006, p421). These include cafés, churches, parks, hair salons, libraries and clubs.
Oldenburg (1999) describes some key features of third places, which are as follows:
- They are on neutral ground;
- They are a leveler;
- Conversation is the main activity;
- They are accessible;
- They have ‘regulars’;
- They have a low profile;
- They are a home away from home; and
- The mood is playful.
It can be seen that most of these characteristics are represented within the CMC of the Pokémon Go community, as well as within the gameplay itself.
- Neutral ground
Steinkuehler and Williams (2006, p890) identify games as being “neutral grounds in the sense that there is no default obligation to play”. Unless a player enters into a legal, financial or otherwise agreement (such as in e-sports, an activity not typically linked to casual games such as Pokémon Go) they can start up and quit the game, or leave the community space, as they please. - Leveler
As is the case in the vast majority of games, all players of Pokémon Go, regardless of social or financial status, previous Pokémon playing experience, start the game on an equal level. An initial player has no Pokémon, no in-game currency and they begin at level 1. - Conversation
Players talk to each other through such mediums as online grassroots network The Silph Road (Geraghty, 2017) as well as other platforms such as Facebook, Discord and Reddit. The entire purpose of these platforms is to share conversation with other users. - Accessibility
Virtual communities such as those mediated by Discord, Facebook or Reddit are perpetually accessible, given their online nature. They are accessible directly via one’s home, or on the go via a mobile device or laptop and Internet. The game itself is also playable at any time, and players can go geographically almost anywhere with it. - Regulars
Whilst the game was very popular when it initially came out, and has gained over 750 million downloads (Carter, 2017) in its first year, users began to report a lack of game content and buggy servers. Despite this, nearly two years later as Geraghty (2017) says, it has retained a ‘surprisingly loyal fanbase’ of about 60 million players. A lot of these players participate in forums such as The Silph Road, Reddit or local Facebook groups, and no doubt form a core group of ‘regulars’ that frequently enjoy playing the game with each other. - Low profile
While Pokémon Go might have a bright, colourful and sometimes intense game design, and not fit the low profile criterion visually, the social function of its environment does. The social atmospheres are informal and without pretension, and are not mediated by any kind of official Pokémon organisation. - Home away from home
Trepte, Reinecke and Juechems (2011) report finding “online gaming may result in strong social ties, if gamers engage in online activities that continue beyond the game and extend these with offline activities”. This is definitely true of a game such as Pokémon Go, with its offline activities (such as hunting for Pokémon or battling gyms together) extending from the interactions that happen online (for example, planning such activities). - Playful mood
In his seminal text Homo Ludens, the Dutch theorist Huizinga (1955) defines play as “a free activity standing quite consciously outside ‘ordinary’ life as being ‘not serious,’ but at the same time absorbing the player intensely and utterly”. Pokémon Go and its communities fit neatly into this definition, with players discussing strategies, ideas and other relevant information within groups, whilst maintaining an understanding of friendliness and lightheartedness.
As demonstrated above, it can be seen that the Pokémon Go community’s computer-mediated communication can be classified as a third space. But what about its offline communication, and the way players come together when there is nothing virtual except the game itself, played on mobile devices? Sessions (2010, p376) defines a ‘meetup’ as “local, face-to-face gatherings of online community members”. This definition fits Pokémon Go communities well, as they are indeed local due to the geographic element of the game (and players in different suburbs or cities might organize their own personal meetups based on the geographic placement of its community members). Her study shed light on the social implications of virtual community meetups. She notes, “It should not be assumed that meetups are beneficial to the community … in these cases, such communities may lose the benefit of weak ties, and the exchange of resources with weak social ties may be sacrificed” (Sessions, 2010, p376). These weak ties are essential to such a community because they provide diversity to the players. In addition, Constant, Sproull & Kiesler (1996) found that weak ties are essential because information providers gave advice and solved the problems of information seekers, “despite their lack of a personal connection with the seekers”. This technical advice is reflective of the way that players most often interact in forums and groups online, seeking advice and ideas from other players such as where there is an abundance of a certain Pokémon, or if anyone else is experiencing a specific glitch in the game. However, Sessions (2010) goes on to suggest that ‘multiplex’ relationships – which are relationships that are maintained both online and offline – make attendees of such meetups engage more with the online community as a whole, and contributes to creating social capital. Additionally, Trepte, Reinecke and Juechems (2011) suggest “beneficial effects of online gaming on online social capital and offline social support are particularly likely the more users interact both in online and offline settings”. So, whilst not with abandon, players should (and do) continue to ‘meetup’ in offline settings, hunting for Pokémon and battling gyms together.
Pokémon Go also has an effect on the wider community. As Perry (2016) wrote for Business Insider, “The other night, I put down a lure module on a PokéStop (which lures more Pokémon to the stop) in the park across from my apartment. At 10 p.m., with a slight drizzle coming down, several people showed up within minutes.” This is representative of the type of community engagement and spirit that people were playing the game with. Kagi (2017) reported that a visitation to King’s Park, a popular park in Perth, Western Australia, improved 12.5% on the previous year and was the highest visitation on record. This was largely due to the Pokémon Go craze, and players flocked to concentrated areas after rare Pokémon became available in the area. This ‘offline’ use of a digital game reflects the strength of the in-game community.
It can also bring isolated people together, and bring them into the community. One such health phenomenon that Pokémon Go could address is that of the condition hikikomori, of Japan – a severe social withdrawal documented amongst teenagers and adults who experience fear, anxiety and a sense of refusal (Tateno, Park, Kato, Umene-Nakano & Saito, 2012). Individuals who experience hikikomori become recluses in their own homes or rooms. This is almost directly correlated with the availability of the Internet and a growing incidence of Internet addiction. However, with the release of Pokémon Go, there are reports of gamers becoming less sedentary and having improvements in depression and anxiety through physical activity (McCartney, 2016). Tateno et al. (2016) indicate that for some cases of hikikomori, Pokémon Go could provide a rehabilitation opportunity, and suggest placing PokéStops at hikikomori support centres to serve as an adjunct to other psychiatric interventions. This is just one example of how gamification of a community resource could provide advances in care.
There is an ever-increasing amount of discourse about whether or not video games have a positive or negative impact on people’s social lives. Pokémon Go is absolutely beneficial to players for health reasons, due to them getting outside and moving about while playing the game, but it is also beneficial for their social experience as well. As Kaczmarek et al. (2017) found in their study, “Pokémon Go also provides an opportunity for players to interact face-to-face with each other and socialize, which has emerged as a social factor that has been related to greater engagement in games”. The successful gamification of activity brought on by Pokémon Go has allowed people to join strong and welcoming communities they would not otherwise have known existed. Within the community everyone has at least one shared interest – their interest in Pokémon Go – and because of this their social capital is increased. Once social capital has been established amongst the virtual community, it then spills over into offline social capital, as members begin to meet up and play the game together. Gross, Katz and Rice (2003) state 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.” Players talk to each other from across the world as well as locally, creating communities virtually and then taking them offline. As Soukup (2006) states, “the virtual third place should feel like a place that is integrated seamlessly into the existing textures and details of our lived communal experiences.” The communication that occurs in the community spaces takes place in oft-used digital spaces such as social media, further cementing the game and its community as a third space.
References
Carter, C. (2017). Pokémon Go has made $1.2 billion to date, surpasses 750 million downloads. Retrieved from https://www.destructoid.com/pokemon-go-has-made-1-2-billion-to-date-surpasses-750-million-downloads-446609.phtml
Constant, D., Sproull, L. & Kiesler, S. (1996). The kindness of strangers: the usefulness of weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 7(2), 119-135.
Geraghty, L. (2017). Pokémon Go no longer has the hype of 2016, but a loyal fanbase remains. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/pokemon-go-no-longer-has-the-hype-of-2016-but-a-loyal-fanbase-remains-80438
Gross, M., Katz, J., & Rice, R. (2003). Social Consequences of Internet Use: Access, Involvement, and Interaction. Contemporary Sociology, 32(6), 691.
Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo ludens; a study of the play-element in culture. Boston, USA: Beacon Press.
Kagi, J. (2017). Pokémon Go craze drives extra 790,000 visitors to Kings Park in Perth. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-16/spike-in-kings-park-visitor-numbers-after-pokemon-go-craze/8950482
Kaczmarek, L. D., Misiak, M., Behnke, M., Dziekan, M. & Guzik, P. (2017). The Pikachu effect: Social and health gaming motivations lead to greater benefits of Pokémon Go use. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 356-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.031
McCartney, M. (2016). Margaret McCartney: Game on for Pokémon Go. BMJ, 354, 4306. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4306
Niantic, Inc. (2016). Explore! | Pokémon Go. Retrieved from http://www.pokemongo.com/en-au/explore/
Oldenburg, R. (1999). The Great Good Place: cafés, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons and other hangouts at the heart of a community. Cambridge, USA: Da Capo Press.
Perry, A. (2016). The 3 best things about ‘Pokémon GO’. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/the-3-best-things-about-pokemon-go-2016-7
Siegal, J. (2017). Four out of five ‘Pokémon Go’ users have quit. BGR. Retrieved from http://bgr.com/2017/04/03/pokemon-go-popularity-2016-users/
Soukup, C. (2006). Computer-mediated communication as a virtual third place: building Oldenburg’s great good places on the World Wide Web. New Media & Society, 8(3), 421-440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444806061953
Steinkuehler, C. A. & 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
Tateno, M., Park, T.W., Kato, T.A., Umene-Nakano, W., Saito, T. (2012). Hikikomori as a possible clinical term in psychiatry: a questionnaire survey. BMC Psychiatry, 12, 169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-12-169
Tateno, M., Skokauskas, N., Kato, T. A., Teo, A. R., Guererro, A. P. S. (2016). New game software (Pokémon Go) may help youth with severe social withdrawal, hikikomori. Psychiatry Research, 246, 848-849. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2016.10.038
Trepte, S., Reinecke, L. & Juechems, K. (2011). The social side of gaming: How playing online computer games creates online and offline social support. Computers in Human Behaviour, 28, 832-839. http://dx.doi.org/0.1016/j.chb.2011.12.003
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Hi Claire.
Great conference paper really enjoyed your information on the hikikomori condition. it is true how gaming world does make people turn away from the real world but your argument on how Pokemon go is trying to break that trend and create an environment where people can be online and still enjoy the offline environment around them.
Hi Bradley,
Thanks for your comment. I found the hikikomori condition really interesting to research, and it made me wonder if there are equivalent conditions (perhaps not formally diagnosable or named) in other countries around the world.
I am questioning, though, your comment about how the gaming world makes people ‘turn away’ from the real world. Do you think that there are, in fact, discrete and separate ‘worlds’? Or is there some overlap? Does your definition mean that games can’t be considered ‘real’? I’d love to hear your opinion.
Hi,
Just hijacking on your question Claire; I think that the large amount of mobile technology that is available to many people has meant digital and physical “worlds” overlap significantly on a daily basis. You could argue that, for example, the connections made on a desktop computer could easily be separate to the “real world”. However, with many people interacting with others and digital worlds via mobile phones on an ongoing basis, it is hard to argue that these worlds are completely discrete. It’s interesting to think about how digital worlds impact people’s everyday lives and even the way they think.
i think the gaming world is an escape for many people. a place where someone can be anyone or be something great because in a gaming world the exploration for possibility is endless.But in the real world people might not be able to find the same opportunity but this can also go the other way for people who find endless opportunity in the real world might not find that in the virtual world because they might think the possibilities are limited to connectivity and hardware.
I guess it is a lifestyle choice but i definitely think the two worlds are separated and trying to mold them together is a barrier we have not yet achieved. kind of like Tron legacy.
Love the comparison to Tron! That’s definitely a good example of what it would be like to have an overlap in the two worlds.
Hi Claire, Zachary and Bradley,
Your comments relating to the distinctions between online gaming worlds and the offline world interested me. Yes, there is debate about whether online gaming blurs into the ‘real world’, but I would be really interested to hear your thoughts on the effects of these gaming communities. I wonder if behaviours learned online can translate between worlds despite these being two distinctly separate realities. For instance, do you think that behaviours learned online, like confidence, communication skills or trolling, translate into the offline world? Or are these aspects of online user’s personalities compartmentalised and specific to each world?
Look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Cheers,
Anna
Hi Claire,
I enjoyed your paper on the community effects of Pokemon Go and particularly enjoyed the terms ‘stealth social’ and ‘multiplex relationships’. I can’t think of any social relationships I have that do not in some small way involve some form of online communication so the term was quite interesting. I do have a couple of questions about the topic of Pokemon Go though;
1. As someone clearly involved in the community surrounding this game I’m curious whether you found the community involvement to increase or become more visible with the introduction of socially activities such as raiding?. Prior to this the game lacked any real social activities that be undertaken through the game itself.
2. You mention that due to everyone starting the game at level 1 that it is a level playing field, but people that live in remote locations are restricted by the number of pokestops that are available as well as the limited number of pokemon in their area. Do you feel that while everyone may start at the same position, certain players will be able to advance at a faster rate due to their geographical location? Another aspect to this could be the official events that are conducted by Niantic which are obviously conducted in areas where the game is at peak popularity. These events very clearly bring together large numbers of players in an offline capacity, how do you feel about the lack of a single event in Australia?
Hi Jamie, thanks for your questions!
In regards to your first question, I think raiding did increase the amount of social activity, certainly in terms of people posting in groups and servers asking if anyone else was going to be participating in a certain raid. However before then, people were playing the game together anyway, although those relationships might not have been initiated because of the game itself.
Your second point is also a very good point, and while activities like raids and big events would give players more opportunity to join in on community events, I don’t think they would specifically give opportunities for players to advance faster than others dependant on their geographic location.
Your notion of a ‘third space’ is so interesting, I got pretty into Pokemon Go when it first came out and used to go to Kings Park with friends where there was hundreds of people playing the game at the same time. Kings Park really ticked the boxes of Oldenburgs key features of a third place, especially the neutral ground and the idea that ‘the mood is playful’. We saw many people who were just generally happy to be around others enjoying the same thing, others brought their animals and lots of people dressed up as Pokemon characters and that was a massive factor in bringing the online community into a real world physical community with one common cause.
I definitely agree with you that the game has the ability to move virtual and online communities into the physical setting but it is interesting with Pokemon Go because even though these virtual communities are together meeting new people in a physical place because of the game, they are still online together and being offline isn’t a part of the game or the creation of these physical communities. In order to be part of the physical community in the outside world one had to still be online on their mobile device, and was a really cool interaction to witness and be a part of between online and physical communities!
Your paper is really great and is backed up by a lot of stats, I definitely think it was good you chose to write about this! ☺
Hi Claire,
I thoroughly enjoyed your paper on Pokemon GO and its affect on the wider community, especially helping those in Japan with the ‘hikikomori’ condition which I found really interesting. I liked how you referred to Oldenburg when identifying ‘third place’ and how Pokemon GO specifically catered to that, great links. As a former Pokemon GO player myself, I found that the game was a little repetitive and the player base ‘died down’ so to say. Is this still the case today or has there been a spike in players due to advancements to the game itself?
It would have been great to see some images to split up your paper with the information so that it isn’t as dense. Other than that, amazing stuff!
I look forward to hearing your thoughts!
Best,
Marco 🙂
Hey Marco,
The game still has a small but strong group of central players, who are pretty active in spaces such as facebook groups, discord servers and pokemon go subreddits – it’s not unusual to start to recognise some familiar faces and names on these forums. Then of course you have players who don’t participate in the community as such, but still play the game.
Hi Claire,
I really enjoyed your discussion of Pokemon Go and the Third Place, I too talked about similar topics. Pokemon Go is an excellent example to talk about in the online games realm as there are so many avenues to take with it. I believe that before raids were introduced it was not as socially beneficial as it could have been. Personally, I didn’t play the game with anyone until raids and now I have multiple communities to play and raid with which has been the highlight of the game; meeting new people and having a common interest to talk about. I quite liked where you talked about hikikomori, and believe that this is something that should be talked about more openly around the world, especially were communities of online gamers are prevalent.
Hi Claire,
Great paper! Although it was not necessarily the first example of augmented reality gaming, Pokemon Go has certainly had a disruptive effect on casual mainstream gaming. I liked the point you raised about this type of gaming being ‘stealth social’ – I think it this, coupled with weak ties, indirectly helps online communities engage and collaborate.
In my own paper on the use of location on Web 2.0 platforms, I also refer to Pokemon Go Community Days where players can partake in a bonus game within their local community for a limited time period – https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2018Bentley/2018/05/06/locations-place-in-a-web-2-0-world/
Thanks for sharing your paper!
Cheers,
Teresa
Hey Claire,
What an interesting paper! I remember how crazy Pokemon go became in such a short period of time, I’d never seen a game become so viral so quickly. I think it would be really interesting to compare the the viral nature of Pokemon Go and the new gaming craze Fortnite.
Do you think that the rise and fall of the Pokemon Go app was due to the fact that people got tired of having to go outside and get moving while playing the game? or the game simply lost momentum?
If you have time check out my paper on gaming and how it effects our interactions
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2018Bentley/2018/05/07/gaming-communities-changing-the-way-we-interact/
Hey Madison,
Yeah, I think the game’s popularity waned due to its physical nature, it’s not something you can play from the couch at your house, you definitely have to get up and move for it, and I think there was an element of novelty that wore off for a lot of people after a while, but I also think it had a level of media coverage that was unprecedented and that inflated the game quite a lot at the start, which a lot of other games like it wouldn’t have had to begin with.
Cheers,
Claire