Abstract
This conference paper will analyze how the effects of globalization has benefited online gaming and thus the reason why online gaming is gaining in popularity compared to real life sports. Effects such as the increase in global market value with online gaming products vs sports products, how globalization has brought about thousands of online gaming communities and why people are becoming more involved with online games due to these communities. Finally, the conference paper will explore how the technological advancements brought about by globalization such as Web 2.0 have facilitated the popularity of online gaming and consequently why real-life sports is declining in attractiveness and participation.
This conference paper will argue that online gaming is becoming more popular than sports due to globalisation and possibly online gaming events are growing larger than events such as the Olympics, FIFA world cup and other major sporting events. Globalisation has affected every type of industry including sports with broadcasting rights for television dictating at what time athletes will actually compete so that maximum viewers are attained as this was the case for the Rio Olympic Games. Although lately, in the last decade, the gaming industry has grown exceptionally fast with the U.S and Japanese being the two major participators with many smaller nations rapidly climbing up the ladder, studies indicate that the gaming industry will be the largest industry in front of music and filmography in the coming years. Therefore, this puts the gaming industry in the forefront of globalization. (Charles Sterin & Winston, 2017).
One may argue that these two aspects of gaming do not fall into the same context. However, they are actually both very similar. It is important to establish what is meant by real-life games and online games. Real-life games can be anything played by 1 or more people such as chess, which can be played by one person as well as two people; Olympic Games, Commonwealth Games, Motor GP, Formula One racing and even gambling are all by definition, games. The definition of a game is “a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators” (“The definition of games”, 2018). There is in fact no official definition for “online gaming”, thus, for this argument’s sake, online gaming will be used in the context of any game that is played on a computer/mobile phone, (such as PlayStation or Xbox), and basically any type of electronic technology that has access to the Internet. Furthermore, most online games are direct representations of real-life games such as sports games found online, racing games and gambling games, but of course online games also go beyond the realm of reality and into fiction.
The globalisation of online gaming is more profitable than the globalization of real-life gaming sports. Expert historians in sport conclude that the globalization of sports began with the British Imperial Colonisation in the 1870s, but even today, sports globalisation still continues across the world with countries adopting new types of sports. Globalisation in sports today is through broadcasting large events such as the Olympic Games for example. Research has revealed that the Athens 2004 Olympic games had a total audience of 40 billion for the whole duration of the 17 days the Games took place (Giulianotti & Robertson, 2007). For the 2008 Beijing Olympics 3 billion dollars in revenue had been projected during the time of the Games but overall cost China approximately $41.1 billion to host them (Crookall, 2010). Besides major events, the global sports market revenue for 2017 reached a total of 90 billion US dollars (“Global sports market revenue 2005-2017 | Statistic”, 2018). The globalization period of online gaming compared to the latter has occurred over a much shorter period of time considering that the first game played on separate computer screens came out in 1970s (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006). Online gaming has only recently taken major strides socioeconomically in recent years due to major improvements in technology. The demand for games in the marketing environment is becoming more present because businesses are investing more into games now to attract customers to their products. For example, Ikea Furniture Mobile Game App allows people to decorate their home with Ikea furniture. Accordingly, the global market share predicts that the gaming industry will grow to approx. +6.6% CAGR between 2015 and 2019. In figures, the gaming market was estimated at 91.8 billion US dollars by the year 2019 and the market value would have increased to 118.6 billion US dollars (Warman, 2016). These figures reveal that globalization is making online gaming more profitable than real life gaming and sports.
Online gaming is building successful online communities due to globalization, which has made the world so interconnected due to the ease for people to communicate today through the internet. People can experience a range of diverse cultures and experiences; globalization has created a global community which is subdivided into smaller communities whereby people interact with similar interests to work together to build a bigger more attractive community.
There is no singular definition for online communities; with reference to Preece, “online community consists of 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.” (Preece, 2000). Just like any community member, an online game player also strives to satisfy their needs and have some kind of special role to help in accomplishing a task. Additionally, games seek to exchange information, share objectives as well as is a kind of entertainment service to spectators and an in-depth social motivation between other players (M.I. Koivisto, 2003). For example, research has demonstrated that online gamers believe that the social aspect within a game is an important element to them because it encourages motivation between players (Williams et al., 2006). Previous research conducted on social participation and the formation of friendships states that there are two types of real-life social ties, which may contribute to an understanding of social interactions that occur within a game. These are: bridging and bonding (Castiglione, Van Deth & Wolleb, 2008). Bridging Social Capital occurs when weaker social ties make people feel informed or inspired by each other whereas Bonding Social Capital occurs when strong social ties create emotional support and understanding (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006). In terms of gaming, there is more evidence indicating that an increase in Bridging Social Capital is occurring amongst players and online gaming communities. However, there is also evidence to indicate otherwise, especially in game genres such as Massively Multiplayer Open World Role Playing Games (MMORPG), (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006). Globalisation has allowed for online gaming communities to be formed almost instantaneously within multiplayer games such as Call of Duty, where match cycles can bring in new players every time, forming more of a bridging type social capital amongst players. Although, some games, especially in longer playing games where time and grinding for gear and experience points to level up, have a tendency to have much stronger community ties and seem to be creating more of a bonding type of social capital (M.I. Koivisto, 2003). These communities within some MMORPG games like World of Warcraft or Destiny 2 are called guilds. These guilds provide players with an interactive collaboration between users, and this collaboration can be in the form of voice chat, video chat or simply messaging. Furthermore, guilds offer further support to new members of the game by giving them advice or teaching them little tricks in the game to get a head start or even in some cases give them gear or some kind of useful character item to help them. Within these guilds, there are sub-communities where players have formed closer groups of friends that can get together and go on their own missions and help each other progress faster in the early stages of the game. This is evidence that supports more of a bonding type of social capital (M.I. Koivisto, 2003). Online gaming communities almost seem to have more meaningful interactions between players than simply playing the game, a quote from Burns states that “engagement with the game does not finish when the game session ends, and the computer or console is switched off. Players continue to think about, imagine, even dream about, the events, landscapes and characters of the game.” (Burn 2006)
This quote from Burns suggests that online gaming experiences including online communities is not an isolated singular experience nor is it just one type of social capital, but rather mix of both, depending on the genre of the game (Crawford, 2014). On the other hand, real-life sporting communities are restricted to a particular environment where exchanges can be made such as a football field. Once the time has passed and the game is over, the experience is over, and no further exchanges are made. This has proven not to be the case for online gaming communities. Hence, it is possible that globalisation has given technological means for online gaming communities to be more successful around the world by helping, assisting and building lasting communities where globalisation for real-life sporting communities is limited to its local surroundings.
Although globalisation may be responsible for shaping the world of today, Web 2.0 is probably the true driver behind the success of online gaming communities and relationships. Online communities have come into existence thanks to the creation of the Internet, in particular Web 2.0, which has allowed people to connect with other people; now, more than ever before. Web 2.0 is not just simply a means of staying connected but has also allowed users to participate with other users in an in-depth experience through user-generated content. This user-generated content has impacted the social lives of all users (Wolf, 2018). In other words, Web 2.0 is a major key factor in the reason why online communities have achieved so many social possibilities.
Web 2.0 has enabled communication facilities, which have been integrated into the game mechanics. This does get more technical at some point and will not be discussed here, but this free flow of communication between players within a gaming environment or community is crucial towards the support of the argument that online gaming communities can be as involved and as real as sporting gaming communities. Thus, now it is important to discuss what are the types of communications that are conducted between gamers which will hopefully support the point that online gaming communities can be as involved through the communication possibilities between players because of Web 20. In order for online game players to cooperate with each other in an online gaming environment it must have a broad range of possible ways for players to communicate. The more often players can communicate to each other; the more likely players are to positively contribute to the games social framework (M.I. Koivisto, 2003). Most games require a player to create a virtual avatar whereby interactions are mediated through their virtual avatars of the gamers who inhabit them. Other forms of communication in MMORPGs are character victory emotes; spray tags, clothing or skins that the avatar characters are wearing. These are all forms of communication and status amongst players (M.I. Koivisto, 2003). These similar traits can be found in real-life sporting games too. Many people will wear the football shirt of their favourite international team to communicate that to the players around them, and people who also support that team will notice thus forming a mutual connection. Another example of real-life simulacra is Usain Bolt’s winning pose. Many people will replicate or simulate his victory pose to communicate to others that they have achieved some kind of victory that is meaningful to them. Thus, this proves that Web 2.0 has achieved the same level of meaningful communication and involvement amongst players in online gaming communities.
In this conference paper it has been established that online games and real-life games share the same definition of the meaning, for both types are conducted within the realms of clearly defined rules and objectives furthermore both real life sports, games and online gaming have been affected by globalization advantages and draw backs. Real life sports games might still receive more recognition world-wide in terms of broadcasting views but online gaming in terms of global popularity, participation and market share is benefiting a lot more from globalisation due to the fact that online games can be played at anytime and anywhere. It will only be a matter of time until online gaming events become as anticipated as the Olympics games or football world cup especially with the advancements in virtual reality and Web 2.0, people will become more involved with each through games because they will be more electronically connected than ever before which will only increase the demand for more realistic games and even competitive events. This means between real-life sports games and online gaming, globalization is definitely increasing the popularity of online games a lot more than real life sports games.
Reference list
Burn, A. (2006) ‘Reworking the Text: online fandom’, in D. Carr, D. Buckingham, A. Burn and G. Schott (eds) Computer Games: text, narrative and play, Cambridge, Polity.
Crawford, G. (2014). Video Gamers (1st ed.). Taylor and Francis. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/lib/curtin/detail.action?docID=743941
Castiglione, D., Van Deth, J., & Wolleb, G. (2008). Handbook of Social Capital. Oxford University Press, UK.
Charles Sterin, J., & Winston, T. (2017). Mass Media Revolution (3rd ed.). Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/detail.action?docID=5209906&query=effects+of+globalization+on+online+gaming
Crookall, D. (2010). Serious Games, Debriefing, and Simulation/Gaming as a Discipline. Simulation & Gaming, 41(6), 898-920. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046878110390784
GIULIANOTTI, R., & ROBERTSON, R. (2007). Sport and globalization: transnational dimensions. Global Networks, 7(2), 107-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0374.2007.00159.x
Global sports market revenue 2005-2017 | Statistic. (2018). Statista. Retrieved 25 April 2018, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/370560/worldwide-sports-market-revenue/
M.I. Koivisto, E. (2003). Supporting Communities in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games by Game Design. DiGRA Conference. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4f17/ee84f741c023f8c040e2cfd4a771dd1b9bfb.pdf?_ga=2.144524405.1182549581.1520146345-985881193.1520146345