Tag: online gaming

The reason behind why people play games and form communities in the online game MapleStory.

The Mass Multiplayer Online Game MapleStory Uses Rewards to Motivate Players to Collaborate and Form Communities. 

Abstract
The reason behind why people play games and form communities in the online game MapleStory. Positive rewards are used by the game designers to motivate desirable behaviour and negative stimulus are used to reduces undesirable behaviours. MapleStory uses positive reward systems to incentives collaboration and the formation of communities.

Keywords
Behaviour, online gaming, MapleStory, communities, collaboration, reward systems, motivation, rules, game designs, play, development, MMOG

The purpose of this essay is to explore why people play games and how the Mass Multiplayer Online Game (MMOG’s) MapleStory motivates desirable behaviours, such as collaboration and forming communities. In this paper, I argue that rewards are used motivate desirable behaviours  The following essay will begin by introducing why people engage in play. Then explore the essential motivational drivers behind collaboration and communities in MapleStory.

The reason behind why people engage play is due to the significance of free play for the human brain development according to Dr Panksepp and Dr David Van Nuys, who discovered the play circuit in mammals by examining neurobiological behaviours in rats, which strongly suggests the areas intralaminar nuclei and thalamus make up part of the play circuit. Their research begins by explaining how the human brain contains seven primary emotional processing systems, shared by mammals, which helps anticipate and respond to situations. [r/o] These shared areas are responsible for driving play, especially in children. Dr Panksepp and Dr David Van Nuys describe the importance of free play, as it is essential for the development of neural connections which have a critical role in regulating emotions planning and solving problems and helps to navigate complex social interactions. Panksepp findings suggest out of 1200 genes one-third were significantly changed by a half-hour of play (Panksepp, 1998). The significance of this is it proves play is not a social construction and the importance of play for the human development is an essential requirement. Without understanding the importance and its necessity of play to the human development, it is difficult to understand why so many people engage in games.

What constitutes a game is that it is governed by a set of rules. The Oxford dictionary defines games as “A form of competitive activity or sport played according to rules” (Oxford, n.d.). Thus the primary dividing point between play and games are rules. Once rules are applied to play, a game appears. For instance, a ball with actively engaging participants becomes a match of tennis, basketball etc. Hands can form the game of rock, paper and scissors.

Jesper Juul’s (2010) research paper “The game, the player, the world: Looking for a heart of gameness” explains how games provide a new context for action and meaning, and without a set of rules, participants could not win at chess or make checkmate, however within the rules, there are various options to play (Juul, 2010). In Roger Cailloise’s (2001,1961) paper “Man, Play and Games” noted that the process of play has a beginning middle and end. He suggests when one decides to play a game, it means they are prepared to play within the rules and be governed by them. He used the example of a boxing match to illustrate how it is a part of the restrictiveness which makes the game playable and the goal is not only winning but to enjoy the obstacles set up by the rules (Caillois, 2001,1961). Rules are the essential aspect which makes up a game. The rules provide a context which restricts all player similarly and rewards the players who play well within the rules. Due to the similarity each player experience throughout the game, rules provide a sense of common goal and interest this common interest fosters a sense of community. The Oxford dictionary defines Community as “The condition of sharing or having certain attitudes and interests in common”(Oxford, nd). 

Furthermore, Games and play both require voluntary participation, but games also require active acceptance of the rules. Liebe (2016) uses an illustration of a magical circle to explain games and suggests the space within the magic circle is where the game occurs and the formation of a magic circle is dependent on the players’ participation (Liebe, 2016). The ungoverned space outside the circle may be everything else outside of the game but within the game by engaging the player is voluntary making an agreement to play by the rules. For example, playing the mass multiplayer online game Maple Story automatically requires the player to actively accept the rules by the action of participating. This Therefore suggests the game cannot force the individual to participate in the game or play by its rules, but once the individual has engaged in playing, the rules will govern the player’s actions. 

By examining Maple Story’s rules the game indicates its complexity and sophistication. In simple games such as noughts and crosses the rules can be easily described however as Maple Story is an established MMOG, players are submerged in a highly regulated space where most users would not know or need to know all the rules. The players only need to follow the game and it will show the players the rules once it is necessary. It is difficult for players to do otherwise as the game does not allow for the player to do so (action rage is limited to the design of the game). Thus the game can be seen as a guide and the player as tourists learning what they can and cannot do as they progress through the game(Caillois, 2001,1961). The gamer only knows how to play within the rules because within rules are in a sense the only action rage. Whatever is possible within a game has already been predetermined before the game has begun. This restrictive and confined space leads the player where the game wants the player to progress to, allowing the game designer to pre-determine results, set up obstacles and manipulate/motivate behaviour. Behaviour such as building communities and collaboration is desirable to any MMOG as it is thought to keep players gaming for social factors, such as online friends and help the game build relationship ties between its players and strengthen the player’s relationship with the game (Brox, 2011).  

The method Maple Story uses to promote these desirable behaviours is through a reward system. The gammers are rewarded when performing tasks the game deems desirable. In Maple Story these reward systems are can be seen when gamers are rewarded more when gaming together than alone.  MapleStory is also designed to be played by collaborating this is shown in group quests, which are quests that rewards significantly more than personal quests (rewards in the game are in the form of experience, equipment, weapons, and other things with monetary value) Group quest can only be accessed after a group is forms. 

Characters in maple story have different abilities depending on their job occupation, the strength of these abilities depend on the level of the character. This is important because when in the midst of solving a complex problem; such as solving a maze and hunting monsters, different skills are required. It becomes compulsory to find other players with those skills to form a team with to accomplish group quests. Collaboration within MapleStory’ becomes compulsory at certain points of the game because the game is designed so no character has all of the skills required to solve certain problems. By having these communal restrictions, motivations and rewards for working collaboratively and forming communities, the players are more likely to act in a manner which allows them to achieve the most from the game. By gaming in a manner to maximise rewards and minimise the risks the player will move forward within the game faster. The game is carefully calibrated to keep players on the edge of exploration and requires gamers to use problem-solving skills. MapleStory puts enthuses on learning to cooperate with other gamers this is thought to be good for creating communal ties which bond the player to each other and even deeper into the game. The obstacles set up within the game are complex to solve and require multiplayer collaboration to solve.  Its the constant stimulus from different reward systems that encourage certain characteristics of player behaviour such as forming guilds. 

A clear indication of the game developers desire to see communities within the game flourish is the infrastructure of the guild systems. Guild’s are a design within MapleStory which allows for hundreds of people to belong to one single guild. Guild system within MapleStory is seen as small communities within the big maple community.. They are thought to provide a sense of belonging and status within the group. Facilitating communication tools are designed to enhance the efficiency and speed of communication, functions such as one to one chat, one to many are accessible within the guild. This allows gamers to easily post notifications and ask for help. Some of the benefits of belonging/joining a guild is newbies (new players) can receive consultation from more experienced players. They often receive equipment and training from experienced players. Maple Story is designed to allow experienced players to train inexperienced players and give them experience (experience is the essential requirement to level up within the game and can be collected when monsters are defeated). This design which allows the experienced player to train inexperienced player is a clear indication of the game developers desire to see gamers collaborating. 

By using Abraham Maslow’s “A Theory of Human Motivation” (1943) explains some of the motivations for the individual’s active participation in collaboration. The following is a brief outline of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. The first level and most basic is the physiological need for food, water and clothing. This is shown in MapleStory when newbies join communities such as guilds to receive benefits such as equipment, weapons and basic training. Maslow’s Second level safety needs such as a housing, savings. This is shown in the game as the game provides better monetary rewards for players when they accomplish group quests in comparison to individual quests. The third level affection needs such as family and friends are shown in MapleStory though online friendship/relationships, these are players who meet through the game and form a meaningful relationship. The fourth level self-esteem needs such as recognition and social status are shown through MapleStory when players commit a lot of time to achieve status in positions such as a Guild leader, a high-level player or use limited edition clothing/armour to express their status. The Fifth level self-actualisation needs such as goals and exploring interests. This level of need is shown in the game when players move from casual gaming to a competitive gaming state. Maslow theory suggests human behaviours is usually motivated by one or more of the following five levels of needs, by using Maslow’s Hierarchy of need with examples from Maples story, it shows how MapleStory motivates certain behaviours (Maslow, 1943).

Melis and Tomasello (2013) research paper “Chimpanzees’ (Pan troglodytes) strategic helping in a collaborative task” demonstrates how the correct motivation does not only drive humans to collaborate but also mammals. The author’s findings suggest animal cooperation is more motivational than cognitive. The research was conducted by giving Chimpanzee roles and tools which were not interchangeable by measuring the willingness to transfer a tool to see levels of collaboration to reach reward (food). Their findings demonstrated most subjects worked collaboratively and not only coordinated different roles but also understood which actions their partner needs to perform (Melis & Tomasello, 2013). In other words, Reward systems and motivations can incentivise great levels of participation. MapleStory was able to use the method of rewarding desirable behaviour with positivity stimulus and undesired behaviour with negative stimulus to craft an active collaborative environment which benefits the participants. Some of the negative stimulus used within MapleStory is when gamers attempt to tackle certain monsters without collaborating with other they die within the game. Death within the game has signification connotations, it reduces the players hard earned experience. This is a sign of the heavy hand the Maple Story game designer have regarding collaboration. This also shows how much they desire collaboration within the game. The traits Maple Story deems most desirable are thought to be collaboration, participation, communal efforts and daily active play. 

In conclusion, the free Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game MapleStory has created an alternative world with meaning, social connections, community, monetary value and social status.
Why people play is due to the biological necessity of play, games provide a governed space to play within. When individuals actively engage by playing the online game MapleStory they are surrendering to its rules and participating within the parameters of the game’s design. The design of MapleStory encourages collaboration and the formation of communities. This is shown by group quests and guild’s. MapleStory uses reward systems such as experience, monetary items, obstacles and constraints to guide players to behave accordingly. The game makes it difficult to achieve the ultimate goal (reaching a high level) without the use of collaboration and the formation of communities. Maslow’s (1943) Theory of Human Motivation explains some of the motivation for certain behaviours within MapleStory. The use of positive stimulus to reward and negative stimulus to discourage what MapleStory deems desirable or undesirable behaviour, motivates players to willingly embrace the desirable behaviour. MapleStory pays significant attention to the facilitating tools necessary for collaboration which is communication. Various forms of communication tools are accessible to its gamers. This allows Maple Story’s gamers to easily communicate with each other to form communities and find other gamers to collaborate with. MapleStory is designed to have various options of play, but its also designed when players choose to collaborate and form communities it provides them with best results and fastest route to the ultimate goal of the game which is reaching the highest level.

                        References 

Collaboration. (n.d.). Retrieved April 01, 2018, from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ collaboration?s=t

Caillois, R. (2001/1961). Man, Play and Games, (translated by Meyer Barash). Urbana: University 

of Illinois Press 

Game | Definition of play in English by Oxford Dictionaries. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/game

Juul, J. (2010). The Game, the Player, the World: Looking for a Heart of Gameness*. ^^The Game, 

the Player, the World: Looking for a Heart of Gameness*, 248-270. Retrieved March 25, 2018, from http://www.revistas.uneb.br/index.php/plurais/article/viewFile/880/624

Khambatti, M. S., Ryu, K. D., & Dasgupta, P. (2002). Efficient discovery of implicitly formed peer-to-peer communities. International Journal of Parallel and Distributed Systems and Networks, 5(4), 155-164.

Liebe, M. (2016). There is no magic circle: On the difference between computer games and tradi tional games. The Philosophy of Computer Games Conference Proceedings, 1-4. Retrieved March 20, 2018, from https://books.google.com.au/books?id=168vCw AAQBAJ&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=Tara Brabazon play up play around&source=bl&ots=EQ7- x8xrN7&sig=7Do5SlDHuwaPy95jXN9p b4N2IO8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQpbKO38zKAhVP02MKHXP2CZc Q6AEIKzAF#v=onepage&q&f=false.

Maslow, A. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), pp.370-396.

McIntyre, J., Palmer, D., & Franks, J. (2009). A Framework for Thinking about Collaboration within the Intelligence Community. Person Associates. Retrieved March 20, 2018, from http: www.pherson.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/09.-A-Framework-for-   Thinking-about-Collaboration-within-the-Intelligence-Community_FINAL.pdf

Melis, A. P., & Tomasello, M. (2013). Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) strategic helping in a collaborative task. Biology Letters, 9(2), 20130009-20130009. doi:10.1098/rsbl. 2013.0009

Nuys, D. V. (2013). The Emotional Foundation of Mind- Dr Jaak Panksepp. The Neuropsychotherapist, 90-104. doi:10.12744/tnpt(2)090-104

Panksepp, J., Knutson, B., & Pruitt, D. L. (1998). Toward a Neuroscience of Emotion. What Develops in Emotional Development?, 53-84. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-1939-7_3

Play | Definition of play in English by Oxford Dictionaries. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/play

Reeves, B. & Read, J.L. (2009). Total engagement: Using games and virtual worlds to change the way people work and businesses compete. Harvard Business Press: Boston.

Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.

Williams, D. (2013). A Brief Social History of Game Play. A Brief Social History of Game Play. Re trieved March 20, 2018, from https://is.muni.cz/el/1421/podzim2013/IM082/um/ WilliamsSocHist.pdf .

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.

Fortnite: The Viral Success of Socially Competitive Online Multiplayer Games and their Communities

Abstract

This paper aims to investigate the power social capital holds in cross-platform online gaming communities, and argues that socially completive multiplayer games are more popular because of their development of social capital. Fortnite: Battle Royale, although a relatively new game, is a prime example of how the cross-platform communities have resulted in the viral success of a game. This paper explores the theory of communities, both online and offline, and their relationship to socially competitive multiplayer gaming.  It will discuss the different types of gaming communities and how they span across numerous different platforms. It will also discuss the social capital that is held by members of the Fortnite: Battle Royale (Fortnite) community and how the community has grown since the game’s first release.

Fortnite: The Viral Success of Socially Competitive Online Multiplayer Games and their Communities

The transition from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 has led to the creation of a more collaborative and interactive Internet. Web 2.0 is about the development of communication and content that was not possible in Web 1.0 (Davis, 2009). Online multiplayer games are a development of Web 2.0 that have been able to combine console gaming systems (such as the PlayStation 4) with the Internet to create a unique online experience. This paper aims to discuss how the popularity of socially competitive online multiplayer games have impacted on the cross-platform communities surrounding the games and the social capital these communities hold. We will be examining online multiplayer games that are considered to be competitive but are also used for social interaction between players. These online multiplayer games have resulted in the formation of communities that exist outside the gaming consoles and games itself, and can be found across multiple different platforms online. These communities that are formed around a game create social capital that both individuals and the community hold. Katz defines social capital as a set of shared values and expectations that a community holds. It is about the power people hold through their social networks and the value that is placed on that power (Katz 2004). Social capital is especially important in gaming communities as it revolves around trust and cooperation. This paper will discuss how the popularity of an online socially competitive multiplayer game can result in social capital that spreads across communities that are established in different platforms across the Internet. Using the free-to-play online game ‘Fortnite: Battel Royale’ (Fortnite) as an example of a socially competitive online multiplayer game that players have formed communities in, not only, the game platform itself (PlayStation 4) but across multiple other platforms as well (Twitter, YouTube, Instagram etc.). Fortnite: Battle Royale is a third-person shooter, survival game. It involves up to 100 players (who can play solo or in squads of two or four) that compete to be the last man standing (“Epic Games’ Fortnite”, n.d.).   The game involves a vast selection of weapons that are scattered across the map and a constantly shrinking safe zone that executes lethal damage to player’s health when caught outside it. Building aspects incorporated into the gameplay elevates this game above similar games within the genre. Players can destroy objects in the environment to collect materials that allow them to build defenses to protect themselves or to help them travel (“Epic Games’ Fortnite”, n.d.).

Community Theory and Practice

Community is a social system. It relies on the social interaction, common ties and psycho-cultural bonds that link people together (Katz, 2004). A community is a network of people whose social interactions have formed a group of likeminded people who support one another. Communities can exist in both the physical and virtual environments, sometimes switching between the two. Online communities can break through barriers that physical communities may have, like geographical location, gender, race, ethnicity and age (Katz & Rice, 2002). The absence of these barriers allows for the online space to create communities that thrive on the diversity of common interests and goals that create a sense of belonging for an individual. Katz discusses four types of communities: traditional communities, imaginary communities, pseudo communities and social networks (Katz, 2004).  Traditional communities are closely linked with the design of physical communities. They promote the ideas of co-dependency and commonness, achieving a collective purpose. Social networks are about the communities formed online, they are about individuals and their personal networks; what communities they choose to be a part of. This type of community provides a sense of belong for the individual who has now become the center of their own community (Katz, 2004). Imagined communities are formed online but are still linked to the physical world (Katz, 2004). These communities encompass the ideas of social networks while creating an imagined form of sentiment in the physical world (Katz, 2004). And lastly, pseudo communities have very similar characteristics to that of a traditional community but, are formed virtually rather than in a physical geo-graphical location (Katz, 2004). Fortnite: Battle Royale can be considered a social network, because the majority of the communities surrounding the game are only present online, and focuses on the individual experience within that community. However, smaller Fortnite communities could also be considered imagined communities. These imagined communities can be seen where smaller communities are formed in the physical world to play together, and discuss the game.

Virtual communities are often seen to produce what are known as ‘weak ties’. Weak ties describe distant or casual relationships (Porter, 2015). Typically formed online, weak ties link individuals to a plethora of information across social networks and communities. This information exchange within communities can be important in online gaming communities as it can help players to advance in the games and facilitates player-to-player interaction. Communication is a key part of communities and often results in weak ties converting into stronger, more personal ties. The compelling nature of online gaming communities is that a community focused around one specific game does not have to live within the confides of that gaming platform. The social aspect of gaming has allowed for communities to form outside of the parameters of an online multiplayer game. For example, the communities centered around Fortnite are not only distributed between the platforms of the gaming console such as forums and chats but appear on other online platforms. These platforms range from streaming and video content on Twitch (a live video streaming platform) and YouTube, to microblogging sites like Twitter and discussion websites like Reddit. Each of these platforms contribute to a much larger overarching community solely dedicated and invested in Fortnite. These communities allow players to form social connections and Koivisto argues that it is the reason why players continue to play a game (Koivisto, 2003). Communities allow players to express themselves, and create discussions and their own content surrounding a game. This is also closely linked with the social capital surrounding online gaming communities and the power it can hold.

Social Capital and Online Multiplayer Gaming

The popularity of online multiplayer games is based on its social aspects.  Games, such as Fortnite, can become very competitive but still facilitate sociality through head-set conversations and online multiplayer team battles. Social capital has become an import concept in the formation of social interactions and relationships online (Trepte et al., 2012). It has many effects on communities and the individual members in that community. Social capital builds support, trust, and cooperation (Trepte et al., 2012). It helps participants to solve collective problems, widens the awareness of interconnectivity between people, increases trust and aids the process of communication (Putnam, 2000). Examples of the significance of social capital is demonstrated in cross-platform communities around Fortnite, and the value the communities place in members of that community. Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Reddit, Facebook, Twitch and numerous other platforms have facilitated the creation of these communities. To show the scale of these communities you can look at the follower size of Fortnite on Twitter and Twitch. The official Twitter account of the game has over 2.2 million followers and connects with players by providing them with updates, news and replying to the community’s queries and questions (“Fortnite (@FortniteGame)”, n.d.). On Twitch, there are over 10.4 million followers of Fortnite streams and videos.  On platforms such as Twitch, and YouTube, a video sharing platform, have created Fortnite communities around popular content creators. The number one Twitch streamer, ‘ninja’, has been claimed as a “god” in the Fortnite community (Nattrass, 2018). With an unprecedented 108 million channel views and over 4.4 million subscribers, ninja has established himself as an esteemed member of the Fortnite community. YouTubers such as ‘Ali-A’, ‘elrubiousOMG’, ‘Willyrex’ and ‘ninja’ (again) are also prominent with between 6-28 million subscribers apiece (“Top 250 YouTubers games Channels”, 2018). These gamers have built their social capital around the Fortnite community. Their popularity is not just equated to the entertainment they provide, but also the sense of belonging and support other players subscribe to. These cross-platform communities are the reason why socially competitive online multiplayer games are so virally popular.

Popularised Online Multiplayer Games

In 2018 PlayStation released statistics of their top ten downloaded games. This includes Call of Duty: WWII, Grand Theft Auto V, NBA 2K18 and Rocket League (Massongill, 2018). Each of these games involve both an offline single player and/or multiplayer mode, as well as an online peer-to-peer multiplayer mode. However, the second highest downloaded game of 2017, Horizon Zero Dawn, only supported an online-only multiplayer mode, rather than offline single player and multiplayer modes. The popularity of these games may be contributed to a multitude of factors, but it is the sociability of the online multiplayer aspects that become a highlighting factor. PlayStation consoles offer a chat system they call ‘party’. Creating a party allows for individuals to voice and text chat with their PlayStation friends, and other players, whilst in a game or using other PlayStation applications (“About parties”, n.d.). Parties are an important aspect of gaming as it allows players to socialise with their friends and the wider gaming community. Players can connect with each other, and this facilitates the manifestation of relationships outside the limitation of geographical location. This social side of gaming is one of the strongest motivators for players to continue playing a game, and forms both pseudo communities and social networks (Trepte et al., 2012).

The success of Fortnite has been swift. It’s accessibility and competitiveness has led to its rise as one of the most popular online socially competitive multiplayer games. On February 4th 2018 Fortnite’s servers crashed when the game hit a peak of 3.4 million concurrent players (Nunneley, 2018). This rapid scale of growth since the game was released in September 2017 was unimaginable for the game developers. With over 45 million players it has stood out against other popular games. It has been labelled as a “relationship building, strategic masterpiece of warfare”, as it has enabled social bonding and team building that isn’t as possible in other online multiplayer games (Fortnite: An exploration of a cultural phenomenon, 2018). These statistics show that it is clear that the game is widely popular and the communities have a large span, but it is also important to acknowledge the smaller communities that form inside these larger ones. Individuals may only participate in their own personal social networks. They may only talk to people that they already know offline and do not want to socialise with players that they do not know. These smaller communities may not come in participate directly with the larger communities but by association they are contributing to the overarching community of Fortnite, and online multiplayer gaming communities as a whole. However, some scholars note that these gaming communities can result in an increase in anti-social behaviour (Trepte et al., 2012). It can form addictions, increase isolation and deteriorate offline relationships between players and their peers (Trepte et al., 2012).

Conclusion

Communities are a key part of humanity. They create networks of individuals who have come together to bond over their common interests and connect with people.  The support and security they provide were once limited to geographical location but now, with the arrival of Web 2.0, communities span across all areas of life. People can find their own space within the Internet that celebrates their interests with other like-minded individuals. Gaming communities are just one example of the vast network of communities that exist online. The pseudo communities provide support for gamers and creates relationships between players that may not have existed otherwise. Online socially competitive multiplayer games promote sociability and builds social capital between gamers. Players are able to converse not only through the game itself but across different platforms on the Internet. Through livestreams, gamers like ‘ninja’ and ‘Ali-A’ are able to showcase their abilities and provide help and insight into the games they play. The popularity of socially competitive games are tied to the online multiplayer aspect they provide. Games like Fortnite: Battle Royale have become viral because of the community that has formed around the game. The players have found something that they love to play and are sharing that with the people around them, both online and offline.

References

About parties | PlayStation®4 User’s Guide. Manuals.playstation.net. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps4/party/about_party.html

Davis, C. (2009). Web 2.0 definition, usage, and self -efficacy: A study of graduate library school students and academic librarians at colleges and universities with ALA accredited degree programs. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/304844103?accountid=10382

Epic Games’ Fortnite. Epic Games’ Fortnite. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/home

Fortnite (@FortniteGame). Twitter.com. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/with_replies?lang=en

Fortnite: An exploration of a cultural phenomenon. (2018). University Wire Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/2001674512?accountid=10382

Katz, J.E., & Rice, R.E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement and interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

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. Annals of the International Communication Association, Vol.28(1), p.315-371. https://doi-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1080/23808985.2004.11679039

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

Massongill, J. (2018). PlayStation Store: The Top Downloads of 2017. PlayStation.Blog. Retrieved from https://blog.us.playstation.com/2018/01/05/playstation-store-the-top-downloads-of-2017/

Nattrass, J. (2018). Ninja: Everything you need to know about the Fortnite God and Twitch star. Metro.co.uk. Retrieved from http://metro.co.uk/2018/03/16/who-is-fortnite-god-ninja-and-just-how-is-this-twitch-megastar-making-at-least-350000-from-gaming-7391914/

Nunneley, S. (2018). Fortnite hit 3.4M concurrent players last weekend and the servers couldn’t handle the pressure. VG247. Retrieved from https://www.vg247.com/2018/02/08/fortnite-3-4-million-concurrent-players-servers-crashed/

Porter, C. E. (2015). Virtual communities and social networks. In L. Cantoni and J. A. Danowski, (eds). Communication and Technology. Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 161 – 179

Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (pp. 288-289). New York: Simon & Schuster.

Top 250 YouTubers Games Channels. (2018). Socialblade.com. Retrieved from https://socialblade.com/youtube/top/category/games/mostsubscribed

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 Behavior, vol.28(3), p.832-839. DOI: 10.1016/jchb.2011.12.003

Header image retrieved from: Alpha Coders

© 2018 Briana Marino. All Rights Reserved.

Competitive FPS communities; An analysis of the types of communication that occurs in the third place and the emergence of esports in mainstream society

Abstract

Communities play an important role in acknowledging different groups of people who have similar interests. Within these communities, candidates facilitate different methods of communication with applications, evident through the progression in new emergent technologies. This paper first explores the concept of ‘third place’. It then reviews the concept of online games, delving into the specific First-Person Shooter (FPS) community. From here, a precedence for online games is established. The paper then caters towards discussing how online games become competitive through the realm of ‘esports’. Various contemporary examples of ‘esports’ competitions will be looked upon from game titles such as Overwatch and Call of Duty. Each game provides various types of communication, aiding gamers within a competitive environment. Finally, I will transition to the importance of communication in offline events whilst looking at the proliferation of ‘esports’ becoming more evident in contemporary society for viewers as well as players who participate.

Introduction

Over the years, online games have provided an avenue for a variety of people to escape realism and pressures of the ‘real world’. These spaces are often considered as separate to those experienced in real life, donned as a ‘third place’. Soukup (2006) explores the research of sociologist Ray Oldenburg to which identifies the Third Place as “public spaces used for informal social interaction outside of the home and workplace”. Oldenburg specifies the characteristics of these spaces which are a good starting point in identifying and providing a discussion around this community. From Soukup (2006), he argues that third places:

  • Are on neutral ground;
  • Are a leveller;
  • Conversation is the main activity;
  • Are accessible;
  • [Are a] home away from home, they have ‘regulars’; and
  • [Have a playful mood]

‘Third place’ is situated and considered as an extension of ordinary life. In this paper, I’ll be identifying online games within this space, specifically First-Person Shooters (FPS’). The online gaming community is far too big to identify; therefore, the main scope of this paper will primarily cater towards this specific niche in the gaming community. For those that are unaware, the competitive environment is currently on the rise and is referred to nowadays as ‘esports’. Seo and Jung (2014) explore this as “an area of sport activities in which people develop and train mental or physical abilities in the use of information and communication technologies”. Expanding media platforms have promoted this ever-changing phenomenon with it becoming more than just an activity but rather a more inclusive participative activity through spectatorship. With its rapid increase in popularity, “online computer gaming leagues and locally networked events have offered players a place to engage in serious or career competition” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.636). With ‘esports’ occurring both online and in offline settings, communication between players is vital to achieve success. This paper will investigate the FPS community and how it creates a competitive environment and promotes a larger level of communication within the third place. Examples such as Overwatch and Call of Duty will be discussed regarding online and offline settings to further explore the notion of a competitive environment. Finally, I will look at communication at ‘LAN’ events and its importance in an offline environment whilst pursuing the ideal of ‘esports’ and its relevance in contemporary society through its growth through viewership and participation of ‘esport’ ‘athletes’.

Third Place and its relationship with Online Games

As previously mentioned, scholars such as Oldenburg have defined ‘third place’ as a “public space[s] used for informal social interaction outside of the home and workplace” (Soukup, 2006, p. 421). Contrasting from what’s usually considered as ‘normal life’, video games offers further social interaction and a platform whereby consumers can escape from reality. According to Wadley et al. (2003) companies such as Sony and Microsoft were the first of many to pioneer this. It is said that “Sony and Microsoft appear to have similar visions for online console gaming: a global network connecting millions of users, who not only play videogames with each other, but also socialise online” (Wadley et al., 2003, p.238).

Online games come in many different forms, whether it’s through multiplayer against other individuals, or cooperative play whereby players team up with others to perform a certain set of tasks. ‘Third places’ are often regarded to be on ‘neutral ground’ and are ‘accessible’. However, in some cases this is not always possible. With a gap in technology, not all people have access to platforms whereby third places occur, in this case, online games. Scholar Papacarissi argues that “the fact that online technologies are only accessible to and used by, a small fraction of the population contributes to an electronic public sphere that is exclusive, elitist and far from the ideal” (Soukup, 2006, p.430). The ‘leveler’ and ‘accessibility’ arguments that are initially enforced by Oldenburg are under scrutiny, conflicting with the ideal of being available to all.

While this seems to be the case, ‘social capital’ helps to support Oldenburg’s views. Robert Putnam defines social capital to be the “connections among individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness arise from them” (Soukup, 2006, p.430). Moreover, while “connectedness might foster equality, it is not necessarily ‘distributed’ evenly…not all people are equally connected with other members of their communities” (Soukup, 2006, p.430). In the case of online games, it provides members a platform to communicate and to meet others, but in some cases, not evenly. The significance of the third place and online games offer and “provide greater opportuni[ties] for diverse people to acquire social capital” (Soukup, 2006, pp. 430-431) as an extension from daily life.

How do Online Games become Competitive? The concept of ‘Esports’ and its rise within contemporary society

An aspect of online games that has become profoundly more popular over the years is the concept of ‘esports’ or more commonly referred to as ‘competitive video games’. Seo and Jung (2014) explain its concept with the ideal being based around “the emergence of professional and semi-professional tournaments, where consumers have been able to celebrate organised and competitive gaming practices”. It’s progression has seen the creation of “leagues and locally networked events [which] have offered players a place to engage in serious or career competition” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.636). Industry body Electronic Sports League (ESL) reported that in 2012 there were “3.6 million registered users in Europe” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.642). South Korea has been regarded as the hub of ‘esports’ for many years. In its early stages there were “more than 430 professional ‘athletes’ in South Korea who make a living from playing computer games, and the 2013 WCG – an ‘eSports’ tournament comparable to the Olympic Games for traditional sports – saw 400 computer game players attend from 40 different countries” (Seo & Jung, 2014, p.642). The scalability of this phenomenon is quite remarkable. Team-based titles such as Overwatch and Call of Duty are that of which are subject to current competitions produced on global level with the Overwatch League as well as the Call of Duty World League. At the highest level, and even in online matches, communication is an important aspect that can influence the sequence and result of events in-game. Next, it’ll be critical to analyse the types of communication each title makes use of, showing its relevance and how it helps gamers in a competing environment.

Types of Communication experienced within an Online setting

Text Communication vs. Voice Communication – and the addition of non-verbal in-game tools

Fig 1. Overwatch in-game text-based chat channels between team members (blue) and everyone in the match (orange). (Overwatch Chat, 2016).

Overwatch utilises different modes of communication, the first being text oriented. Players can communicate with their teammates using in-game tools such as ‘pinging’ which notifies their team when their abilities will be available. Following this, gamers can also initiate text-based conversations with their team. Figure 1 shows an example of the text chat in action. The players highlighted with the orange text display their disliking towards a players skill within their match. On the other hand, players are also able to communicate via the voice chat system. This is by far the more preferred way of communicating with team members being able to co-ordinate strategies and plays much more efficiently. The ‘competitive’ playlist is a place where the nature and testing of skill is created through Overwatch. Players are presented with a rank based on how they play against one another. A change in rank or ‘skill rating’ (SR) is a result of either winning or losing a match. Levels of communication are therefore required to be very efficient for teams to focus on obtaining specific objectives or eliminating the appropriate targets. Online games that offer something at stake or worth playing for creates value and frames the game as being competitive. To be successful in this environment, communication plays a pivotal role in crafting the way a team plays as well as adjusting to situations as they happen.

Types of Communication experienced through offline events – competing in a ‘LAN’ environment

Communication is not only conducted in an online setting but also through an offline environment at events or more commonly known as ‘LANs’ (Local Area Network). A LAN is a social event whereby “gamers link their PCs…in order to play together” (Jansz & Martens, 2005, p.335). This social setting is very common for those participating in ‘esports’ with major competitions hosted in this environment. The example makes mention to PCs being linked but console games, such as Call of Duty and Halo, have also been subject to LAN events over the years. LAN events commonly offer something tangible for those who win. The offline setting of LAN events creates a different essence of competitiveness. Communication plays a very important role at LAN events with so much more at stake in comparison to an online setting. Previously, I mentioned that communication was used to co-ordinate specific plays by teams to win in certain situations. Communication is much different in this environment with many gamers often subject to performance anxiety or lack of communication under a much stressful setting.

Fig 2. Call of Duty ‘esports’ stars OpTic Gaming take out the 2017 Call of Duty World Championship with a $600,000 USD prize and title of the best team ever. (Fletcher, 2018).

The tangibility of the prize money, trophy, as well as non-tangible aspects such as reputation is something often creates a competitive environment amongst gamers. Tangibility creates a drive “to win or surpass others…to accomplish levels that one’s friends cannot” (Jansz & Martens, 2005, p.337). Winning an event or any competition for that matter enables gamers to hold a reputation over others that haven’t completed the same feat; this is one of the main drivers that promotes competitiveness in an offline setting. Gamers such as those from OpTic Gaming would have been inclined to use a high level of communication between one another for processes in-game to be a lot more effective, and as a result, helped them to successfully win the tournament. Therefore, LAN events are an amalgamation of both online games as well as a social space for competitive gamers. For what was once regarded as a ‘third place’, this is one of the many concepts that are starting to blur the lines of becoming a much more evident part of the ‘real world’.

‘Esports’ viewership rivalling that of traditional sports and the future for ‘esport’ ‘athletes’

The viewership of traditional sports in comparison to that which is generated from ‘esports’ is something quite interesting. With the introduction of streaming platforms, such as Twitch and YouTube, it has lessened the barriers of entry into the realm of esports. According to Lack (2017) “Streaming platforms like Twitch (launched 2011) acted as growth catalysts for eSports”. Moreover, these platforms “provided the stage for tens of millions of viewers to watch their favourite teams and players live without traveling from their bedrooms. In doing so, they have allowed audience numbers to compete, and even outcompete, with traditional sporting competitions” (Lack, 2017).

Fig 3. Shows the finals viewership comparing NBA and MLB finals against the finals for League of Legends on the streaming platform Twitch. (Lack, 2017)

Viewership of ‘esports’ online can also be replicated in an offline setting at live events. One of the prime examples of this was at the League of Legends World Championship Final in Seoul, South Korea. It was said that “40,000 fans crowded…where huge opening and closing ceremonies featured bands like Imagine Dragons” (Lack, 2017). The viewership of ‘esports’ has transcended from preceding years. Twitch has pioneered a movement allowing for everyday consumers to delve into the concept of ‘esports’ online. The growth rate of the industry is remarkable with “Corporate sponsorship, audiences, and prize funds start[ing] to grow at a rapid rate” (Lack, 2017). Not only this, but “tournament regularity; from the year 2000 to the year 2010, the annual frequency of tournaments increased by 2600%” (Lack, 2017). The progression of this phenomenon is something that needs to be taken seriously with games like Dota 2 which has “awarded little short of $90,000,000 in prizes, with $20,000,000 given out in one tournament alone” (Lack, 2017). Following this even “Colleges and universities are cultivating ‘eSports’ teams” (Lack, 2017). For people that show a high interest in this field, one that was considered traditionally to be a hobby, can now look at ‘esports’ in a way that blends into ‘contemporary’ life as possible job prospects.

Limitations

There are a few limitations that need to be considered regards to the contents discussed in this paper. These include:

The scalability of Online Games. The online gaming community is far too broad to explore for the sake of this paper. The research conducted is only limited to that of the First-Person Shooter community and does not make many ties to extended gaming genres.

Examples identified. The examples of Overwatch and Call of Duty only offer a small insight into the realm of ‘esports’ and shouldn’t be reflective of the whole industry.

Accuracy of statistics. The statistics regarding ‘esports’ viewership should be reviewed more closely from various sources and should not be regarded as an accurate representation unless reflected in similar cases.

Conclusion

In summary, Online Games offer a range of benefits towards consumers exposed to its many intricacies. For many, games are a part of a third place which is identified by Soukup (2006) as “public spaces used for informal social interaction outside of the home and workplace”. Games within a third place offer an increased level of social capital as people learn to create relationships and form friends as an extension of everyday life. However, it must be noted that not all consumers have access to such technologies, making it somewhat exclusive. There’s also an aspect whereby games become competitive. I explained the concept of ‘esports’ and how competitiveness is stemmed contrasting to casual play amongst consumers. For those seeking to succeed in such a diverse and competitive environment the use of communication is vital. From here, the methods of communication experienced in First-Person Shooter titles are referred to, ultimately aiding gamers perform their best competitively. The paper transitioned to communication at ‘LAN’ events and how it differs from its online counterpart. Finally, the concept of ‘esports’ events from a viewership perspective are explored and how it’s becoming more evident as a part of contemporary society with an increase in esports tournaments online and at live events; ultimately rivalling those of traditional sports.

 

References

Fletcher, A. (2018). Top 5 Largest Esports Games & Their Prize Pools. Retrieved from
http://www.xygaming.com/content/top-5-largest-esports-games-prize-pools/

Jansz, J., & Martens, L., (2005). Gaming at a LAN event: the social context of playing video games. New Media & Society, 7(3), 333-355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444805052280

Lack, A. (2017). A Comprehensive History of Esports. The Good, The Bad, and The Atari 1976 Space Invaders Tournament [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.adspreemedia.com/blog/comprehensive-history-esports-good-bad-and-atari-1976-space-invaders-tournament

Overwatch Chat. (2016). Chat Example. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/overwatch_chat/status/773348692640227328

Seo, Y. & Jung, S-U. (2014). Beyond solitary play in computer games: The social practices of eSports. Journal of Consumer Culture, 16(3), 635-655. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540514553711

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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444806061953

Wadley, G., Gibbs, M., Hew, K., & Graham, C. (2003). Computer supported cooperative play, “third places” and online videogames. In S. Viller and P. Wyeth (Eds.), Proceedings 2003 Australasian Computer Human Interaction Conference (OzCHI 2003), Ergonomics Society of Australia, Canberra. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Gibbs3/publication/251747173_Computer_Supported_Cooperative_Play_Third_Places_and_Online_Videogames/links/5625617c08aed3d3f137129f.pdf