Media and societal violence: Identifying the two camps on the debate

The second discussion highlighted by Terra Nova in respond to a never-ending fascination by some quarters to link media with violence in society was also started by Edward Castronova. Castronova provides a scathing attack on the authors of a paper "The Effect of Videogame Violence on Physiological desensitization to Real-World Violence" (see left).

Now I have not read the paper yet but Castronova's review brought to my attention the individuals from the two polarized camps on this issue. I am familiar with works of people in Castronova's camp but not that of Carnagey, Anderson and Bushman. I need to be familiar with their works, how their works are cited and who cited them , and also critics of their works. I need to explore more of such works as they will be useful for my literature review and help extend the discussion of my research topic from psychological perspective.

GE lanyard design: Magical bond and transcending game playing experience beyond fun and social enjoyment

On the left is a lanyard designed by Keo-Hime following Granado Espada theme. I thought the design was incredibly fantastic. There seems to be interest from IAH for the design. Whatever happens, I hope Keo-Hime gets her share of monetary reward for her effort.

Anyway, what interest me the most about the lanyard is what I draw from insights I gain making commentaries on an article post by Aldo Tolino in Gamasutra and a blog post by Henry Jenkins. The lanyard is an example of ludic artifact and it transcends game playing experience beyond the game environment. What is interesting about the lanyard is that while it is product of a player, but it came through from collective effort of critical friends who are fans of GE. There seems to be a kind of magical bond created from the process of making the lanyard that brings the designer and her critical friends together if not closer, and this magical bond transcends beyond this circle to include all GE players as the creator dedicates her design to all. Amazing.

I am at odds trying to reconcile how lanyard is situated in the designer's exploration of her subjectivity and experimentations with many identities while searching for meaning to her existence and her relations to the social environment around her. I can see that the process of making the lanyard afford her some degree of recognition from her circle of close GE friends and overall, the GE community. This is very empowering and she has established herself in the community (even IAH notices her now).

So her playing experience transcend what we normally associated games with- fun and social enjoyment. For her, it is bigger and one that potentially affects and mediates her future. We cannot dismiss that she also sees playing as empowering and providing opportunities to explore her potential and interest. It will be interesting if I could interview her and find out more about how she read GE and what she takes away from playing.

How teens' experimentation with identities affects how they read game?

Henry Jenkins shares an autobiography of one of his students reflecting on her journey and engagement with popular media during her teens. The post reminds me that I too did collect pictures on my bedroom wall and in my scrapbook. Those pictures are pictures of soccer teams and players. I remember those collections meant a lot to me then and I had to save before I could afford to buy soccer magazines from sundry shops where they had pull out centre piece that featured a famous players or soccer teams competing in the English Division One, equivalent to today's EPL. I drew pictures of soccer players and paste them onto the cover of my school text books. Back then, I aspired to be like them, most importantly to be like my all time favourite player, Ian Rush. While I play nowhere near Ian Rush, I remember fondly calling myself as him when I got together for a game of soccer or even when I hanged out with friends. I agree that I was experimenting with identities back then and media facilitated that.

Jenkins' post alerts me to the influence of age factor on how players "read" games. Teenage is a period of time where teens explore their subjectivity and experiment with many identities while navigating their way in searching of meaning to their existence and their relation to the social environment around them. Hence, MMOGs can be seen as laboratories to experiment with identities and how this experimentation mediates how they "read" and take away from playing MMOGs.

Social bonds created in MMOGs: With who and how players choose as friends?

Face with never-ending fascination by some quarters to link media with violence in society, Terra Nova highlights a series of discussions held in the past on the issue. I start with my commentary of the discussion entitiled: Why Do Kids Kill? by Edward Castronova.

Castronova brings to attention the works of two family therapy scholars, Ken Hardy and Tracy Laszloffy, who according to him, "warn (us) from blaming simple environment factors like video games and guns...(but) trace the roots of teen violence to four things: devaluation, erosion of community, dehumanized loss, and rage".

Castronova then goes onto suggest that video games can potentially help teens with such background overcome the impacts of their experiences. One of the discussion paths centres on social bond players create in MMOGs. The contention is that the four roots of violence are "elements that damage an individual's bonds with a social group" or more specifically with the "mainstream" social structure. So the issue is, if affected teens are only exposed to teens who share similar experience, their bonds potentially will serve as "social reinforcements that make (their) group stronger, perhaps even increasing the isolation from... or the animosity toward... the "mainstream" (social structure)".

This discussion makes me thinks of a possible primary and many secondary research questions for my study. I wonder whether players my research subjects play with most often are those that share similar real-life profile as them or are they opened to play with just about anybody. I have read a paper that reports that players commonly establish clan (guild, faction, etc) consisting of individuals from their off-line networks in order to reduce the risk of cooperating with strangers. I guess it is always fun playing with real-life friends in MMOGs but subsequently, how open are players to embrace the community of strangers out there in the game world. Is there a rule of thumb that they use to decide who they can get closer with and who they should stay away? Or do these work on hunches? Or do they have like a self-imposed "probation period" to find out more about strangers from playing with them before finally loosen down their guard and become friends. I am sure the kinds of friends players have in the game world potentially mediate the kinds of conversations they have in game which in the end, impact how they "read" and what they take away from playing the game.

What BGT can teach us about subjectivity?

Watching the trio of Piers, Amanda and Simon gives you a good lesson how exploring one's own subjectivity is important in qualitative research. This particular clip (click on pic) is taken from the first semi-final of BGT 09 involving the performance of Julia Naidenko. See how they reacted throughout her performance and when they gave comments in the end.

Looking at Piers giggling and overly excited, I wonder what he really meant by "stunning performance" and "I am very grateful that you brought all your frieds with you". :D I see Amanda's interjection as a good prompt for Piers to check on his subjectivity. And Amanda cannot agreed with Simon on whether the Queen would like to see belly dancing underscores how gender too impact on one's subjectivity. It's like have three qualitative researchers looking at a phenomenon and all three come up with three different stories to describe it.

It was only during qualitative class that I learnt to explore and appreciate how important it is to establish my subjectivity. Well, not all subjectivities can be addressed but it is important to be aware of them and how they mediates how you generate and interpret your data. I see subjectivity as a lens for readers to understand where you coming from and appreciate how you see your research. Another thing I learn about subjectivity is that it is not a one-off process where in one sitting you can pen down all your subjectivities. It is a process of discovery. So far I have gone through two rounds of subjectivity writing and in the process learn more about assumptions and biases I have - in short, I learn more about myself. I will do the exercise again when I during the stage of simulataneous data collection and analysis.

Well, I don't think that the judges in BGT will be ask to write their subjectivity statement in any foreseenable future. But it would be great if we can have a peek into their mind through their subjectivity writing. While I agree there will be benefits, I also think the controvesy this will invite outweighs its benefits. Just sharing my thoughts.

Choosing from four screens: Interactivity still does not impact narrative

Following up on Wesolowski's great article Beyond Pacing: Games Aren't Hollywood, Wesolowski argues that cinematic narrative is only possible because of the absence of any interactivity in films. He adds that any decision made about a film (even decision to stop watching), is made outside the process of film watching. "Within the process, there are no decision you can make with regard to the film you're watching." So no audience interactivity here like in games.

A respondent to Wesolowski's article brings to attention one possible exception, the experimental film "Timecode" by Mike Figgis. He says "The film consists of 4 scenes shown on the screen simultaneously (which take place in real time, without cuts), but the audio only comes from one of the scenes. In the theatrical release, Figgis controls the audio for what he wants the audience to pay attention to. However, in the DVD release, the watcher is allowed to switch the audio channel at will, so you do have direct control of how the movie plays out, at least as far as the sound goes."

While I agree there is somewhat limited audience interactivity in Timecode, I can't see how such interactivity have any bearing to the narrative of the film. The film narrative continue to be linear and audience are not shaping the outcome of its narrative. Choosing which screen to see may give the audience one perspectival view if the shots focus on looking at what is happening in the film from one character's lens. Choosing to look at different characters' lens may give the audience more complete picture from every characters' perspectives. Still, even when, as Wesolowski puts it, "when miscommunication happens, a film just goes on at its own pace".

Another interesting note from Wesolowski is his comment about films that encourage thinking and discussion. He says

" ...the process of building an interpretation. The message of a film is not delivered instantly. It takes time, so your perception of the film and its message changes over time. Your reaction to film is your own, individual process - you kind of "play the Reservoir Dogs game" in your head. But it doesn't affect the way you watch the film, only the way you interpret it. Again, it happens outside of the process of film watching. Naturally, you can discuss or even object to the film's message. But the message itself won't change. "

In games, interpretation and actions on what is perceived and interpreted are live, and they mediates the outcome of the narrative.

Wesolowski's Games Aren't Hollywood

Another word for "pacing" is "storytelling". We never tell stories to players; we just put them in games. Then players tell our stories to themselves.

- J. Wesolowski

There is a great article in Gamasutra by Jacek Wesolowski entitled Beyond Pacing: Games Aren't Hollywood. Reading the article makes me wonder how Steven Spielberg inaugural videogames will look like. Will it has the same cinematic effect like his many epic films. God knows.

In his article Wesolowski argues that "games aren't Hollywood". According to him, in many blockbuster films, you find a prescribed formula to achieve "cinematic effect of mounting tension" that glues the audience to their feet, roller-coastering their emotions over alternate climatic peaks and downslide reliefs, and at the end of the movie they are "left shaken and wanting for more". This effect can be achieved when the intensity is paced as "an increasing wave of peaks and relief".

Wesolowski argues that in games you cannot pace intensity as you see in film for the fundamental reasons that unlike film:

• games are not linear
• games are interactive
• the audience are not passive but participate in the shaping the outcome of game narratives
• games rely on repetitions
• games are "three to twenty times as long as film" (so intensity is much slower and hardly noticeable when compares to film)
• games has "more individual action sequences than in film" and so more difficult to connect gameplay and narrative
• games needs redundancy because "you never know which part the player is paying the most attention to"

Further, he argues that intensity in games works differently than in film when he says that in games:

... we can either escalate sensory stimuli or build up abstract meaning. The former happens when guns, explosions or enemies get bigger, putting the Hero in a greater danger than before. The latter happens when each part of a narrative means something -- but together they mean something else. "I am your father, Luke" is more than just a paternity acknowledgment.

These two kinds of intensity tickle different parts of our brains. Escalation is visceral and relies on our perception, while meaning buildup is cognitive and relies on our understanding. Escalation is temporary, because it's easy to replace a big gun with a small one.

Meaning lasts. Once we learn to like a character, it takes a lot to convince us to hate them.

To make things even more difficult, he adds, what players take away from escalation and meaning build-up are mediated by players' subjectivity. He says:

You can give them a bigger gun, but they may still like the previous one better, because it made a nicer sound, or because it fit their style. You can give them a useless but funny sidekick, and they may not appreciate it if they are challenge-oriented.

[...]

Audience tastes differ, too, but most filmgoers will agree they watch films for one or more aspects of the narrative.A player may or may not care about other players, the story, the challenge, the opportunity to express themselves, and so on. The game's message needs to be much more robust, because you never know which part the player is paying the most attention to.

But all is not lost. Moving away from pacing Hollywood style and looking at four exemplary games, Wesolowski suggests that pacing can be done by 1) players' skills, 2) balancing sections of play between giving players the liberty to do whatever they want and forcing them to play through short introductory sections, 3) setting, and 4) allowing events to emerge that guide players' decision.

Wesolowski concludes that pacing is "a complex function of player actions, parametrized by game's dynamics and aesthetics." He adds:

It's a dynamic, rather than preset feature, hence it's difficult, and sometimes impossible to specify it upfront and then design a game to it. We can't just take the increasing wave, and slap it onto the gameplay.

We often see ourselves as all-powerful creators of worlds. Our job is to present, and our players' job is to admire. But in reality, our job is to create an interesting, consistent, and interactive system.

All of its components, including decorations, and the narrative, are interdependent. If the underlying process is interesting, rewarding and entertaining, then it will create a compelling intensity pattern dynamically. We don't have to predefine the pace.

Another word for "pacing" is "storytelling". We never really tell stories to players; we just put them in games. Then players tell our stories to themselves.

Wesolowski's article provides game designers' perspective on players' gameplay and is congruent with game researchers' findings that players may not necessarily play according to how a game is designed but exercise some degree of agency in shaping the kind of game playing experience they wish to engage in.

Games and suicide: Exploitation of public paranoia

Article summary in Bangkok Post

What happened?
A 12-year old boy jump to his death from the sixth-floor balcony of his school building.
Why he did that?
It is perceived that he did that because his father banned him from playing computer games.
What happened next?
No investigation was done to establish why he committed suicide but the government had ordered the closure of 72 websites offering access to online gambling and games.

If you ask me, what happened here reminds me of what the government of a middle-eastern country did when H1NI virus first came under the spot many weeks ago. The government decided to cull all pigs in farms within the city. The farms were in squalid conditions but the government did not have the political will then to order their closure for re-operation on the condition that operators must place high regard on cleanliness of the farms. So, taking full advantage over the H1N1 virus scare (which was popular under the name swine virus even though it is not established that the virus comes from the poultry) and heighten public concern over hygiene resulting from the virus scare, the government ordered the culling.

While I do not support any form of gambling and welcome the closure of the gambling websites, I feel strongly it should not be done or be seen as a respond to the suicide. I see no link between the suicide with online gambling and games (unless a thorough investigation is done and is proved to be the case). The Thai government here too lacks the political will to order the closure and rides on increasing public concern over the suicide and its perceived link to gaming to order the closure. One repercussion (which is likely to be intended) will be continued public association of games with addiction and other ills fanned from this incident. What a pity.

GamePolitics are against gambling too but feels that "it would seem reasonable for the Thai government to at least conduct some sort of investigation before closing down online game websites".

The attractions of Granado Espada

I found a number of websites here, here, here and here featuring interviews with key players in Granado Espada - Hak Kyu Kim (imcGames CEO), Grantley Day (Vice President of Product Development at K2 Network) and Peter Cesario (Operations Producer also at K2 Network). K2 Network is the publisher and distributor of Granado Espada in North America and Europe under the name Sword of the New World. In MMOBase, Granado Espada setting is described as (brackets added):

" ...it takes place, as the title indicate (Sword of The New World), during the time when European explorers, adventurers and colonists braved the lengthy, perilous Atlantic crossing in small, sailing ships. Some did so in search of riches, whether by establishing new, profitable trade routes or by taking them through force of arms. For others, the vital motivation was to build a better life in a land where they could escape tyrannical oppression and openly practice their beliefs. However, the game’s primary focus is not historical accuracy. Rather than trying to simulate the harsh and frequently unappealing realities of the period, it transports players to a romanticized version that seems likely to provide a suitably sweeping yet somehow familiar backdrop. "

Interesting excerpts of the interview are below.

On what are the attractions of Granado Espada...I wordled excerpts of the interviews related to GE attractions and this came out.

" It has a really unique feel and position in the marketplace, both in terms of the game play and feature sets, and in terms of the consumer model

a huge quest system, trading houses, diversity of classes, and depth in game play

a huge PvP system that will offer something to every type of player. What we do not have from the Korean side is the dreaded grind, that Korean titles are often associated with

the level progression is similar to other MMO’s released over the past few years in the American market.

a few that really stand out such as the game’s unique setting, stunning graphics, and its one of a kind multi character control scheme

there is room for a highly unique and exciting MMO such as Sword of the New World Vis. The fact that no other title in the genre offer’s the player the ability to control up to three character’s at once is almost enough in itself! But add in the distinctive setting, highly detailed and striking visuals, and almost unlimited character skill combinations, and Sword of the New World Vis is a title that no MMO fan should miss out on!

you are given the option to create a party of three characters to explore and conquer the world

Granado Espada was the winner of the 2006 Grand Award for Best Game in Korea. Gamers highly valued the creative game system and appreciated the beautiful graphics, the dynamic action, the fast-paced gameplay, multiple character control system, the NPC creation, etc.

some of the most amazing visuals I have seen in an MMO - and not just another clone of a current MMO, but rather something that looks new and different.

The art-style of the game caught the eye of many MMOG veterans, who saw something familiarly fantastic yet altered just enough to make the game feel new. Gun-slinging was just as prevalent a combat style as swordplay, and the multi-character control system stands as a brilliant gameplay adjustment on a tired old formula.

At first, we were definitely attracted to the setting and the graphics...On top of that, we really enjoyed the unique player characters. There’s really nothing that Sword of the New World compares to in the Western market. The Baroque style is unique, the UPCs certainly are a draw, and the setting is fantastic.

Set in an original world with a story modeled after Europe’s exploration of America, the developer of the title, IMC Games, looked for a period where there was little exploration and development in the game world, and settled on the 17th century. Not to mention the access to such great content including architecture that is used in the game.

Sword of the New World’s Multi-Character Control (MCC) enables players to control up to three characters at once. No longer limited to playing just one character at a time, with MCC players can access their favorite classes immediately and combine them for fast-paced, dynamic action.

The multiple stances per character class that allow for diversity in play styles without the downside of having to create or go through some elaborate process to change you characters skills will also be of huge benefit to players. Not enough healers for your RAID, simple, move your scouts from Assassin style back into Healing style (when the combat has died down) and proceed. The level of flexibility will be a refreshing change to players.

On why change the title to Sword of the New World...

The title is being changed for the West to remove the steep entrance curve that exists in the game currently, and to change the flavor of the name to be more interesting to the western marketplace

On what changes to be made to the game for Western markets...

The primary changes to the title are in character creation. We are offering many more options to the North American players when they start the game. Each character class is going to have many costumes and outfits available for selection. We are also making subtle changes to the control scheme so that players who have been playing other MMOs will be able to slip into SNW vis’s control scheme and feel “at home”. Additionally, we are adding a significant storyline to the title and revamping the whole quest structure. I believe that the snw vis players of 2007 expect great stories and interesting quests when they play their games.

On whether MCC will encourage less socialization...

Sword of the New World still contains many dungeons, bosses, quests and PVP instances where parties are essential; the bonus that players can achieve by forming social groups and fighting for prizes will be of great boon to most. On the positive side, you want have to spend hours trying to find a healer for your party, since most groups have the ability to have their own!

On why less buzz now...

One of the things that hurt us concerning release was the fact that we launched the same day as E3. And E3 this year garnered even more interest because it was in a new venue and the focus of the expo had changed. When E3 hits, people shift their focus on to what’s new and what’s upcoming, not so much what’s just released.

What do you take from watching Eugene, the Librarian?

Fancy that you'll get into the semi? I have already had standing ovation from two thousands people. I can die happy now.

-Eugene the Librarian

Amazing. One of my favourites to win this season BGT. Simon and Piers ought to be ashamed of what they did here. I guess they must have forgotten lesson from Susan Boyle's episode which Amanda called "a wake-up call".

Anyway, if you keep coming back to this video or share it with anyone, you may want to ask yourself why you keep coming back and what kind of conversation you have about the video. As Henry Jenkins puts it (when reflecting on the Susan Boyle phenomenon), the "meaning doesn't reside in the video itself -- we won't exhaust it no matter how many times we watch it. The meaning rests in the conversations that [in this case, Eugene and not Susan Boyle] enables us to have with each other."

So it follows that the meaning that colours our conversation is what we take from watching Eugene.

Videogames surpassing movie-watching as America's favourite pastime

Steven Spielberg has crossed over from movie making to making videogames, reported the Guardian. A prominent figure in the entertainment industry, Spielberg also exerts great influence in shaping public opinion and fascination. For the gamer community, he is a major acquisition and a sign that videogames are gaining growing popularity in the midst of some long-standing nagging issues about its perceived negative impact.

Another welcoming news is the NPD group's commentary on Entertainment Trends In America Report that highlights more Americans play videogames than go out to the movie. These new developments makes my research even more critical. I foresee videogames will be popular, using James Gee's term, "cultivating agents" in mediating public opinion. The folk theory is that suggestive themes in videogame mediates how players "read" and what they take away from playing. In the context of MMOG, players don't play the game according to how designers design it and there are a bunch of other factors at play that impact game play. So, the notion of the folk theory is contentious and my research seeks to establish what the truth is.

Players' generated narratives = players reading of games?

Last month, City of Heroes (COH) introduced an authoring tool built-into its game called Mission Architect that allows players to create their own adventures, share them with other players in the game and have them rated. I would bet that the affordances would make the game more popular and extend its longevity. Tolino wouldn't classify these players' generated adventures as ludic artifacts because they remain within the confine of the game environment. But I would say that the opportunity to share one's own narratives in the form of game play and have it rated by others would stir up a lot of interest and encourage participation.

Well, I was right theoretically but in real practice, players abuse the opportunity to create short cut to level up the characters quickly. Micheal Abbot's posting, Rouge architect describes in greater detail of these abuses. I find this quote from him explains in a nutshell players' motivation to abuse the system (bold added):

While I'm sympathetic to the devs' desire to maintain a level playing field in their MMO, gaming the system and figuring out its loopholes is a game with a certain seductiveness all its own. Players are drawn to exploits like moths to flames.

I have been thinking about narrative and what players take from playing. I have a hypothesis that what players read from playing may have nothing to do with narrative their create. In the COH episode, I would to believe that players were likely to take away lesson on ingenuity in finding loopholes and capitalizing on the weakness of game design than reading into the lesson of good triumphing over evil (or vice versa) from the adventures they created. Well, I could be wrong? Hmm...I hope my research can shed light on this.

Grievers enhancing players's game playing experience?

My experience with grievers haved never been pleasant so far.

From the five stages of grief identified by Brett Staebell: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance, I can say that I am still at the Anger stage. In Granado Espada (GE) there are maps where you find a lot of grievers that I choose to stay away, but on many occasions I still find them elsewhere too. I have never viewed that grievers can enhance my playing experience as how Staebell shares in his article: A Griefer's Life for Me in The Escapist. I guess I play GE like a book, like how designer want player to play the game.

Staebell reminds of a player I have meet in GE who is well-known for grief-play. The limited time I have seen him in action, he works alone. When I bumped into him in Auch (one of the cities in GE), I decided to have a friendly chat with him. I remember him pked me once when I was afking in Deprimida Valley (my buddy who squad with me told me so). He was expecting me to abuse him but was surprised by my warmth and friendly approach. In the end, he added me to his friend list and promised not to pk me anymore. When I asked him why he chose to pk others, he replied that was how he enjoyed the game.

Again, Staebell's article reminds me what grievers take away from playing when choosing to play the game differently from what gave designers have in mind. And how grievers impact the gameplay of other players and what the latter draw from this experience.

Brenda Laurel's Utopian Entrepreneur

I came to know of Brenda Laurel's work, Utopian Entrepreneur, through a reader who replied to Micheal Abbot's posting: OMG, girls in trouble! in his blog (The Brainer Gamer). I did a commentary on that post here.

We are all too familiar with the fact that decisions in the real world are often tied to the bottom-line - dollars and cents, and in the business world, there is no exception to this rule. We find there is a lot of money to be made at the cost of sacrificing what is morally good and the risk of inviting social ill to the society. Discussion generated from Abbot's posting also provides a sense that investors are not willing to put their money to developers who do not subscribe to the idea that games will only make money if they're made for young teenage boys.

In her book, Laurel provides a step-by-step guide how to be that Utopian Entrepreneur from insights drawn from her experience leading a company and its pet project Purple Moon. The company was enormously successful right before the first .com bubble burst. The company, in her own words, consisted of:

" Earnest researchers, nerdy rich guys, lesbian separatist designers, businesswomen with barracuda smiles, strident feminist reporters, Barbie, Rockett, and several million little girls. "

Purple Moon is a game that attempted to create a nuanced virtual world structured around the life of girls during primary education and Rockett (a character in Purple Moon) was very popular with young girls. Laurel explains:

" Purple Moon might have chosen, as fashion and cosmetic companies often do, to take advantage of girls' insecurities in our product designs and marketing approach, and that approach might have turned out to be more lucrative. A product that preys on personal weakness or perpetuates negative values may succeed, just as a product that expresses socially positive values may fail. Purple Moon might just as well have failed following the Barbie model, but ignobly and without honor. "

A reader whom I learn about Laurel's work describes it well what happen to Purple Moon and adds his reflection about developing socially responsible games when he says:

In the end, the company was remarkably successful. Too successful for it's own good: investors pushed Laurel to move into merchandising, because they didn't understand that some brands should best be left to a virtual existence and wouldn't work in a synergistic model that more mainstream and less ethically ambitious products thrive in. She lost her funding, the site had to close down, and Laurel still receives letters from the now-young-women who remember it as one of their formative gaming experiences.

People have used example of Purple Rain's financial meltdown to support the notion that the market won't support games for girls that push the envelope and refuse to feed the hegemonical structuring of young females as people who "like to play dress-up games and shop." This is market manipulation and missed opportunity at it's worst.

Most of the people funding games will only support marketers who subscribe to the idea that games will only make money if they're made for "14-year old boys" (from an interview by my professor Celia Pearce). Games don't have to serve every audience, but they should be transparent about this fact. We can't sit around and wait for other people to decide that it's a good financial move to embrace the pre-teen female market. It's the Utopian entrepreneur's duty to step forward and make socially responsible games for under explored markets.

What videogames can teach us about assessment?

I label this post as "non-research" because it is not related to my dissertation. However, it is important to my work in IDM research in Education because from where I come from, educators here have been grappling with how best to design and implement alternative assessment and how IDM can facilitate the process. So this post is like a bookmark in my "online diary", pointing and reminding me of James Gee's excellent work on studying what videogames can teach us about alternative assessment.

Why I say alternative assessment? Personally, I feel traditional assessment or assessment that we all familiar with will be around for many years to come. Efforts to explore alternative assessment are most welcome not only that they show us how learning should be assessed but also to help move public opinion. Alternative assessment will continue to work in the fringe of schools' assessment of learning until the public are ready to embrace it.

There is a series of four articles altogether. The first one is the pic above: Rise of Nations: A Model of Assessment, where Gee identifies seven points what videogames can teach us about assessment. In his second article: Games as Their Test, Gee brings it to our face why can't assessment and learning be one and not two separate entities. Like in games, games itself is assessment, and playing and learning is assessment, all part of a complete whole. In his third article, the title already suggest what it is all about: Assessing Development, Not "Static Stuff". In the last article: Appreciating What the World Say Back to Us, Gee pokes us to relfect back on our fascination with assessing fact (he calls this fascination "fact fetish"). He calls for the need to assess learners' respond in advancing their learning further from feedback they receive.

Framework to understand players' generated content

Call it grey literature if you like. All I can say is that it has really helped me in shaping my ideas for my dissertation. I guess for my study I need both: literature review of academic endeavours and everything I can dig from the blogsphere. I learn a lot from the latter from the few weeks of commentaries I have been giving to postings and articles from members of the gaming community in cybersapce.

And again, today I find an excellent article by Aldo Tolino in Gamasutra: Beyond Play: Analyzing Player-Generated Creations. Tolino analyzes player-generated creations inspired by videogames and calls them ludic artifacts. He makes a distinction that ludic artifacts only refers to artifacts that are made available in the internet beyond the confine of the game environment. He proposes a framework or what he calls "a taxanomy of ludic artifacts" to "better understanding player-created content and the motivation for players to creatively expand on their gaming experience" and for designers to design games in a way "which encourages players to not only play the game, but to transcend the video game itself and invent their own game-based creations".

We have learnt from Klastrup that a player's “continuous presence…helps keep the fiction of the world alive”. A player's presence and gameplay not only mediates the fiction of the gameworld, but also the fictions other players create. He becomes "part of the many "texts" which enable the collective and ongoing (re)creation of the world". I wonder whether players will get hook to a game longer if he is able to create his own content. Furthermore, the practices of generating ludic artifacts also transcend game playing experience beyond the game environment. How will these practices mediate the game playing expeirence, what player read from the games and the conversation he carries within and beyond the game?

Before reading the article, my understanding of players' generated contents is too narrow. There are many practices in Granada Espada that I see now as such. Tolino explains how players' motivation to create can be understood from any of the six categories he proposes. And within each categories, the practices can be situated to represent whether they afford players denser immersion into the games (which means the practices are closely linked to the rules of playing the games) or transcend players beyond the confine of the game environment. Again, excellent piece of writing!

Stereotypes and multiculturism in MMOG

This video features Celestine Arnold's talk “Ghosts in the Machine: Digital Multiculture”.

In a nutshell, she brings to light that games are increasingly popular with non-whites and other minority groups who are underrepresented in games excepts for stereotypes. She calls for games to be designed that reflect the multiculturism of their consumers' profile beyond perpetuating the usual stereotypes.

Who the Stuff, a multi-cultural gamer, describes the presentation well in his post All Culture Enjoy Killing Nazi Zombies. Granado Espada (GE) has a number of strong Asian characters, but by Asian, it means Chinese and the usual stereotypes - Chinese martial artist like Baihu and Feng Ling. Then there is Irawan too, Thai kick-boxer. I personally feel there is no issue here but it is good to ask players whether they feel underrepresented in GE, whether stereotypes exist in GE, how they feel about them and how the stereotypes impact their reading of the game. Most of the players in GE are from Singapore, Philipines and Malaysia.

How society and media stereotypes impact players reading games?

There is an interesting post in the Brainer Gamer about "little pink and unicorn" games targeted at young teenage girls which carry suggestive themes that would likely to encourage self-absorbed consumerism and promote existing stereotypes about young teenage girls. Equally interesting to the post are the readers' comments. I describe below themes that emerge from their comments.

While majority of them felt the games are a concern (many even cited other problematic games for girls), there are opinions that run contrary - Girls like to dress-up anyway so what's the big deal. Furthermore, there are enough games out there that are inspiring and empowering girls. Have faith in parents' ability to teach their children to think critically and surround them with positive role-models, imagery, media, GAME!, books, etc. Girls are not easily duped. we must trust kids to make the right judgment.

Some readers are concerned that the games look harmless from the outside (aesthetics & packaging) and parents may not be aware of their content. Others feel that parents' ignorance could also be due that such games receive little coverage from media.

Finger pointing on who is to blame for the games? Blame the company. Blame the society and media for the gender stereotypes. Games is also another platform to extend male hegemony. There is a call for game developers to demonstrate high moral and exercise social responsibility by creating social responsible games for unexplored markets. Others are awed by the fact that technology has become so advance that we can summon any narrative and make games so incredibly focused on conveying an idea. Technology also allow us marketeers to attack on specific demographic.

Solution? Have female game designers. But having girls games only perpetuate the gender stereotypes, right? Then, have gender friendly games. Have strong female characters along side dominant male characters so that boys and girls can play along side each other.

What can I draw for my study from the comments? I think the comments on society and media stereotypes are most interesting. I wonder what kind of stereotypes exist in Granado Espada. How does society and media stereotypes impact what players read from games and the conversations they carry in and beyond games.

Contemplating on the practices of fan-fiction

Following on my commentary on Klastrup article, I would like to follow up with some insights I gain from interviewing a player about his practice of writing fan-fiction. Let's give him the name BoyX. Now, Boyx had been writing fan-fiction of a game called MU Online for a long time.

Background:

MU Online was the first MMORPG BoyX played. The fiction consists of a number of pieces he wrote over a period of time and he wrote them in his own language. He uploaded the pieces in a game forum. But he did not complete the story because he had lost interest and could not bear the demand for a new chapter (readers ask him to continue writing). He found it stressful to continue writing.

BoyX was happy to find that people had copied his writings to their websites. He made a google search lately and found them on other forums too. A google for his fiction reveals more than one millions search results. However, except for two people, the rest did not make reference of his writings back to him. Still, he feels happy but a little disappointed when many people did not give him due credit for his works. The very least, he said, they did not claim those works theirs. He reasoned that his unfinished fiction had received the most views because it was too long and people have to read a lot of time to get the story. He shared that only one forum reader found out who he was in the game.

The interesting parts are here.

Boyx admited that he wrote because he loved the game, and when he stopped playing, he lost interest and could not write anymore. He admits that he may finish the fiction someday. He stopped playing MU Online because of bad administrator. He agreed that writing fan-fiction did not affect how he play MU Online (i.e. it does not make him wanting him to play MU Online more) but acknowledges that playing the game makes him wanting to write.

So BoyX, in Klastrup’s words, “continuous presence…helps keep the fiction of the world alive”, and for him personally, he continued writing so long as he was playing the game”. When his stopped playing, naturally he stopped mediating on the fiction of the gameworld and the fictions players create which are impacted by his presence and gamepay. He also ceased to become "part of the many "texts" which enable the collective and ongoing (re)creation of the world".

BoyX did write fan-fiction for GE because he has no time to do so. He also does not do fan art because he says that he has no talent for that. He admitted that his English is not fluent and even if he has the time, he may not write in English because of this. He felt that knowing how to write well is more important than having time to write. To him it is important to write something that people would read and he would make sure that someone likes his writing. He agreed that he writes with having the audience at the back of his mind, i.e. to serve the audience.

So participation in the "collective andd ongoing (re)creation of the world" are also mediated by non-game related factors. I wonder too whether did writing make him play the game differently. Like did his play to suit the story line of his writings?

MMOG as 21st Century Fiction

Lisbeth Klastrup has a great article in Game Studies entitled The Worldness of Everquest: Exploring 21st Century Fiction. She study MMOG from the perspective that MMOG is a entertaining fictional "text" like novels and films. I quote below interesting excerpts below.

On whether MMOG can be considered as fiction, she says (brackets [] added):

" ...one could argue that our understanding of the ontology of the [MMOG] world is that we know it is a fiction and by entering the world we as players become part of the fictional discourse ourselves, while we are at the same time well aware that what goes on inside it is indeed a social reality and that this reality, as T.L Taylor has aptly pointed out in Play Between Worlds (Taylor 2006), often is, or will be, closely interwoven with our social world outside the fiction. An analysis of an online world should therefore also include an exploration of the interplay between the fictionality and sociality and how these two aspects of experience inform each other. "

I am thinking how about players who see MMOG as another window where bring into their real life engagements and decisions that they make in the game world are intertwined with real life agenda. Would the ontology of the MMOG world is still a fiction? I am just curious.

Kalstrup does not see MMOG as a narrative which is understood as the presentation of a series of events. She says:

" ...in the case of gameworlds, though stories about the world exist, told in companion manuals and official and fan-based websites, the online world is more than a mental construct (a world projected by a story), it is unique in that it presents an actualised version of an imaginary universe. Contrary to earlier forms of fiction, the way we make sense of gameworlds in general follows not from what we are told (what is being presented to us), but from how we experience gameplay and the architecture of the world itself, the way we are forced to act in certain ways as players, the way we simulate that we live in this world. In other words, it is neither a case of of showing or telling but of acting out. This is not to say that players do not have the experience of taking part in an unfolding story. In fact, online worlds are unique because they enable the unfolding of many stories at the same time, not the least through the design of completable quests with a story-like structure "

I agree that "we are forced to act in certain ways as players" and very often such incident happens because of how the game is designed and other times, because of the gameplay of other players like grief play. However, Brett Staebell in The Espapist (A Griefer's Life for Me) proves how grief play has potential to enhance game play experience of other players. So while gameworlds affords many stories unfolding at the same, these stories also cut into each other.

Klastrup also sees gameworld in MMOG as reflective lab where actions in the gameworld reflect players' "a mediated understanding of what a world is or should look like". She explains (bold added):

" ...the simulated online world, the description of it (the back stories and the stories introducing new expansions) as well as the myriad player-generated stories about the world, functions much in the same way as the presentation of fictional universes in "analogue" storytelling: they are frameworks of interpretation which allows us to judge whether events in the world are, for instance, "moral" or "immoral", "good" or "bad" according to the "world rules", the designated morals of that particular world. This ties well in with Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Smith & Tosca’s observation that, in general, the function of the fictional world in relation to games is to "prompt players to imagine that their actions take place within a meaningful frame" (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Smith & Tosca 2008: 171) "

Klastrup notices there is what she calls "seamless oscillation between taking part in the fictional discourse and stepping outside it" of players' behaviour in MMOG gameworld. This is part of their wholeness or immersion experience in the gameworld, and it does not "dilute" their experience.

Another interesting excerpt is when Klastrup hypothesizes (bold added):

" A hypothesis would be that what players come to think of as memorable experiences could be especially those experiences which marked the transition from one stage of knowledge to another. The continuous presence of players helps keep the fiction of the world alive; when their experiences are communicated to other players either in-world or on out-of-world websites, they themselves create and become part of the many "texts" which enable the collective and ongoing (re)creation of the world. "

Klastrup identifies three stages of experience and knowledge players go through in MMOG. The first stage is "getting to know the world", the second stage is "interacting with the world", and the third stage is "to perform in the world". About the final stage, she again hypothesizes (bold added):

" Thus, an interesting hypothesis is that this final stage of one’s life in a gameworld is also characterised by the emergence of player-told stories which emphasise and commiserate the important social events in a player’s or a guild’s ongoing history. "

With regard to Klastrup hypothesis, I would like to add commentary and share interesting insights from my interviews with players with regard to fan-fiction and guild's ongoing history. To prevent from making this post too long, I will do that in a separate post.

Moving on from Chapter 1...

This will be the last time I work on my Chapter 1. It has gone through more than 20 iterations already. In its present form, I think it is good enough but I can confidently say that it will not the final form when I submit my dissertation. My boss, sharing his PhD journey, had advised me not to be so hard-up on trying to improve it. He said that Chapter 1 would be the first and the last chapter you would write for your dissertation. He is right. I can sense that some sections need improving as my thinking is continuously shape from my reading, writing, reflecting and blogging - a never ending process. I am determined not to touch it anymore until my ideas are more concertized. And this means that I will only visit it again when I have written all my other chapters.

Link between violence and games: A reality or a halucination?

I was alerted to this news article through a post in GamePolitics.com and needless to say all comments made to the post ridicule the content of this article. As with the respondents, I too disagree with Henley. Competitions is an element found in all MMOG and fights and violence are most popular themes. They are there in GE as in WOW too and in my research, I look forward to find out to what extent exposure to such game content lead to inclination and tolerance of violence among players in real life. Is violence what they read from playing? I feel much of what had happened in the past that lead to public support to what the Bush administration did under the slogan "War against terror" that resulted in what we regretted happen in Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib has their roots in the manipulation of mass media. If you have control over the media, you have the control of public opinion. What written and filmed about Henry Ford is a good example how a man of high morale was made to look like a scum. I see that it is just a convenient to use what has happened as an attack on games. Anyway, this is a departure from my research interest and so I would not want to deliberate further on this.

I leave here a video, used by Henley to support her claim which I thought was hilarious and very funny. *To Henly: Oh yes, that was my reaction. Nothing to be taken seriously.

"Nobody cares about your stupid story"

Ken Levine's 08 GDC talk (no prize for guessing who he looks like ;D) Nobody cares about your stupid story helps explain why many players in Granado Espada (GE) knows little of the background story behind the game. Levine, who is also fond to be known as one who not design games but design experience of play, say that storytellers have to keep in mind three kinds of gamers, and to strike a balance in providing details of their narratives and in ensuring no disruption to the enjoyment of play of all different kinds of gamers. According to him, there are casual gamers who have no interest in the narrative found in games. Then, there are also those who additional details of the narrative are necessary as part their enjoyment of play, and finally the hardcore who just adore everything about the game title and make it their habit to know more about it beyond game play. While technology advances afford complex and sophisticated narrative to be implemented in games, Levine advises to keep the narrative simple.

So far from my readings of blog posts related to game design, I conclude that behind every games you will find a storyteller spinning his story. While some storytellers may be Hollywood scriptwriters, it seems storytellers who themselves are avid gamers and are conversant with gamers' taste can cook up an interesting story and are flexible enough to accept changes to their story in allowing the need for interactivity. In 10 Game Design Process Pitfalls, Ian Fisch includes allowing the story to control game design as one of the 10 pitfall in game design process. I also sense that maintaining what Csíkszentmihályi calls flow in game play is important in keeping players, who are interested in the story behind game, hook onto the narrative. Adam Saltsman shares four Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment (DDA) systems he found in games that help keep players' frustration below affective filter (Gee, 2008).

Back to GE The background story behind GE (click here to hear the narrative in GE trailer) is set in a mysterious and dangerous continent, and is inspired by Europe’s exploration and conquest of America. I am sure there are the three kinds of gamers in GE, and many players I have chatted with have the least idea of what the background story in GE, except for one hardcore gamer I have met. He seems to be online all the time, has so many alts and does a lot of fanart of the game. His version why so many martial characters (and I feel the same can be said of other collectible characters too) require mystery powders (MPs) because they are all substance abusers. He likens MPs as drug and these characters fight better if the get enough of MPs to get high. :D

Then, there is my son too. Yesterday I asked him why he was not playing GE anymore, and he told me that most of his factions mates are too busy to squad up with him. He hates playing alone. It has happened to me before. There was a time I feel so pointless playing when you are playing alone. No fun. The again, my son is not a vet yet and I guess this could be why his faction mates refuse to squad up with him (assuming that they have high level characters). I guess when talking about players' state of flow, designers have to look beyond DDA systems and design games that requires a fair bit of collaboration, even between noobs and imba. Else, many players may retire early and not play long enough to reach the end of the game narrative.

Can players be duped or not?

James Gee dedicated the last chapter of his book What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy, to discuss whether players can be duped by videogames. He concluded that just as learners may not necessarily take the view propounded by authors when reading their books, and in some instances may take a totally opposite and unexpected view, in MMOG too there is likelihood that players may not necessarily “read” MMOG as game designers and developers would want them to. But this did not stop protesters, marching and chanting out “War is not a Game”, calling for the closure of the "Army Experience Center" in the Franklin Mills Mall. The centre, while meant to increase recruits into the army, allows kids to run an iteration of America’s Army from playing videogames,and it is fear that it is likely to promote violence among teens and “create a generation that is wired to kill and think that killing is something that is easy”. I was quick to brush this off as another paranoia until I found this post below in GamePolitics.com.

I won’t risk having my kids play RapeLay even if all the James Gees of the world were to unite and assure me that my kids are above the negative influences of this game. Game like RapeLay is rich with experiences that will allow in Loyers's word, "dynamic experiences of subjectivity, affect, and emotion". I wonder to what extent can players' discerning ability of what is right and wrong influences how they respond to such experiences. While it is natural to expect discerning ability to be positively related to age, but is this true for every players? Perhaps the protesters against the "Army Experience Center" is concerned about teens not being able to be discerning on what can be taken into the real world from playing and what should be kept purely within the confine of the gaming environment. I wonder what the field of psychology has to offer to enlighten us on these issues.

MMOG pervasiveness and reading of games

There is a post in tiltfactor that provides a review of a book On Deep History and the Brain written by Daniel Lord Smail (New York Times review of the book is here) from the perspective of videogames and human paranoia. Excerpt from the post:

" Last month’s Harvard Alumni Magazine explains:
“In eighteenth-century Europe, Smail points out, the list of addictive substances to be used with caution included books. With the rise of the novel and the spread of literacy, a new fear of ‘Reading mania’ gripped the populace. He quotes one scholar’s account that young women were seen as particularly vulnerable, because they might ‘grow addicted to the pleasures induced by novels…have their passions awakened, and form false expectations about life.”

If similar sexist fears persisted today, we might expect girls to be the leading consumers of games… and they aren’t. The numbers are about even actually. Seems we’ve been wrong about these things before, so what do you think? Are games psychotropic? Should we care? I think they are, but I’m not sure I can tell anyone what to do about it.

It would seem that humans (male and female alike) have learned how to cope with the addictive qualities of the novel. Perhaps fears of addiction are misplaced when applied to all media. Or, maybe our biological “passions” are more intensely evoked by digital media. Are video games drawing more vulnerable consumers into escapism while the novel is left in more steady hands? ”

Inventions that revolutionize how people communicate, socialize, work and play bring about changes to the brain structures and afford people the ability to do things in ways previous generation find too much cognitive load. These affordances lead to different ways of being in this world, and previous generation frowned in dismay and concern of these developments because the new practices not only look different and did not conform to the usual norms, they challenged old ways of being into extinction. So in this light, the paranoia is understandable.

Print (paper) media generation have brain structures different from generations where mass media are predominantly radio and television. And now where digital media technology has become the natural landscape for us, we find ourselves a generation that is totally different, not only in our brain structures but our very ways of being is this world are unique to us. How we work, play and enjoy our leisure are poles apart to how generations before us carry on with their lives.

Silverstone (1999) in his book Why We Study Media argues that MMOG is mass media and he points to the convergence of play and media when he says, “play is the core activity of everyday life […] we can see media as being sites for play, both in their text, and in the responses those texts engender […] We play on the net, downloading games, role-taking, role-making with other players, players not known to us, except through the characteristics they take, as allies and opponents in electronic space. Play masters and mistresses in virtual dungeons” (p. 60). Silverstone’s argument underscores the fact that play in MMOG is an integral part of our daily life and can be both playful and productive.

How is reading a book or watching a movie or television series for past generations different to play MMOG for us today? How integral is reading a book or watching a movie to daily life for past generations? I am sure technology was not so developed then to allow these leisure activities to become so pervasive in daily life. Such activities would have definitely their own, in Huizinga’s words, magic circle i.e. their separate sphere and time that are distinct from daily routines. Technology affords MMOGs to be so pervasive and form an integral part of our life. How would this make our reading of MMOG be different to how people read book or movies in the past? Would pervasiveness and being integral to our life impact our reading of MMOG and what meaning take from it? If true, I wonder how is this so?

What experiences engage RMTs with their subjectivity?

How fantastic RSS feed, I must say. I paste RSS feed of a number of popular game research blogs onto my blog and I am updated of the latest buzz in the game researchers circle. Fantastic.

This particular blog post from the Virtual Economy Research Network is about real money trade in MMOG (click on the pic to read the post). And there is a nice piece of article in the Guardian about people who earn a living from playing. A good read.

Anyway, I didn't know that there is going to be a documentary on real money trade coming up soon. Awesome. I know of no researcher who is able to get real money traders to share their trade and so the documentary is something game researchers will be looking forward to. It manages to interview the organizer of RMT (the big boss), people who work for him and the person who creates bots and now wrangling in a court case with Blizzard. The documentary is called Play Money and below is the excerpt what the documentary is all about taken from its website.

" Deep within a digital underworld - a parallel universe composed of ones and zeros where warlocks, wizards, and warriors roam - a secret lies: multi-million dollar economies. Economies where real money meets "play money."

Gamers spend vast amounts of time inside these online playgrounds, developing their characters by acquiring weapons, armor, trinkets, and gold. These virtual goods are used to make their characters more powerful and ultimately more competitive in the virtual world they inhabit. But some gamers don't have the months and years it takes to obtain these goods. Fortunately for them, it is now possible to spend hard-earned cash on the virtual gold and goods that help them obtain the power and status they seek.

The real-world economic opportunities these virtual worlds offer can translate into salaries that many can only dream of making. With a team of workers playing MMO's (Massively Multiplayer Online Game) around the clock, individuals and companies can rapidly earn the coveted virtual items, in turn selling them online to gamers who don't have enough time to acquire them.

But is it so simple?

Play Money explores the complex world of virtual property, the business of real money trade, and the question that blurs the line between the virtual and the real. "

My feelings about RMTs in Granado Espada is mixed. I started hating them at first and I hunted them down in maps where they are most popular to bot. It is so easy to recognize them by their family names and the characters they use. They have this "jumble-up alphabets" names created out of convenience (by typing without looking) like "ahdghad" or "jdajahad". They usually play with at least a high level musketeer and never did I see any of them belonging to a faction before. Once one of them managed to infiltrate into my faction. I guess he did so to prevent being tracked down by the game developer (IAH) or to have a affiliation with a faction as a cover up for his activities. I was so distress when I found it out and ranted out verbal abuse on him while we were on different maps. Eventually I got the faction leader to kick him out.

Then I became more tolerant and saw the importance of the services they provide. On a few occasions I bought vis (in-game currency) from them with real money. To my surprise the transaction was so easy - go to their website, chat with one who man their chat room your intention, do a fund transfer, go to the chat room again to update, meet someone in the Cite of Reblouex in the game (that city is littered with RMTs when I first play the game), follow him to one remote corner of a building where no one is there and he will drop you elemental jewels (EJs) for you to pick up based on the vis you have ordere . Each EJ sells at 10 millions vis. They do not carry a lot of vis in their account in fear fo being tracked as RMTs and have their account banned by IAH.

Things in Granado Espada were so exorbitant in prices because people sells things in the millions and billions (even for stuff I would consider craps). Crazy! To catch up, you have no choice but to engage the RMTs. There were reactions from IAH and players. IAH keeps up with new patches with each new version of the game to make bots and macros useless. But new bots and macros keep on coming up and share among players within hours of the launch of new version of the game. It was only recently that IAH managed to do something more productively with the patch that hit botters and macro users hard. I hardly see any RMTs these days and the prices of items drop so much now that I regret spending all the vis I bought from RMTs in the past. While RMTs services is welcome for those who hardly have time to hunt, they are the reason for inflation in the game all these while for they provide easy access to vis. In my recent visit to their website, I discover that you get a lot less vis as compared to the past for the same price. 100m vis used to cost 3 Singapore dollars (SGD) before but now it costs SGD 9. Wow! 3-fold increase.

Interestingly, some players work independently or organize themselves in a group in trying to maintain a strict non-botting and non-macroing environment in the game. They do so by tracking down botters and macro users and report them. They shame these "offenders" by posting pic of the report (in red rectangle in left pic) in their group forum. I can say that this group of "virtual policemen" is well disliked by many gamers for whatever benefits they claim the community reaps from their effort.

Anyway, what I am most interested about is what kind of stories would RMTs get from playing. RMTs play for a living and I am refering to people who work for the big boss. I am assuming that the big boss is less likely to spend his time hunting for drops and loots because his business looks over not a few but many MMOGs and so I picture him as someone who keep an overall picture not by playing, but by having runners reporting to him. These runners (RMTs) are people who work for him and hunt drops and loots for salary. How would they read the game? Is there a difference since they are playing not purely for the joy, but instead to earn a living? What kind of conversations would their work enable them to take back? Would different motivations of play engender different conversations?

If life is a game, what kind of conversations do we bring back from our work place? Well, we likely share memorable incidents at work with our family and friends. Incidents becomes memorable if they afford us learning to do our work better or when they allow us, in Loyers's word, "dynamic experiences of subjectivity, affect, and emotion". These incidents revolve within the sphere of the community in our working environment. So RMT's could share about tips and tricks how to overcome challenges they face in their work (like how to deal with verbal abuses and grief play from other players). Or they could share moments in the course of their work that effect their emotion and affective domains. I wonder what kind of experience will engage them in a dialogue with their subjectivity. Do they think about subjectivity? They probably should. There must be grey areas that cause them to confront their beliefs and worldview. What could be these experiences be for them? Hmm...interesting thoughts.

Anyway, it seems that I cannot stay away from "learning" as another keyword in my literature review search. Let's see..."learning +mmog or mmorpg". Oh....it's only 396 articles. Manageable.