
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".

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.
No comments:
Post a Comment