APPENDIX C. SAMPLE CONSENT FORM
Researcher: Stephen Brown, Department of Communication, Trinity University
Supervisor: Dr. Aaron Delwiche, Department of Communication, Trinity University (210-999-8153)
Researcher’s statement
PURPOSE AND BENEFITS
This interview is being conducted as part of a course titled "Ethnography of Massively Multiplayer Online Games." In this class, we are studying the behaviors and attitudes of gamers who enjoy virtual worlds such as Vanguard and World of Warcraft. Our research will benefit game developers, scholars, and broader player community by increasing our understanding of this emerging medium. The results of my study might also be interesting to you. At the end of the semester (December 15, 2008), I will share my findings with Vanguard players and with the broader community of gamers. My paper will be linked to the course web site and made available to anyone with an Internet connection.
PROCEDURES
This particular study will be conducted via in-world chat channels with open-ended interviews.
RISK, STRESS OR DISCOMFORT
No risk, stress or discomfort is anticipated as a result of this study. I will do everything that I can to make sure that your responses are both private and anonymous. If at any time you feel uncomfortable or stressed, you may terminate the interview immediately.
OTHER INFORMATION
You must be 18 years or older in order to participate in this study. This interview is voluntary. You may refuse to answer any questions that I ask. You may terminate the session at any time.
This data will be used as a basis for my academic research. My professor and I are the only people who will have access to the transcripts and survey data.
If your comments appear in my research, a pseudonym will be used to protect the anonymity of your real-life identity and your game character. You may refuse to participate or may withdraw from this study at any time without penalty.
This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Trinity University. If you have any questions about this research, you can also contact the IRB chair: Professor J. Paul Giolma, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Engineering Science, Trinity University, 1 Trinity Place, San Antonio, Texas, 78212-7200. Professor Giolma's telephone number is (210) 999-7563.
________________________________________
Signature of Researcher
Participant's statement:
The study described above has been explained to me. I voluntarily consent to participate in this activity. I have had an opportunity to ask questions. I understand that future questions I may have about the research or about my rights as a subject will be answered by one of the researchers listed above.
________________________________________
Signature of Participant
[As noted above, because collecting signatures is not practical in virtual worlds, students will instead post this form on a publicly available web page. Before conducting any interviews, they will ask the participants to confirm that they have read the consent materials and agree to participate. On-line surveys will be prefaced with a statement which reads "By completing this survey, you are indicating that you have read the consent materials and agree to participate."]
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
I apparently missed out on the essential gaming experience of educational games in my youth. I've been reading through my fellow classmates' blogs and I can't remember playing any of the games they mention, even when one of them went to elementary school about 2 miles away from me.
Yes, I played Oregon Trail, maybe once a week until it was banned because learning ground down to stand still, but that's it. We had zero fun educational games in my elementary school. In fact, the only game I remember playing was the quiet game. Of course, now I can look back and see what a load of bologna that game was; nobody ever won, I didn't learn anything from, and the teacher was just trying to control us so as not to go insane.
Though, I did just take a peek at some of the educational games that are circulating the internet nowadays and I found some interesting things out. Dora the Explorer has about 200 million games out there...for everything! She has math, social studies, science, and english games! Why? Is Dora really that appealing to kindergartners?
More to follow...
~Stephen
I apparently missed out on the essential gaming experience of educational games in my youth. I've been reading through my fellow classmates' blogs and I can't remember playing any of the games they mention, even when one of them went to elementary school about 2 miles away from me.
Yes, I played Oregon Trail, maybe once a week until it was banned because learning ground down to stand still, but that's it. We had zero fun educational games in my elementary school. In fact, the only game I remember playing was the quiet game. Of course, now I can look back and see what a load of bologna that game was; nobody ever won, I didn't learn anything from, and the teacher was just trying to control us so as not to go insane.
Though, I did just take a peek at some of the educational games that are circulating the internet nowadays and I found some interesting things out. Dora the Explorer has about 200 million games out there...for everything! She has math, social studies, science, and english games! Why? Is Dora really that appealing to kindergartners?
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
I know that I mentioned how much fun Carnelli might be in my last post, however, I found two other parlor games that could be much more fun and exciting than Carnelli could ever hope to be. The first one is called Psychiatrist and was found by Patrick Lynch. While I feel that Psychiatrist would be absolutely chaos in the chat logs, it would be an excellent game to play if done well and it does not get out of hand. Also, it would be interesting to see what people do with their characters in the virtual world as far as movement goes. I feel like the game could be better when converted to a virtual world due to all the emotes that characters can do.
The second, and my personal favorite parlor game that I found is called Zombie Attack and was posted by my good friend Grayson Hamilton. This game was actually played on the Baylor University campus to great success and I have always wanted to play it myself. The only problem I see with it is if people cheat in the virtual world by running away on their mounts. Also, it would be hard to mark a player as a zombie or as a human. However, if done well, the game could be amazing!
More to follow...
~Stephen
I know that I mentioned how much fun Carnelli might be in my last post, however, I found two other parlor games that could be much more fun and exciting than Carnelli could ever hope to be. The first one is called Psychiatrist and was found by Patrick Lynch. While I feel that Psychiatrist would be absolutely chaos in the chat logs, it would be an excellent game to play if done well and it does not get out of hand. Also, it would be interesting to see what people do with their characters in the virtual world as far as movement goes. I feel like the game could be better when converted to a virtual world due to all the emotes that characters can do.
The second, and my personal favorite parlor game that I found is called Zombie Attack and was posted by my good friend Grayson Hamilton. This game was actually played on the Baylor University campus to great success and I have always wanted to play it myself. The only problem I see with it is if people cheat in the virtual world by running away on their mounts. Also, it would be hard to mark a player as a zombie or as a human. However, if done well, the game could be amazing!
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
I recently found a parlor game that is, amazingly, better than playing The Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon and that also works the intellect a little bit. The game is called Carnelli. The way the game is played is that a group of four or more people get in a circle with a judge, or the Carnelli Master, sitting in the middle. Then the Carnelli Master chooses one person in the circle to and says a title - a title being the name of song, movie, play or book, and then the chosen person continues by saying another title that has something in common with the first title, either by way of a common word, a common author, or something else, just as long as there is something in common. The next person in the circle has to name a title in common with the previous person's title and so on and so on down the line until someone cannot come up with a title. The Carnelli Master is allowed to reject any person's title at any time, for whatever reason they want.
Carnelli can easily be translated to the virtual world. The physical aspect of the Mafia game we played yesterday was almost non-existent, while the dialogue part was the true focus of the game. Thankfully, Carnelli is a dialogue heavy game with little to zero physical action. The same set up that we had for Mafia would work for Carnelli, with everyone meeting at a certain place, but this time sitting in a circle or having assigned numbers, then the game can start. The only problem I see with the virtual world version is that people might chat too much and people's actual answers or "titles" will get lost among the chat.
More to follow...
~Stephen
I recently found a parlor game that is, amazingly, better than playing The Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon and that also works the intellect a little bit. The game is called Carnelli. The way the game is played is that a group of four or more people get in a circle with a judge, or the Carnelli Master, sitting in the middle. Then the Carnelli Master chooses one person in the circle to and says a title - a title being the name of song, movie, play or book, and then the chosen person continues by saying another title that has something in common with the first title, either by way of a common word, a common author, or something else, just as long as there is something in common. The next person in the circle has to name a title in common with the previous person's title and so on and so on down the line until someone cannot come up with a title. The Carnelli Master is allowed to reject any person's title at any time, for whatever reason they want.
Carnelli can easily be translated to the virtual world. The physical aspect of the Mafia game we played yesterday was almost non-existent, while the dialogue part was the true focus of the game. Thankfully, Carnelli is a dialogue heavy game with little to zero physical action. The same set up that we had for Mafia would work for Carnelli, with everyone meeting at a certain place, but this time sitting in a circle or having assigned numbers, then the game can start. The only problem I see with the virtual world version is that people might chat too much and people's actual answers or "titles" will get lost among the chat.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
My initial topic for my research project was a continuation of Bartle and Yee's study of motivation behind playing MMORPGs. While the two researchers did not necessarily collaborate on that specific field of study, they've both contributed to the overarching theme of player types. After talking it over with my gaming professor, I am no longer going to do a continuation of their research, but start over at the beginning and try to form my own player types/groups/categories, but narrow the categories down into a multitude instead of lumping players together in very broad categories.
My research question as it stands right now is, "What are the prevailing player types in the MMORPG virtual world population?" Another, similar research question that will go along with the first one is, "What are the smaller groups of player types within the MMORPG virtual world population?" My research method is simple: I will conduct open-ended, informal interviews with fellow players. These interviews will contain a set list of questions, but they will not be asked in any necessary order and I will leave room for improvised questions in case a new topic should come up over the course of an interview. I will not only conduct these interviews in the Vanguard virtual world, but also in other virtual worlds such as World of Warcraft, Everquest 2 and possibly even City of Heroes or City of Villains.
More to follow...
~Stephen
My initial topic for my research project was a continuation of Bartle and Yee's study of motivation behind playing MMORPGs. While the two researchers did not necessarily collaborate on that specific field of study, they've both contributed to the overarching theme of player types. After talking it over with my gaming professor, I am no longer going to do a continuation of their research, but start over at the beginning and try to form my own player types/groups/categories, but narrow the categories down into a multitude instead of lumping players together in very broad categories.
My research question as it stands right now is, "What are the prevailing player types in the MMORPG virtual world population?" Another, similar research question that will go along with the first one is, "What are the smaller groups of player types within the MMORPG virtual world population?" My research method is simple: I will conduct open-ended, informal interviews with fellow players. These interviews will contain a set list of questions, but they will not be asked in any necessary order and I will leave room for improvised questions in case a new topic should come up over the course of an interview. I will not only conduct these interviews in the Vanguard virtual world, but also in other virtual worlds such as World of Warcraft, Everquest 2 and possibly even City of Heroes or City of Villains.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
After another long session of perusing the world wide web's large quantity of video gaming websites, I found a few that were particularly good:
MMORPG.com: http://www.mmorpg.com/index.cfm?bhcp=1
If you are a fan of MMORPGs, this website is all you need for your news updates, forum topics, screenshots, and videos.
The Daedalus Project: http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/
This is an excellent website if you're going to be doing any research on MMORPGs.
IGN.com: http://www.ign.com/
IGN is and has always been one of the top video game websites out there. This site will most likely have information on any game that has ever been made.
Game Politics: http://www.gamepolitics.com/category/vid
This is an interesting website where people are allowed to post anything they want in relation to where video games and politics collide.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
I had possibly the most moving experience I've ever had in a virtual world before while playing Vanguard: Saga of Heroes this past week. I would like to preface this experience by explaining a little bit about myself. I have been playing video games since I was young, but it has never been anywhere near an addiction for me. I usually enjoy first-person shooter games like Battlefield 2 or adventure games like Oblivion, but seldom do I ever play MMORPGs. Whenever I play, it's usually in pursuit of accomplishment or killing someone or something. I've never played for social reasons or even really tried talking to people online while playing. I've always had a very active social life outside of my gaming experiences, which is partially why I have never sought a social virtual world life. All that being said, I recently joined a guild in Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, and the moment I joined online during the game, I was flooded with greetings, warm welcomes, and conversation from other guild members. I'm sure this is normal for most gamers upon joining a guild, but it was such a nice feeling to be accepted into a family and instantly be greeted by several people who were strangers just a moment before, no questions asked. I feel like I understand a lot more about the social reasons for why people spend so much time playing MMORPGs. I feel like I would love to investigate this motivation further.
More to follow...
~Stephen
I had possibly the most moving experience I've ever had in a virtual world before while playing Vanguard: Saga of Heroes this past week. I would like to preface this experience by explaining a little bit about myself. I have been playing video games since I was young, but it has never been anywhere near an addiction for me. I usually enjoy first-person shooter games like Battlefield 2 or adventure games like Oblivion, but seldom do I ever play MMORPGs. Whenever I play, it's usually in pursuit of accomplishment or killing someone or something. I've never played for social reasons or even really tried talking to people online while playing. I've always had a very active social life outside of my gaming experiences, which is partially why I have never sought a social virtual world life. All that being said, I recently joined a guild in Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, and the moment I joined online during the game, I was flooded with greetings, warm welcomes, and conversation from other guild members. I'm sure this is normal for most gamers upon joining a guild, but it was such a nice feeling to be accepted into a family and instantly be greeted by several people who were strangers just a moment before, no questions asked. I feel like I understand a lot more about the social reasons for why people spend so much time playing MMORPGs. I feel like I would love to investigate this motivation further.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
I was perusing the archives of the wonderful website Terra Nova recently; being new to the field of virtual world research, I decided to catch myself up on what topics are circulating the field. I happened to find a couple astonishing articles and posts that were different from the usual gender-bending or motivation-oriented ones I've been reading lately.
The first article that grabbed my attention was titled "Seeing the Magic Circle", and was posted by Timothy Burke on September 26th, 2006. Burke discussed how certain games' visual originality helped propel them into popularity, however, were de-emphasized as causes for why the particular game was great while other factors such as game play, story, and structure were hailed. Burke cites World of Warcraft in particular as having truly original visuals. Of course it is understandable for the visuals in this game to be de-emphasized when looking at all the great aspects of the game. He then went on to discuss another game that was not as up to par as World of Warcraft called Okami, but the visuals in the game were so astonishing that it motivated him to play the game. I think the overall statement of the article was that there are certain aspects of games that many people might be overlooking or it's possible that some people feel motivated to play games for subconscious reasons that turn out to be overlooked aspects of a game. I personally feel that other aspects than story, structure, and gameplay motivate me to play certain games. Even though the game play in Battlefield 2 is stupendous, I would not play it as much as I do if it did not have such a real life setting and atmosphere. Along the same lines, I don't think the game Assassin's Creed would have been as great of an experience if the visuals were not as breathtaking as they were.
The next article I found interesting was posted by Bonnie Ruberg only two days prior to the Timothy Burke post and was titled "What's in a Name?" The article discusses how a user name on the internet or in a game is probably the only time in a person's life where they have complete freedom to choose what they want to be called, and what they choose can say a lot about a person. Also, what if the person is gender-bending; what does the name choice say about the person's ideas and feelings on the opposite sex? I really enjoyed the post because I believe it brings up a good point. On one hand, the choice of a name can be meaningless. I recently chose the name Hal for an alternate character in Vanguard because it was the first name that popped into my head. Yet, I chose the name Artrise for my main character in Vanguard who is a female healer because I felt the name had a bit of elegance in it. I also feel it depends on the type of game or atmosphere that your character is being put in to. For instance, my main character in Battlefield 2 is named StarPants because as my friend pointed out, it is one thing to be killed by another player in Battlefield 2, but another thing entirely to be killed by someone named StarPants. I think this article could turn into a very nice study of virtual world players.
The last post to strike a chord with me and simultaneously confirm the impending apocalypse was posted by Julian Dibbell and titled "Orcs Go Better With Coke." Julian described a recent trip to China in which he repeatedly viewed a commercial for Coca Cola in which a popular Chinese band is kidnapped by Orcs, who also steal their Coke, and are literally brought into the World of Warcraft. At this point in the commercial it is suggested that Cristiano Ronaldo, the actual band members, or Chinese Idol Li Yuchun might save them. In my personal opinion, the commercial is idiotic at best, containing zero substance and throwing as many big names and products at the consumer as possible. While the commercial speaks volumes about the decline of our society, it poses another question about games: how far have they come and how far will they go within popular culture? If World of Warcraft is already being used to promote Coca Cola, one of the most well known products in the world, how long will it be until there is product placement in virtual worlds? How long will it be until there is zero substance in all of the games, and just product funded games that are in existence solely to promote a product other than the game?
More to follow...
~Stephen
I was perusing the archives of the wonderful website Terra Nova recently; being new to the field of virtual world research, I decided to catch myself up on what topics are circulating the field. I happened to find a couple astonishing articles and posts that were different from the usual gender-bending or motivation-oriented ones I've been reading lately.
The first article that grabbed my attention was titled "Seeing the Magic Circle", and was posted by Timothy Burke on September 26th, 2006. Burke discussed how certain games' visual originality helped propel them into popularity, however, were de-emphasized as causes for why the particular game was great while other factors such as game play, story, and structure were hailed. Burke cites World of Warcraft in particular as having truly original visuals. Of course it is understandable for the visuals in this game to be de-emphasized when looking at all the great aspects of the game. He then went on to discuss another game that was not as up to par as World of Warcraft called Okami, but the visuals in the game were so astonishing that it motivated him to play the game. I think the overall statement of the article was that there are certain aspects of games that many people might be overlooking or it's possible that some people feel motivated to play games for subconscious reasons that turn out to be overlooked aspects of a game. I personally feel that other aspects than story, structure, and gameplay motivate me to play certain games. Even though the game play in Battlefield 2 is stupendous, I would not play it as much as I do if it did not have such a real life setting and atmosphere. Along the same lines, I don't think the game Assassin's Creed would have been as great of an experience if the visuals were not as breathtaking as they were.
The next article I found interesting was posted by Bonnie Ruberg only two days prior to the Timothy Burke post and was titled "What's in a Name?" The article discusses how a user name on the internet or in a game is probably the only time in a person's life where they have complete freedom to choose what they want to be called, and what they choose can say a lot about a person. Also, what if the person is gender-bending; what does the name choice say about the person's ideas and feelings on the opposite sex? I really enjoyed the post because I believe it brings up a good point. On one hand, the choice of a name can be meaningless. I recently chose the name Hal for an alternate character in Vanguard because it was the first name that popped into my head. Yet, I chose the name Artrise for my main character in Vanguard who is a female healer because I felt the name had a bit of elegance in it. I also feel it depends on the type of game or atmosphere that your character is being put in to. For instance, my main character in Battlefield 2 is named StarPants because as my friend pointed out, it is one thing to be killed by another player in Battlefield 2, but another thing entirely to be killed by someone named StarPants. I think this article could turn into a very nice study of virtual world players.
The last post to strike a chord with me and simultaneously confirm the impending apocalypse was posted by Julian Dibbell and titled "Orcs Go Better With Coke." Julian described a recent trip to China in which he repeatedly viewed a commercial for Coca Cola in which a popular Chinese band is kidnapped by Orcs, who also steal their Coke, and are literally brought into the World of Warcraft. At this point in the commercial it is suggested that Cristiano Ronaldo, the actual band members, or Chinese Idol Li Yuchun might save them. In my personal opinion, the commercial is idiotic at best, containing zero substance and throwing as many big names and products at the consumer as possible. While the commercial speaks volumes about the decline of our society, it poses another question about games: how far have they come and how far will they go within popular culture? If World of Warcraft is already being used to promote Coca Cola, one of the most well known products in the world, how long will it be until there is product placement in virtual worlds? How long will it be until there is zero substance in all of the games, and just product funded games that are in existence solely to promote a product other than the game?
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
Gold farming is one of the more ludicrous activities I've come upon in my life. The basic idea of completing a single task, repeatedly, every day in order to gather virtual gold and then sell that virtual gold for a very small amount of money sounds like something either a genius or a complete moron thought of. Now, I understand the argument that some people in other countries like China are active in gold farming to feed themselves or their families due to the shortage of employment, but gold farming, at least in America, is very much illegal. According to Richard Bartle, in his article "Pitfalls of Virtual Property," all virtual world property belongs to the creators of the virtual world and all real world selling of virtual property is against the law. Therefore, why not start counterfeiting money or stealing? Of course, I'm not actually suggesting committing crime, I just feel like there must be better or easier or more legal to do for money.
I am on the fence concerning how I feel about selling virtual world property on e-bay. Aside from the whole illegal aspect of it, I feel like buying characters or equipment ruins the game. In a somewhat nerdy analogy, it would be like reading the first few pages of the Lord of the Rings trilogy and then skipping to the end to see Frodo dropping the ring in Mount Doom; the experience and the journey are why the books are good! However, I can see the benefit of buying a completely leveled up character if you are a very experienced player and your personal character happened to get deleted or if you're a veteran player and you would like to play with your friends, but do not want to put in the effort of days and weeks of playtime just to catch up to them.
After perusing e-bay for virtual world property, I found a hoard of World of Warcraft characters for sale that have been completely leveled up. i was actually very surprised to find that most of these characters weren't going for more than $20. I was under the impression that most of them were being sold for thousands of dollars. Why would you spend so much time playing a character and leveling them up just to sell them for a small amount of money?
I wonder what would happen to gold farming if the game creators sent out a new patch that gave each player enormous amounts of money, but kept prices for everything the same. I'm sure this would ruin the game in many respects, but it would also take care of gold farming and consequently probably ruin many people's source of income.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Gold farming is one of the more ludicrous activities I've come upon in my life. The basic idea of completing a single task, repeatedly, every day in order to gather virtual gold and then sell that virtual gold for a very small amount of money sounds like something either a genius or a complete moron thought of. Now, I understand the argument that some people in other countries like China are active in gold farming to feed themselves or their families due to the shortage of employment, but gold farming, at least in America, is very much illegal. According to Richard Bartle, in his article "Pitfalls of Virtual Property," all virtual world property belongs to the creators of the virtual world and all real world selling of virtual property is against the law. Therefore, why not start counterfeiting money or stealing? Of course, I'm not actually suggesting committing crime, I just feel like there must be better or easier or more legal to do for money.
I am on the fence concerning how I feel about selling virtual world property on e-bay. Aside from the whole illegal aspect of it, I feel like buying characters or equipment ruins the game. In a somewhat nerdy analogy, it would be like reading the first few pages of the Lord of the Rings trilogy and then skipping to the end to see Frodo dropping the ring in Mount Doom; the experience and the journey are why the books are good! However, I can see the benefit of buying a completely leveled up character if you are a very experienced player and your personal character happened to get deleted or if you're a veteran player and you would like to play with your friends, but do not want to put in the effort of days and weeks of playtime just to catch up to them.
After perusing e-bay for virtual world property, I found a hoard of World of Warcraft characters for sale that have been completely leveled up. i was actually very surprised to find that most of these characters weren't going for more than $20. I was under the impression that most of them were being sold for thousands of dollars. Why would you spend so much time playing a character and leveling them up just to sell them for a small amount of money?
I wonder what would happen to gold farming if the game creators sent out a new patch that gave each player enormous amounts of money, but kept prices for everything the same. I'm sure this would ruin the game in many respects, but it would also take care of gold farming and consequently probably ruin many people's source of income.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
Our current topic is the ethnography and how to remain unbiased when immersing yourself in a different subculture that you're studying. How does one remain unbiased? It's only natural to be subjective towards everything we encounter. So let's make a short list of possible techniques to employ in order to remain unbiased in a certain subculture. To better describe how these steps might work, I'll use an example subculture: Neo-Nazis. Now, I really chose Neo-Nazis because it's probably the one subculture I would have the hardest time staying unbiased in...except maybe if I were studying cannibals.
1. Don't take anything with you that connects you to your personality. This may seem a bit harsh or extreme, but in order to change yourself from being subjective to completely objective and unbiased, you must almost become a little less connected to yourself, or even a little less human. Therefore, do not bring any pictures, mementos, or anything else that might trigger a memory or reveal who you truly are. In fact, it might even be a good idea to buy an entire new set of clothes. With Neo-Nazis, I would definitely buy a new set of clothes and maybe even change my appearance. I think the better I fit in, appearance-wise with them, then the easier it will be to stay focused and not be reminded of the fact that I nowhere near a Neo-Nazi. For instance, if I were Jewish, I wouldn't want a Star of David necklace hanging around my neck to remind me of the religious contradictions...and also for other reasons.
2. Don't talk or have contact with anyone in your personal life while immersing yourself in a different subculture; or if you do, then do not talk about the project. My family does not agree with any of the viewpoints that Neo-Nazis stand for. Therefore, if I were to call my Mom and talk to her while I was in the middle of the study, I would not want her asking me questions that might remind me of what I was doing.
3. Lastly, I would keep a journal or diary so you can have time to vent out any biased thoughts or feelings; or at least so you can draw attention to the fact that you're having these feelings and deal with them instead of trying to suppress them. Of course, it would be important to not let anyone see your journal. I think this step would be especially important if you were studying a subculture that you do not agree with, like Neo-Nazis. You could get out any anger, frustration, or disagreement into your journal instead of letting it explode out during the actual study.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Our current topic is the ethnography and how to remain unbiased when immersing yourself in a different subculture that you're studying. How does one remain unbiased? It's only natural to be subjective towards everything we encounter. So let's make a short list of possible techniques to employ in order to remain unbiased in a certain subculture. To better describe how these steps might work, I'll use an example subculture: Neo-Nazis. Now, I really chose Neo-Nazis because it's probably the one subculture I would have the hardest time staying unbiased in...except maybe if I were studying cannibals.
1. Don't take anything with you that connects you to your personality. This may seem a bit harsh or extreme, but in order to change yourself from being subjective to completely objective and unbiased, you must almost become a little less connected to yourself, or even a little less human. Therefore, do not bring any pictures, mementos, or anything else that might trigger a memory or reveal who you truly are. In fact, it might even be a good idea to buy an entire new set of clothes. With Neo-Nazis, I would definitely buy a new set of clothes and maybe even change my appearance. I think the better I fit in, appearance-wise with them, then the easier it will be to stay focused and not be reminded of the fact that I nowhere near a Neo-Nazi. For instance, if I were Jewish, I wouldn't want a Star of David necklace hanging around my neck to remind me of the religious contradictions...and also for other reasons.
2. Don't talk or have contact with anyone in your personal life while immersing yourself in a different subculture; or if you do, then do not talk about the project. My family does not agree with any of the viewpoints that Neo-Nazis stand for. Therefore, if I were to call my Mom and talk to her while I was in the middle of the study, I would not want her asking me questions that might remind me of what I was doing.
3. Lastly, I would keep a journal or diary so you can have time to vent out any biased thoughts or feelings; or at least so you can draw attention to the fact that you're having these feelings and deal with them instead of trying to suppress them. Of course, it would be important to not let anyone see your journal. I think this step would be especially important if you were studying a subculture that you do not agree with, like Neo-Nazis. You could get out any anger, frustration, or disagreement into your journal instead of letting it explode out during the actual study.
More to follow...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
I just got through researching many of the Vanguard guilds that are out there, and while the kid sitting next to me in the library probably thinks less of me for looking at guild information for half an hour, the short experience was very intriguing. First off, I had no idea there were so many guilds out there, and beyond that, the many different guild types: player-vs-player, role playing, specialty, casual, multi-game, raiding, and hardcore. As far as subcategories go, I noticed that there were guilds that only wanted to concentrate on leveling up and gaining experience, and then there were other guilds that only wanted to concentrate on exploring the land; there were some guilds that wanted a nice fun-filled experience for everyone while there were others that wanted to be the "top-notch" guild out there.
There were some very interesting things that I noticed while surfing the guilds today. When the guilds were given a space to describe themselves, there were two particular responses that I enjoyed: And from the darkness we were born, like the lotus seed embedded in the mud. The sun called to us and the strong answered...breaking free from the world of illusion, through the waters...and blossoming in the light of truth, and the second one: A secretive group existing on the outskirts of society, yet society still finds necessity in contacting us. The first quote sounds like the guild admin went a little too far with the role-playing nature of the game. The second quote sounds like the admin is either crazy or a little too disconnected from reality and a little too connected to his guild and online play; both of these two quotes, however, seem like great online-game-play psychology to study. Another observation I had was a little bit of game-racism. There were some guilds that would only allow certain races into their group. One in particular said they were only interested in High-Elves, but because there were too few of them, they were going to start allowing half-elves and wood-elves in as well.
I found more than 3 guilds I think I would like to join, but I feel like I can categorize them. The first group consists of The Kingdom of Evenfall and Agony's End. These two guilds are highly motivated, ambitious groups. The first one said that they want to be a large, powerful, well organized group that has a great time together. The second said that they want to create their own city and run guild wars and city wars. Either one of these two guilds would be good to join if I wanted to study overall player motivation and gamer types. Both guilds have a lot of members and seem like they play a lot. The second group consists of one guild called The Valkyrie Elite, who only allow female characters into their guild. Now, a player can be male or female, but their character has to be female. I think it would be fun to join this guild to study gender-bending and also to see how people and other guilds treat an all female guild. The third group consists of The Elder Dragons and The Old Timers Guild, both of which require their players to be above the age of 35 or 40 to join. I would love to join one of these guilds in order to study the motivations behind the middle-aged player mindset.
More to come...
~Stephen
I just got through researching many of the Vanguard guilds that are out there, and while the kid sitting next to me in the library probably thinks less of me for looking at guild information for half an hour, the short experience was very intriguing. First off, I had no idea there were so many guilds out there, and beyond that, the many different guild types: player-vs-player, role playing, specialty, casual, multi-game, raiding, and hardcore. As far as subcategories go, I noticed that there were guilds that only wanted to concentrate on leveling up and gaining experience, and then there were other guilds that only wanted to concentrate on exploring the land; there were some guilds that wanted a nice fun-filled experience for everyone while there were others that wanted to be the "top-notch" guild out there.
There were some very interesting things that I noticed while surfing the guilds today. When the guilds were given a space to describe themselves, there were two particular responses that I enjoyed: And from the darkness we were born, like the lotus seed embedded in the mud. The sun called to us and the strong answered...breaking free from the world of illusion, through the waters...and blossoming in the light of truth, and the second one: A secretive group existing on the outskirts of society, yet society still finds necessity in contacting us. The first quote sounds like the guild admin went a little too far with the role-playing nature of the game. The second quote sounds like the admin is either crazy or a little too disconnected from reality and a little too connected to his guild and online play; both of these two quotes, however, seem like great online-game-play psychology to study. Another observation I had was a little bit of game-racism. There were some guilds that would only allow certain races into their group. One in particular said they were only interested in High-Elves, but because there were too few of them, they were going to start allowing half-elves and wood-elves in as well.
I found more than 3 guilds I think I would like to join, but I feel like I can categorize them. The first group consists of The Kingdom of Evenfall and Agony's End. These two guilds are highly motivated, ambitious groups. The first one said that they want to be a large, powerful, well organized group that has a great time together. The second said that they want to create their own city and run guild wars and city wars. Either one of these two guilds would be good to join if I wanted to study overall player motivation and gamer types. Both guilds have a lot of members and seem like they play a lot. The second group consists of one guild called The Valkyrie Elite, who only allow female characters into their guild. Now, a player can be male or female, but their character has to be female. I think it would be fun to join this guild to study gender-bending and also to see how people and other guilds treat an all female guild. The third group consists of The Elder Dragons and The Old Timers Guild, both of which require their players to be above the age of 35 or 40 to join. I would love to join one of these guilds in order to study the motivations behind the middle-aged player mindset.
More to come...
~Stephen
Dear fellow gamers and researchers,
I recently took the famed Bartle quiz to find out more about myself as a gamer, and I was definitely left wanting. My scores from the all-telling quiz told me that I am a Killer; my exact scores said that I am a 60% Killer, a 60% Achiever, a 53% Socializer, and a 27% Explorer. First of all, why are my scores out of 200% and not 100%? Second of all, how exactly was I designated a Killer when I clearly have the same percentage in the category of Achiever? Does the Killer category take precedence? When looking on the quiz results page for other members, I noticed that every single person was either an Achiever or an Explorer, perhaps the quiz needs more Killers in its results category. Of course, I'm sure this isn't the actual reason, I just wanted to cite the incident as a clear flaw in the quiz.
Frankly, I'm surprised I wasn't classified as an Explorer; exploring different areas is one of my favorite parts of any game, which brings me to another flaw I found in the quiz: it doesn't take into account doing two different activities at once. For instance, I recently played the video game Oblivion: Elder Scrolls, and I loved travelling to different, unknown cities and caves and mountain ranges because I wanted to see different things, but also because I wanted to kill as many new foes as possible. Also, the quiz asks questions like,"Would you rather sit at a bar and socialize with friends, or go out hunting by yourself?" I would rather go out hunting with my friends while socializing.
I also feel like the Bartle quiz has two few categories; and for that matter I feel like Yee's recent study had too few categories when defining players. You can't just lump people into 3 or 4 categories. People are complex with different motivations and characteristics and using virtual characters with their own characteristics only complicates the matter more. Yes, when I play I usually like to do a lot of the killing, but sometimes I like to play characters who are healers. While playing Vanguard recently, I took a lot of satisfaction out of healing the rest of my team while they completed their own quests or fought different monsters. Now, the experience points gained from healing vs. killing is not too stellar so I can't fit in as an Acheiver, and it wasn't as if my group and I were socializing for most of the time so the category of Socializer is out; where would my healer character fit in on the Bartle quiz?
Lastly, the comments about what types of games my player type plays was a little ridiculous. Firstly, I've never played World of Warcraft, Dark Age of Combat, Guild Wars, Everquest, or Final Fantasy XI in my life, so clearly my player type does not always play these games. In fact, I usually play Battlefield 2. Secondly, I noticed that World of Warcraft was under "games usually played" for every player type, not just Killer. Is World of Warcraft an "everyman's" game? How accurate is this "games usually played by player type" list?
More questions and possibly answers next time.
~Stephen
I recently took the famed Bartle quiz to find out more about myself as a gamer, and I was definitely left wanting. My scores from the all-telling quiz told me that I am a Killer; my exact scores said that I am a 60% Killer, a 60% Achiever, a 53% Socializer, and a 27% Explorer. First of all, why are my scores out of 200% and not 100%? Second of all, how exactly was I designated a Killer when I clearly have the same percentage in the category of Achiever? Does the Killer category take precedence? When looking on the quiz results page for other members, I noticed that every single person was either an Achiever or an Explorer, perhaps the quiz needs more Killers in its results category. Of course, I'm sure this isn't the actual reason, I just wanted to cite the incident as a clear flaw in the quiz.
Frankly, I'm surprised I wasn't classified as an Explorer; exploring different areas is one of my favorite parts of any game, which brings me to another flaw I found in the quiz: it doesn't take into account doing two different activities at once. For instance, I recently played the video game Oblivion: Elder Scrolls, and I loved travelling to different, unknown cities and caves and mountain ranges because I wanted to see different things, but also because I wanted to kill as many new foes as possible. Also, the quiz asks questions like,"Would you rather sit at a bar and socialize with friends, or go out hunting by yourself?" I would rather go out hunting with my friends while socializing.
I also feel like the Bartle quiz has two few categories; and for that matter I feel like Yee's recent study had too few categories when defining players. You can't just lump people into 3 or 4 categories. People are complex with different motivations and characteristics and using virtual characters with their own characteristics only complicates the matter more. Yes, when I play I usually like to do a lot of the killing, but sometimes I like to play characters who are healers. While playing Vanguard recently, I took a lot of satisfaction out of healing the rest of my team while they completed their own quests or fought different monsters. Now, the experience points gained from healing vs. killing is not too stellar so I can't fit in as an Acheiver, and it wasn't as if my group and I were socializing for most of the time so the category of Socializer is out; where would my healer character fit in on the Bartle quiz?
Lastly, the comments about what types of games my player type plays was a little ridiculous. Firstly, I've never played World of Warcraft, Dark Age of Combat, Guild Wars, Everquest, or Final Fantasy XI in my life, so clearly my player type does not always play these games. In fact, I usually play Battlefield 2. Secondly, I noticed that World of Warcraft was under "games usually played" for every player type, not just Killer. Is World of Warcraft an "everyman's" game? How accurate is this "games usually played by player type" list?
More questions and possibly answers next time.
~Stephen
Hello fellow gamers and researchers,
Unfortunately, I had a few mishaps on Monday night and could not make it into class on Tuesday morning, which I regret immensely. However, I hear that most people's initial impressions of the game were that they highly enjoyed it which only made me more envious of them. I have heard that tonight's gaming session will bring everyone back to square one and I'm glad that I will get to start over with everyone.
Unfortunately, I had a few mishaps on Monday night and could not make it into class on Tuesday morning, which I regret immensely. However, I hear that most people's initial impressions of the game were that they highly enjoyed it which only made me more envious of them. I have heard that tonight's gaming session will bring everyone back to square one and I'm glad that I will get to start over with everyone.
I actually haven't experienced very many virtual worlds such as World of Warcraft. While I'm familiar with chatting from games such as Battlefield 2, I'm actually a little bit worried about evaluating the strength of monsters because I usually just trust that my characters is strong enough and I charge into any battle...that probably won't work in Vanguard I think. Any tips anyone can give me will be most welcome.
As far as the game mechanics go, I was wondering if the fighting is turn-based or in real time? Also, are you given a map of the entire world or do you actually have to discover different regions and cities?
I'm sure I will have many more questions and hopefully answers as I start and progress through the game.
~Stephen
~Stephen
Hello fellow gamers and researchers,
My name is Stephen Brown. I have also been known as "Knutta", the evil Orc in Oblivion, "Mars B. Goode", the star soccer player in Fifa '08, and "Master Sergeant StarPants" in Battlefield 2, but most of the time and more importantly, I am Stephen Brown, the college student.
I have to admit that while I've played my fair share of video games over the teenage years of my life, I have never played an MMORPG. However, like everyone else, I have heard the stories: Men losing their jobs and families because they were too devoted to their online character, people meeting and falling in love through a game, and yes, I most definitely saw the Leeroy Jenkins video. Most of these tales only bolstered the stance I reached about 2 years ago, which is that I would rather improve and "level up" my own life than spend any more time with a fake life in a fake world.
Yet, an idea occurred to me the other day: with the advancement of gaming worlds and interaction like World of Warcraft, how fake are these worlds? People more or less interact the way they would in real world situations, they fall in love, they make friendships, they earn money and advance in their own society. Therefore, are these fake identities really that fake?
Going off of that - and I know we talked about this in class on thursday - how far can people take these new identities? If i was to sign up as a female character and make friendships and relationships as a girl with other guys, is that still fake? And if I genderbend, will anyone be able to tell the difference?
Also, I'm not really one to join the "violent gaming causes violence issue", but I was wondering if there are any known groups of players that act as death squads and instead of going on raids, they go around joint-killing other players and stealing everything they have, almost like gangs or gang warfare?
~Stephen
My name is Stephen Brown. I have also been known as "Knutta", the evil Orc in Oblivion, "Mars B. Goode", the star soccer player in Fifa '08, and "Master Sergeant StarPants" in Battlefield 2, but most of the time and more importantly, I am Stephen Brown, the college student.
I have to admit that while I've played my fair share of video games over the teenage years of my life, I have never played an MMORPG. However, like everyone else, I have heard the stories: Men losing their jobs and families because they were too devoted to their online character, people meeting and falling in love through a game, and yes, I most definitely saw the Leeroy Jenkins video. Most of these tales only bolstered the stance I reached about 2 years ago, which is that I would rather improve and "level up" my own life than spend any more time with a fake life in a fake world.
Yet, an idea occurred to me the other day: with the advancement of gaming worlds and interaction like World of Warcraft, how fake are these worlds? People more or less interact the way they would in real world situations, they fall in love, they make friendships, they earn money and advance in their own society. Therefore, are these fake identities really that fake?
Going off of that - and I know we talked about this in class on thursday - how far can people take these new identities? If i was to sign up as a female character and make friendships and relationships as a girl with other guys, is that still fake? And if I genderbend, will anyone be able to tell the difference?
Also, I'm not really one to join the "violent gaming causes violence issue", but I was wondering if there are any known groups of players that act as death squads and instead of going on raids, they go around joint-killing other players and stealing everything they have, almost like gangs or gang warfare?
~Stephen
Profile
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
starpants2- starpants2
Syndicate
