|
Adam . Ruch
| Written by Adam Ruch |
| Sunday, 22 February 2009 00:03 |
I have been very quiet here for the last few months, but I have decent reasons. I've settled in at Macquarie and have been doing genuine writing for my thesis, as well as working on some articles for other destinations. The biggest news is that the first of my submissions has actually been accepted, while I'm waiting on news of the rest.
World of Warcraft: Service or Space?
This article seeks to explore the relationship between the concept of Blizzard’s World of Warcraft in legal terms, in Blizzard’s End-User License Agreement (EULA) and the Terms of Use (TOU), and the concept of the game as conceived by the players of the game. Blizzard present their product as a service, and themselves as a service provider, in the EULA/TOU. Meanwhile, the product itself seems to be more akin to a space or place, which subjective players move about in. This conflict is essentially a difference between a passive viewer accessing certain content within a range available to him, and an individual who inhabits a space and acts within that space as an agent. The meaning of this subjectivity-in-space (or denial of the same) problematizes the relationship Blizzard has with its customers, and the relationships between those customers and Blizzard’s product.
An evolution of the governance of these spaces is inevitable. Where Castronova and Lessig’s answers differ, their basic assertion that the virtual political landscape can and will change seems clear. These changes will be influenced by the values placed on the social capital generated within the spaces themselves. The identities as per Turkle, Koster, and Dibble are human identities. As the synthetic world increasingly affects the real world, attention must be paid to the development of these cyberspaces.
Journal Details: www.gamestudies.org
This should appear in the issue following their upcoming special edition, though I really don't know when that will be.
The Decline of Psuedonymity
The post-modern trajectory of identity theory has seen the once solid, embodied notion become decentred and distributed across multiple ‘windows’ of performance. Turkle’s seminal work in the mid 90s accurate portrayed a time of technology-assisted exploration of the multiple facets of each inner self, in discreet, self-contained worlds. This trend has continued up until the most recent cyber-technological innovation: Facebook, MySpace, Friendster and other social networking tools have brought ‘being online’ fully into the mainstream, while massively multiplayer games like World of Warcraft boast 11 million players. These numbers mark significant changes to the perception of engaging socially across the internet. More importantly, however, the specific functional differences between the Facebook network and the now out-dated MUD experience lead to a very different experience of identity. Social networking tools take a very different path towards identity, one of full-disclosure, grounded in corporeal reality rather than the imagined or psychological self. The communities which were discreet are now merging together, as a Facebook page becomes the base of operations, of broadcast to all audiences. The technology has become ubiquitous in that it presents the same image of the individual to disparate, non-technical audiences, undermining the distributed-self phenomenon of the earlier technologies. These observations are not disparaging or hopeless, but must be made to ensure users of these newer technologies do not mistake them for serving the same function as the previous series. The disconnection from corporeal reality that the MUD represented created a safe layer of protection between the user and the consequences of his or her actions online. Now, Facebook and others like it remove that layer. The technology is not arcane, so mainstream employers check up on their workers, parents can access their children’s pages, friends can keep track of each other in far more pervasive ways than before. This means that users of these sites must take notice of who is watching, of who will know what about themselves.
This has been submitted to a conference as a presentation paper. The details are behind the link:
4th Global Conference: Visions of Humanity in Cyberculture, Cyberspace and Science Fiction
World of Warcraft: A Game of Motion
The basis for this article appears here on Joomla. I'm going to leave it there for now, since I will probably have to re-write it somewhat to conform to a more academic tone. You can get the gist in the article: A Game of Motion
This has also been submitted to a conferece:
1st Global Conference:Videogame Cultures and the Future of Interactive Entertainment
Obsolescence in a Virtual World
World of Warcraft supports an internal model of value that behaves according to many of the same rules as a real-world market, with one distinction: Warcraft's developer Blizzard have ultimate control over the products and the uses to which those items can be put. This virtual world can be a lens through which we can reflect upon how value is assigned and what happens when a new set of items is introduced to the economy, virtual or real. Are the "old" items also "obsolete"? Under what circumstances is this true, or not? What does obsolete mean in a world where items and their uses are virtual? And how does this relate to models of value in the real world?
Journal Details: M/C: Journal of Media and Culture
The theme of the issue is 'obsolete' which is due out in the middle of 2009.
So there is plenty of writing out there, hopefully the other 3 will be found worthy of publication so I can link to the genuine articles once its all gone through. If any aren't selected, I will probably submit to other destinations before resigning myself to self-publication here under the guise of a blog.
With the 3 Warcraft-related articles, I may have finally satisfied myself regarding that subject. I spent a long time very much engaged with that game, and if I end up with 3 publications as well as my honours thesis, I feel as though I've said something significant about the game. Hopefully!
|
| Last Updated on Sunday, 22 February 2009 00:24 |
|
| World of Warcraft: A Game of Motion |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Adam Ruch |
| Tuesday, 17 June 2008 06:04 |
|
I’m such a noob. By choice, as it happens in this particular case, but that doesn’t make it any less true. The cartoonish, tailed and hooved avatar who currently represents me is definitely a noob. As I write this I am making the long, arduous journey from Ironforge to the Wetlands for the first time. It’s going to take me some time, I know, but I can’t avoid it. I ‘have’ to do it. I have to sit, at my desk and watch a weird satyr with an axe and shield canter through the mountains for ten or fifteen minutes. Now this is playing! But at least I have some time to think while I run.
Ok so what am I really doing? Why am I doing it? What is gameplay, in this 'game' world? There are so many layers.
I suppose we could start with the ‘I’ in the questions. Just who am I at the moment? Just phrasing the question that way suggests part of the answer: decidedly post-modern, I am definitely distributed in Turkle’s terms. I am not one, but many. I would not be widely recognized as Jaxalte, but as Jaxell? That might be another story. Certainly the guild I belong to would know me, when I sign in and say hello. But Jaxalte? He has no one to welcome him when he materializes into being in Azeroth. I don’t play him much, I am usually on my druid, the aforementioned celebrity, Jaxell. That makes this paladin my alt, and Jaxell my main. Actually this is my alt-alt… maybe even one or two more removes. I have another lvl 70 shaman, and a 64 warrior, and a 49 mage… all ‘me.’ Or different shards of me.
If the world of Ultima Online can exist in shards, why not the players? Only my shards are not discreet replicas of the same, they are individuals who can be taken as whole, or when cast as a part of a greater whole, create the more mature being I’ve elsewhere described as a ‘craftsman’ of the MMO world.
|
| Read more... |
| Thesis: Player Identification Cycle in World of Warcraft |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Adam Ruch |
| Saturday, 06 October 2007 03:03 |
|
This thesis is an examination of the playing experience of World of Warcraft. As a video game it shares some common characteristics with other video games. As an online community, the game shares aspects of other online communities. What I will show is that as a combination of many things, the game of Warcraft becomes a layered experience for players. I will explore the storytelling nature of this environment, and how the metaphorical space allows for a kind of immersion that allows a different experience of one’s identity to take place within the game. That experience of identification I have found to be separated into three stages. The first is a general identification with the on-screen avatar, where players begin to share the goals and fears of their character. The second throws players into the social world of Warcraft, where players must interact with other characters- which are of course, other players themselves. This causes players to begin to identify as their character in order to achieve their goals. Eventually, as I will show, the player transcends this role and becomes what I have called a craftsman: one skilled in the development of these characters, characters whose quality reflects the skill of their maker. I will explore the relationships originating with the player at each stage, and demonstrate the complexities of multiple-identity in this online environment.
Blizzard Entertainment’s World of Warcraft is one of a new breed of online video games, collectively known as MMORPGs: Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games. Boasting over 8 million players globally (according to Blizzard’s www.worldofwarcraft.com website, as of September 2007) it is a social phenomenon of enormous proportions. As a game, Warcraft is a logical evolutionary step from the RPG genre generally. As a piece of software it is a technical solution to the problem of computer-based role-playing games, in that it allows for multiple players to take part in a shared experience- like that of the original table-top game, and unlike the single-player computer games prior. Yet in so doing, Warcraft has created a wholly new space within which people are able to spend time together. The created space is not exactly physical, but not exactly imaginary either. It is a social space, a metaphorical space, where players interact according to the rules of the world. Rules that are hard-coded into the system: gravity, line of sight, the number of arrows one can carry in a single quiver; and the social rules that live in the social aether found in and surrounding the game. So, while the word game will always be used to describe Warcraft, to suppose that it just a game is somewhat limiting. Blizzard themselves have come to the conclusion that “It’s not a game. It’s a world.” (www.worldofwarcraft.com)
In this thesis, two distinct sections will be presented. The first will deal with Warcraft itself as a new media type which is simultaneously a collectively written text, and an event (or series of events) experienced by the participants. The game itself will be described as a framework or architecture, developed by a gaming publisher, which creates a space in which players can enact narratives about themselves, their characters, and each other. The gamespace will be set up as a ‘narrative architecture’ as per Henry Jenkins, and as a symbolic ‘realm of action’ as described by Kenneth Burke. In this space, varied strands of narration work themselves out through motion and experience, as a player must be in the world and move through it in order to absorb the stories.
The second section will undertake an analysis of the player experience of the game world. We will move into discussions of how players experience the game as a process of interaction and identification with their character, other characters, and finally, other players. Working from a broad model developed by Sherry Turkle in her research into MUD culture, I will show that players experience a three part process of identification in Warcraft that resembles in some ways what Turkle identified in the earlier environments. I have called the process an identification cycle, and it consists of three parts. Firstly, the player will identify with the character/avatar on-screen much like with any other video game. As the player progresses, he or she will come into contact with other players and the identification will shift and the player and character will merge: the player will identify as the character in social situations, and be identified as such by others. This stage invokes part of Turkle’s theories on fashioning of an identity online. Finally the third stage is reached when a player, as a member of a relatively stable social network, fashions more than one character, and cycles between them as a kind of craftsman able to occupy the many roles he has developed. This third stage invokes other aspects of Turkle’s work, and corresponds well to her theory of multipresence, or a cycling through identities which collectively make up the total identity of the individual. As players mature into the third stage, they are at liberty to ‘become’ different characters at different times, and play different roles in either the same or different social networks. So these players will in effect be both outside and greater than their characters, but also inside and continuing to identify as the character when required.
|
| Last Updated on Tuesday, 06 May 2008 03:27 |
| Read more... |
|
| Written by Adam Ruch |
| Thursday, 08 May 2008 09:33 |
|
The following is a reflection on the article ‘Gamble your life away in ZT Online’ and some of the subsequent ripples this article, and the game itself, have caused across cyberspace. This paper is consciously sub-academic, as the research materials are by-and-large written by non-academics, and my information is decidedly second-hand. The nature of this beast demands a kind of grass-roots approach, but encourages a degree of academic discipline in this response. The original article is in Chinese, and has been translated and reposted by Joel Martinsen, of danwei.org. The quality of the original is questionable for a number of reasons, and has been questioned publicly many times over. The flimsiness of the original article is part of what prompted this response. I will attempt in this piece to tease out the various issues surrounding the article itself, as a piece of quasi-research or journalism, but also extrapolate what are valid and relevant discussion points raised there.
The article discusses a Chinese MMORPG, ZT Online which recently reported a peak concurrent user record of 2.1 million. Last year, ZTO was voted the most popular MMO in China, and Giant Interactive, the game’s producers, have this month launched a second MMO into beta testing. (Money Central, Giant’s ZT Online PCU) This game is significant in terms of scale and the philosophy of cyberspace and MMOs. The article here has also sparked significant discussion across the blogosphere, with some calling it ‘the best, most detailed, most fascinating piece of online gaming journalism I have read in recent years...’ despite its shortcomings from a research perspective. (Maomy, in Mortinsen, ZT Online and China’s media “system”) It is those issues I will address first, and develop the discussion from there.
|
| Last Updated on Thursday, 08 May 2008 11:24 |
| Read more... |
| Written by Adam Ruch |
| Tuesday, 06 May 2008 01:49 |
|
What is cyberspace?
“Barlovian” cyberspace is an extension of the telephone system, whereby people perform everyday communication via text, pictures (and now video and sound) instead of only voice. This cyberspace is highly practical, and is accessed through typical personal computers. (Morris, et al., 2002)
“Virtual Reality” is often synonymous with cyberspace, meaning a visual world rendered in real-time from the perspective of an active viewer. Usually projected in goggles to create a three-dimensional immersion, the truly immersive worlds will allow the user to navigate and interact with the world with their body as the input device, using datagloves or bodysuits to project their physicality into the world. (Morris, et al., 2002)
Finally, we return to “Gibsonion” cyberspace, one of the earliest, and indeed the source of the term itself: William Gibson and his novel Neuromancer. “Cyberspace. A consensual hallucination experienced daily by billions of legitimate operators, in every nation, by children being taught mathematical concepts... A graphic representation of data abstracted from the bank of every computer in the human system. Unthinkable complexity. Lines of light ranged in the nonspace of the mind, cluster and constellations of data. Like city lights receding...” was how he referenced the virtual world Case and his cohort inhabited. (Gibson, 1984 p. 51)
While Gibson’s definition seems of little practical use, and would be unlikely to find itself placed in a dictionary, it is extremely useful in a theoretical approach to the term itself. As with Benedikt, it essentially debases any concrete, singular object which is called cyberspace. Where the previous two definitions could be summarised, Gibson’s is elusive. Barlovian cyberspace could be summed up easily by citing software: e-mail clients, message forums, instant messaging programs, and the like. Similarly, VR cyberspace is equally summed up by citing exemplary virtual world tools. Yet they are not cyberspace they are software. They are what I will call cyber-media, particular manifestations of a concept casually called cyberspace without true understanding of what is being evoked within that term.
What is cyberspace?
|
| Last Updated on Tuesday, 06 May 2008 03:33 |
| Read more... |
|
|
|
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
|