Many online games include voice chat capability in the interface of their game. Along with this elevation of in game communication has come more social “laws” to define and enforce acceptable use in the online space. One of these rules is do not over use the voice broadcasting feature of a game. It mostly stems from the fact that the primary function of these games is to play the game. Communication is a utility to enhance the game, not the other way around.
There are a few ways people can transgress this rule. One of the easiest ways new players do so is simply talking too much over it. Most players want to concentrate on the game, and prefer to not hear someone else talk constantly about unrelated issues while they are playing. There are instances when this is acceptable, such as when one is mainly playing with friends, or there is a server wide discussion going on, but for the most part players want chat kept to game-relevant chatter.
New players learn of this convention most often through observation when they enter a game. Much like the elevator gag that Wallace mentions in her book, a player who comes into a server where the voice chatter is mainly task oriented and sparse, he will most likely not break the trend. Sometimes game servers also post rules that players see before entering, often including “no mic spam” (which means don't overuse the voice chat feature.)
There are several social mechanisms to enforce this social norm online, collectively referred to as the Leviathan by Wallace. The “virtual eyebrow”, as Wallace calls it, is a subtle nudge from other players that another player is in breach of this rule. Most often this comes in the form of a verbal or text reminder from other players to keep it down. This can often be the most effective form of the leviathan. Online games by their nature sort people into groups (especially in games that put players on teams), but increasing the sense of group among players. In addition, most games provide no continuity for identity between games, meaning each new game is a fresh start. This increases anonymity felt by players. The Postmes study we looked at found that when a group sense and an anonymous condition intersect, the susceptibility of the subjects to priming to encourage conformity increased. Much like that study, the game primes people to feel like part of a group, and that sense of group with anonymity encourages players to conform to the observed social norms inside the game.
cha-comment
cha-comment:the return
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
You make a very valid point that the purpose of online gaming is for the social-interaction within the game itself, and it is not meant for communication. As you stated, communication can help improve players' experiences. This point you make clearly relates to the role of the Leviathan. The Leviathan is there to maintain the norms of playing the game for the game itself and to make sure users do not talk excessively.
If there is a specifc player who does not conform to the norms time and time again, what kind of power do other players, who you seem to state make up the Leviathan, have to reject this annoying player from their online group? Or, do gamers pretty-much adhere to the "raised eyebrow", rendering a larger overbearing Leviathan unnecessary? If so, that would mean the group has a very strong identity and is very capable of monitoring itself.
I think your topic, voice communication in online games, is a very interesting one. While it’s a feature that exists to improve and speed up communication between players, it can quickly become extremely annoying and unproductive. I would also say that the leviathan is generally the other players, who can reproach the offender verbally, usually in the form of a comment like “shut up,” or by personally muting the player via their game options menu. As a server admin who has had to deal with players who spam music over their microphones, talk excessively, talk offensively and/or talk in otherwise annoying manners, I can say that sometimes, however, the leviathan can be a server or game admin, who generally have the power to either globally mute the disruptive player, kick and/or ban him/him. I also have to disagree with Daniel, in that I think you’re suggesting that voice communication is normally not for social interaction, which is another idea I agree with.
hey,
i really liked you post! you made very good use of all the theories explained in class and in Wallace's book.
also, you explained that it is not acceptable or common for the users to talk about game-unrelated topics while playing. this is a great example of online gaming norms that only expert players are aware of. i am a non-gamer and thus, i didn't know this. as you stated, after a couple of games, i would have become aware of this fact and adapted to this convention.
overall, good post!!
I thought this post was really interesting. It made me think of this one time when I was watching my friend play WoW and I decided to snatch his headphones from him to hear what kind of conversation was going on. I was shocked to hear people playing Ludacris in the background, talking about personal issues and swearing left and right. For the most part, about 50% of the conversation didn't even have to do with the game. I personally wondered how it was acceptable for them to communicate in that manner. Is there a Leviathan out there that regulates conversation? What are the consequences of breaking these non-written rules? Your post definitely raised some great questions.
I can completely relate to your post on voice chat in games. Many an eye roll has occurred when someone decided to share with everyone their favourite album in the middle of a BF2 or CS game. Although I do agree that, in general, voice chatting is used to supplement the gaming, it would be interesting to see how voice chat is being used in less 'serious' games. Describing games as serious or not can be a very subjective problem, but in general games requiring a substantial amount of concentration, such as high precision first person shooters(CS), or real time strategies(Starcraft/Dawn of War), have featured this social norm of functional voice chat in my experience. In contrast, lighter games such as World of Warcraft (MMORPG) and more mindless shooters (UT) often accept casual or superfluous voice chat, only challenging it if it starts seriously getting in the way of completing some objective. While only “T's rushing B” may be the only type of accepted voice chat in CS, listening to someone impersonate Chris Walken during a raid in WoW only adds to the jovial, friendly mood of the game. Great post subject.
Post a Comment