Social Creatures

As much as our identities are bound up in the games we chose to play (or not to play), so much of the gaming world is tied to gaming culture and identity. As I quoted Flanagan in the previous post, the current gaming norm of “white dude” bro culture is a very intimidating one for interested parties to try and break into, if they don’t speak the language. Even when you do know the lingo, and are accepted in, there are more things at work than just social inclusion.

Given the fact that playing Ultima Online is very time-consuming and also requires a degree of financial investment, the users must assume they will benefit in some way. A recurrent theme in our interviews with the players, as well as in several items of the questionnaire, was the social experience of gaming. About two-thirds of the players mentioned the potential to interact with several thousand fellow players or participating via ones’ character in a virtual “society” as an essential motive to log onto Ultima Online. Compared to this, motives related to the individual such as mastering “quests” or the improvement of skills play a subordinate role. Surprisingly, only a quarter of those surveyed regarded climbing up the hierarchy of players as a very important incentive (Kolo and Baur 2004).

Despite their study being over ten years old, many of their findings still hold up strongly in the current online gaming landscape. Alongside social interaction within video games, particularly MMOs like World of Warcraft or web-based shooters like Fortnite or Overwatch, there’s also vast fan communities online, user-created content development, and an explosion of live-streaming. In this way, we become invested in the games we play not only because we like them, but because we like the people who like them.

Isolated individuals are given access to people that help them not feel alone. Isbister sums up the importance of sociality and gaming it up well:

The isolated gamer sits alone, face illuminated by the blue glow of the screen, lost in a solitary trance. It’s a familiar image from movies, TV, and popular culture in general. But the stereotype of the pasty-faced, antisocial game addict belies what we actually know about gamers. In fact, the majority of people who play digital games play them with others. 1 This shouldn’t be surprising: from playground tag to chess, card games, and board games to Minecraft and Call of Duty , the long history of games is primarily a story of rules and equipment created to engage people together socially. When we humans play (aside from the occasional game of solitaire), we usually play together. So before we can grasp the emotional impact of digital games, we need to understand what happens in social games more broadly (44).

WoWScrnShot_112409_200050 — A contest, a guild, a dream.

I started playing World of Warcraft sometime before the launch of Patch 2.1.0, which included the infamous Black Temple. It was my first MMO and I knew pretty much nothing about them. I had previously dabbled in Champions of Norrath online play on my PS2, and played countless single-player RPGs beforehand, but I had next to no bearings heading into Azeroth. I started playing because of my friend, and a free week trial. I got addicted, they didn’t. I learned the ropes the hard way, in a “git gud” environment. My original character was a warrior who didn’t know how to tank, and occasionally wore leather when I should have been wearing all plate. I was a mess. Eventually through coaxing, meeting good people, and joining a helpful community, I grew and became a better player. Eventually, through social networks on Akama-US, and after re-rolling to a restoration Shaman, I joined one of the top-3 raiding guilds on the server, just in time to see Black Temple and The Sunwell while they were still current. And the rest is history…well Hello Kitty Club history.

I’ve been with the same guild, more or less, ever since. Late night Ventrilo chats were replaced with late night Discord chats, but a large portion of our core remains. The guild has fallen apart in the virtual space, only to be bound back together again an expansion or two later, all the while our social ties went on through Facebook and other social media. Many people in the guild, myself included, stay in the game, and keep returning to the game, because of this community we’ve built. Many of us have met in person, or created lasting bonds outside of the game. Some of us have been friends longer than some of my friends in my “real” life. We’ve been through things together and the game wouldn’t be the same without them. “There is something deeply satisfying and bonding about over-coming a challenging mental and physical situation with someone else, especially if it requires close coordination” (Isbister 45).

MVIMG_20171102_213348 — HKC at BlizzCon 2017

Our friendships have come a long way, as all internet friendships have. In the early days of WoW and other online gaming communities, it was not unheard of to be scorned or cautioned for having web-based friends. It didn’t matter that people were connecting across the globe or with mutual interests–they were unknowns and scary. “Ubiquitous connection has dramatically changed how we communicate with one another on a day-to-day basis, shaping how we understand community and copresence. Texting, Twitter, and Facebook, email, and blogs offer countless ways to check in on someone–or on many someones. Game developers have interwoven networked communication and the sense of copresence it creates deep in the experiences that they offer players today” (109). Beyond simple communication tools, developers are including gifts for friends, friend bonuses, and other incentives to bring the social into the gaming space–to become even more invested in their worlds. Pokemon Go recently added these kinds of friendship-incentivizing features and might have helped to re-invigorate the game as a result.

Internet-based games are not the only place where the importance of social play occurs of course. Franchises like Super Smash Bros. persist in a world of web-ready content, pushing the importance of split-screen or same-room play. “When players in a room together laugh, jump, and tease each other, the power of games to drive connection, empathy, and closeness appears right before your eyes” (109). While our views of web-based communities may be shifting, the importance of an in-person all out brawl has not changed. Arguably, it’s also at the root of attending e-sports championships. There’s something to be said for the energy of cooperative or competitive gaming, that just can’t be conveyed through digital media–at least not yet.

What’s more, is that in-person gaming is something which ties itself into nostalgic memory. Four kids surrounding a singular tube-screen, facing off in Goldeneye; a group of high schoolers creating a local LAN party for a Quake tournament; a controller smashed in anger after getting run off the course in Mario Kart 64; another group huddled around a single player, waiting for their chance to hold the controller, as they progress through Final Fantasy 7. These group displays of cultural bonding and belonging are very much a byproduct of the tangible world. As much as players can join each other in the virtual space, the visceral reactions can only be fully felt alongside on another in person.

However, that doesn’t stop people from trying to catch a glimpse into other people’s gameplay habits or experiences. One of the last ways I want to consider the social realm in this series, is to consider the case of live-streams. The rise of bandwidth availability and video prevalence on the internet has helped to facilitate a surge in video game streaming. However, while videos of “talking” cats and falling toddlers, ala America’s Funniest Home Videos makes sense as a translation to the internet, live-streaming is a curious social engagement.

What distinguishes Twitch.tv from other video hosting and streaming websites with videogame content, including YouTube.com, is the presence and participation of the players and viewers…With its strong reliance on participative engagement, even single-player games become a social activity. It is difficult to find streams on Twitch.tv without, at bare minimum, an audio feed of the player, and the chat box is constantly updated with messages from eager viewers. In a mass medium most often considered inhuman, robotic, or purely digital such as videogaming, Twitch.tv has foregrounded the human element (LaRell Anderson 2017).

As LaRell Anderson discusses, Twitch.tv provides videos of games, but (and most importantly) also of players. Countless games are being played simultaneously on Twitch, and it’s a graball of personality and popularity as to who gets the most viewers for that game. From the outset, there’s a lot of potential to draw connections between live-streaming and spectator sports. However, the primary difference in Twitch streaming is the interactivity. According to LaRell Anderson, “while the chat box supplies plentiful opportunities for viewers to address the streamer/player, it does not inevitably signify an interaction between the two…[instead] the physical feedback provided by the streamer through the video stream transforms the interaction into something human and recognizably physical. The eye movements to read chat messages, the head shakes, the hand gestures, and the various non-verbal communication cues present in face-to-face communication all denote that the interaction is between people instead of from a content creator to a nameless, anonymous audience.”

While Twitch (and now YouTube) live-gaming streams do not fully replace the living room experience, it seems to help facilitate the kind of participatory nature that those experiences provided. While some streams may be as simple as helping a streamer get through a difficult puzzle, ala the group surrounding the Final Fantasy VII player, some streams even encourage playing with viewers. In this way, the boundary between virtual and real is again blended, and the engagement is intensified. A potential gamer may have no interest in playing Dead by Daylight on their own, but when faced with the possibility of earning a place to play alongside one of their favourite streamers, their opinion may altogether change.

Much like the group huddled around a single copy of Final Fantasy VII, live streaming also helps provide access to game content for those who might not otherwise be able to afford it. Living vicariously through the engagement of another player’s entertainment, may be the only way that individual can experience the content.

To this end, we must then consider the importance of monetary investment and gaming engagement [Part 4].

– Isbister, Katherine (2016) How Games Move Us
– Kolo, Castulus and Timo Baur (2004) Living a Virtual Life: Social Dynamics of Online Gaming (Game Studies)
– LaRell Anderson, Sky (2017) Watching People is Not a Game: Interactive Online Corporeality, Twitch.tv and Videogame Streams (Game Studies)

Travel All of Space & Time – From Your Living Room

Stories have always been a way to travel without leaving your surrounds–gateways to another place, another time. Is this transportation affected by how we indulge in stories?

Over reading week I was tasked with a reading project, in efforts to recreate a modern take on reading aloud from a pulp magazine to a group. It was an enlightening experience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Oig_j_sXmU

It was my logic that as some people in the class were setting out to read aloud in an in-person group setting, I would try to recreate the experience over the web. A pseudo-recreation of course, as the people I would be reading to, and interacting with, would not be in the room with me. I tried to adapt in advance to suit this need, showing the document on screen with a picture-in-picture display of my face and the text, in addition to some other features. As often happens with these things, I was unable to anticipate everything.

To start, I set the mood as it were, by playing a “Steamboat Willie” cartoon as my opener. Normally I would do a countdown, but I figured some sort of cartoon would be a cute way to get as close to the 1913 era of the pulp magazine serial as I could. Along the same lines, I queued up a playlist of big band/swing music to play in the background as I read. Part of this was my own fear of reading against silence while in ‘entertainment’ mode, but also in part because I imagined that radios and music would be commonplace enough in historical homes, possibly even through reading stories together. Either way, I set things up, started the stream, and began my very awkward read through of the last part of B.M. Bower’s The Last Stand.

While some in the class read from the original book, the version I read on stream was from the FlipBook version from the Pulp Magazine Project. This led to a number of problems, mainly an issue of readabilty. Partially due to linguistic conventions of the time, and partially due to the layout of the text, the document was fairly difficult to read. I was out of my element, and had not read aloud in a long time. While I had streamed countless times, this kind of entertainment was different. There were no pictures to distract my audience and many, including myself, found things hard to follow for the first while. Eventually things got a bit more melodical, and I was able to get into the rhythm of the narrative. While we discussed this week that the inclusion of full names were a status symbol for the characters, I have to say, that after reading them over out loud countless times, I’m through with people being referred to with their full three word names after the initial introduction.

There were a lot of similarities between the other read-aloud group and myself. Issues in legibility, reading comprehension, etc. I was surprised to learn that they had taken longer than me to read the entirety of the selection, including a ten-minute break as I started to lose my voice. Perhaps it was because they swapped who was reading back and forth, perhaps I read too quickly. Streaming did result in some interesting complications and improvements, however. I found that I was able to make commentary as it happened. I could voice my opinion about the story, the characters, or my fumblings and capture it candidly (as you can easily see in the above video). I was also able to pause at will and address the Twitch chat, or include their feedback into my commentary. Their voices were unobtrusive as the text cleanly popped up on the side. If we were in the same setting, their comments could have been lost or withheld, out of fear of interrupting. This way, they were perserved as they happened, and could be addressed when the timing was ‘right.’ Similarly, this method gave me no marker of my audience. Without facial reactions, I didn’t know if I was going too quickly, or too slowly, unless people spoke up about it. In-person you could gauge your audience and adjust accordingly.

Ultimately, this experience allowed me to reflect a lot on what it meant to read a pulp magazine, but also to read aloud in a group at that time. While I nearly lost my voice (and in truth my throat hurt the day after), I wondered if such a thing would have been passed around in a family setting to prevent such a thing, or if voices would have been accustomed to longer periods of reading at that time. Would pictures have made it more engaging for my audience? For any audience? How would have ‘city folk’ reading this story related to the tales of the wild west?

As we discussed in class, the serial in the pulp magazine, later a book, was one in a series of stories about “The Flying U” band of cowboys and their ranch. I imagine that contemporary readers of this publication would have been much more invested in their stories, and would have taken to binge-like behaviour to absorb more information about the fictional world. With more limited access to entertainment at the time, particularly affordable entertainment, I would wager the audience of the time would have been much more captivated as well.

Ultimately learning more about B.M. Bower also endeared me to her writing further. Like I discussed in Gendering History, an acknowledgement of female writers and of female participation in the Western genre has been sorely lacking, if not ignored, in scholarship. Learning that Bower fell victim to this in her own time was heartbreaking. She was successful after a period of personal strife, yes, but she could have been even more so, had there not been such a fear of being ‘outed’ as a female writer of Western stories. My change of heart, also highlights the importance of taking cultural contexts into consideration when doing academic work. It’s easy to dismiss something you don’t personally like or aren’t interested in, but when doing academic studies, it’s important to look at works holistically–to understand them from as many perspectives as possible.

I’m interested in giving her a second shot. Just because the last quarter of The Last Stand isn’t for me, doesn’t mean there isn’t something to be had in the Westerns of the time, particularly such a popular pulp writer as Bower. After all, I love me some Sci-Fi Westerns.

I may just have to avoid reading them aloud in the future…

Streaming, Not Just For Shows

We stream everything else, why not stream your video games too?

Streaming video, whether it be through YouTube, Twitch, Netflix, or Hulu, has already become a staple of most households in some fashion, whether or not you’re particularly tech-savvy or not. Smart TVs and other streaming-primed devices make slipping into a world of internet based media all the easier for the average media consumer. But what about video games?

It seems like the video game industry is trying to “Blockbuster” the brick and mortar game stores.

Digital downloads of video games are no new feature of the tech industry. We’ve been legally downloading video games since the early 2000’s when internet bandwidth finally allowed for users to access their content without taking forever. While the technology existed in the 1980’s, the downloading of video games was severely hindered by internet technology. As our bandwidths have grown, companies have increasingly transitioned to distributing their content to us via the internet.

When was the last time you bought a physical version of a non-Nintendo title? While discs are available for the newest generations of consoles, downloading of titles directly from console stores has been around for the Xbox 360/PlayStation for three years, and has only grown in popularity. So much so, that rather than downloading a game on the PS4, you are now able to stream titles from the gaming cloud.

Much like Netflix, services like PlayStation’s “PlayStation Now”, gamers will be able to stream their favorite PlayStation exclusive titles from various console generations, all for a subscription fee. What’s perhaps best of all, is that this streaming service also extends to PC gamers, effectively bridging a very wide gap for many budget-based players. Such services would allow players to enjoy PlayStation titles without having to purchase the system or game themselves.

Myself, I originally purchased an Xbox 360 in the previous generation of consoles and proceeded to trick it out with every game I came across. As a result, when the prices dropped for the PlayStation 3, after the launch of the PlayStation 4, I had limited incentive to purchase the PS3, as many of the games I desired I already owned on the Xbox 360. Exclusives are not always enough to buy an entire console for, I discovered. However, a service like PlayStation Now, would allow me to play a series like The Last of Us, that I’ve been coveting for years, in addition to older titles I may never have purchased for my now-dusty PlayStation 2. While the benefits seem endless on paper, don’t throw your discs away into the Boston Harbor or cancel your game downloads just yet.

While there are loads of great potentials to these new game delivery methods, drawbacks remain. Xbox One’s streaming service, the “Xbox Game Pass”, for example, only allows players to stream titles on an Xbox One console, losing out on one of the great features of the PlayStation Now service. Conversely, PlayStation Now currently only offers older generation games, while the Xbox Game Pass offers current-gen titles. Much like paying for different TV shows or movies from streaming media providers, perhaps differences like these are par for the course?

Gamers will likely need to seek various methods in order to gain access to the titles they want. In the same vein, there’s also the issue of streaming services removing titles. We’ve seen it happen countless times with Netflix or Hulu – your favorite show is pulled before you have a chance to binge-watch it a third time. Could you imagine the outrage a gamer would face when losing access to a game they’ve slowly picked away at, just before they finally got to get all of their achievements or to beat the game at all? I shudder to think of the technology what would be destroyed that day.

We stream everything else, why not video games?

Similarly, rage could easily settle in for gamers who face the buffering boss. While we can all accept that buffering occurs in online media streaming, are we ready to face unavoidable lag caused by streaming our games? Streaming services not only need their own networking technology up to snuff, but also require players to have solid connections on their own end. Additionally, let us not forget that some countries have data caps on their internet services, and large amounts of high-quality streaming may actually be impossible without emptying the bank over internet services.

Is it all worth it? Depending on your origin console of choice, internet access, and spare money, maybe. PlayStation Now currently offers one-month memberships, three-month memberships, and annual memberships. One month costs $19.99 US vs. $100 for the year. Comparatively, the Xbox Game Pass costs $9.99 US for unlimited access to their streaming games library. Depending on what you want out of the streaming service, it can be a great investment. However, on paper, it certainly seems like PlayStation Now has some catching up to do, at least on price-to-product value delivery purely based on the subscription fee. However, if you’re a primarily PC gamer like myself, and want to check out some PlayStation 3 games you missed out on in the previous console generation, it’s the perfect opportunity to explore.

In a world of constant connection, how does video game streaming affect those with limited internet access?

There’s a lot of potential for game streaming services as they continue to be developed on current-gen consoles. While there are a lot of kinks to work out, we can hope to see the development of Netflix-quality level distribution as time goes forward. It may be too much to hope that a single service could acquire rights for digital streaming distribution (i.e. through Steam), but we can at least hope that developers look at their competition and work to bring desirable features to their own brands.

Xbox could take a page from PlayStation’s book, and bring older titles alongside PC access for their streaming services, while PlayStation ought to lower its price and add current-gen titles to their streaming library. Either way, I’m keeping my bandwidth open, and my eyes peeled for streaming developments. And who knows, maybe the next title I get to immerse myself in will be The Last Of Us after all.

[poll id=”5″]

How do you feel about video game streaming? Let us know in the comments below, or hit us up on Discord, on our Facebook page, or Twitter!

Consoles V. Computers: The Biggest Bang for Your Buck

It’s probably one of the oldest battles gamers have ever known: console or computer? Luckily we’re not here to settle the debate, but rather to give you an idea of what you’re getting into.

When faced with the prospect of upgrading your PC or changing consoles, most gamers will hit the internet. Either to talk to their greater social media, or to scour various forum posts and reviews in order to figure out where their money is better spent. Unfortunately for most gamers, this decision is not made lightly, and is often more complicated than simply spending what you have on hand. When purchasing your primary gaming system, are you in it for the long haul?

Dollar Days

When investing in your gaming rig, price point is probably the most limiting factor. Do you only have $200-$300 to spend? Can you invest more than $800? While consoles are generally cheaper in the long run, they provide a lot of power for a smaller price tag. They’re guaranteed to work out of the box (or at least come with a warranty if they don’t), and usually come in bundles providing at least one game for you to get started. While extra controllers, fancier cords, and more games will cost you additional rates, a console will still offer you instant gaming at a reasonable rate. In addition, many online or local game resellers can provide used consoles at an even cheaper rate–not a bad deal.

Building your own PC however, or buying one pre-made, is a much larger initial investment than a console on average. In the long term however, it might actually provide better gaming benefits. While consoles aren’t quite aging as fast as they used to, the fact remains that a well-built computer will last you much longer than the current system en vogue. Games will load faster and generally look prettier for longer than a console can provide. Additionally, if you have a lot of gaming friends who have built their own rigs, chances are you can scoop up used pieces for a reduced or no cost to help offset the price point. Old monitors, computer towers, mice, keyboards, or speakers, are often held onto and passed down between gamers as needed. While most gaming computer builds will never be as cheap as their console bretheren, the benefits of their longevity help offset the costs.

Longevity

While consoles don’t age quite as fast as phones or cars, the truth remains that when buying a console you have a set number of days before it goes out of date. While new models are often released for existing systems, eventually, the newest system will come and replace it–often leaving you with an empty feeling before the joy of a new system kicks in. Additionally, consoles generally cannot be updated with additional power boosts unless you really know what you’re doing. And even then, it can be risky. Often, computers can be upgraded with minor improvements or additional sticks of RAM, which help to keep your games moving.

While longevity might be lacking for consoles in terms of playing the latest and greatest titles, older gaming consoles have proven their nostalgic staying-power. If getting your hands on those original SNES or SEGA games is what you want out of your gaming experience, you really can’t beat going the system route–computer emulators just aren’t the same.

Exclusivity, DLCs, Social Media, Oh my…

Computers and consoles each come with their own cultures and interests. Similarly, each also often have their own exclusive game titles, DLCs, or social circles which do not necessarily play well between platforms. That one great FPS you’ve been waiting for a sequel for might only be coming out on a given console, locking in your purchase. Similarly, the group of friends you play with might only play their action-adventure game on their computers, and while a console version is available, they are set up on different servers. Do you like sharing everything you do to your various social media? You might be limited in what kinds of sharing you can accomplish based on which system you choose. Sadly quite often there are circumstances outside of a gamer’s control, which dictates the way they’ll spend their money, given the chance.

So What Should You Do?

When weighing the benefits of either gaming method, it’s clear that the decision isn’t easy. So what should you do?

TLDR: Consoles

Plug and play: a great gaming experience right out of the box, no adjustments necessary!
Lower up front cost investment.
Will likely have exclusive DLCs or titles that will not be available on a computer.
Great deals on used consoles and games, and the ability to relive the nostalgia of older systems in true form.

If you only have a bit of money to spare, and you want to start gaming now, a console is probably your best option. With a low end cost, you’ll have more money to spend on games for as long as the system is supported.

TLDR: Computers

A higher cost investment initially, but its power will likely last much longer than a console, even with minor tweaks.
A wider variety of titles available, including the option for modding your games.
More sales on newer and indie games (e.g. Steam).
A lot of options for sharing or interacting with your social sphere without having to rely on built-in options.

If you have a bit more to spend up front, and want to have more control over your gaming experience, then a computer is your best bet. Whether you build it yourself, or buy a pre-made system, a computer’s components are likely to outlive a console’s power in the long term, allowing you to game for longer without having to change things up.

Whether you decide to buy a new console or build a PC, there are tons of gaming options available. Controllers are no longer console-exclusives, consoles are integrating more cross-platform interaction, and built-in emulators allow you to play your favourites no matter whether you’re looking at an Xbox or Windows UI. After all, it’s not what you game on, but how you game, that truly matters.

Featured Image Source