Digital America

Class Blog | History 305

[samtxu-blog]

Red, White, and Blonde: Keller v. Electronic Arts

http://digitalamericasp16.wikispaces.com/Keller+v.+Electronic+Arts

[samtxu-blog]

Red, White, and Blonde: Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez

http://digitalamericasp16.wikispaces.com/Campbell-Ewald+v.+Gomez

[samtxu-blog]

Digital Time Travel

I would have loved to go back through my old Myspace for this mission, but was forced to use Facebook instead as a result of a major shift in my attitude towards social media in the last few years. I actually still remember pretty vividly when I first joined Facebook and set up my profile in 2009 with the help of a slightly hipper friend. For some reason, I've always considered myself a private person when it comes to social media presence, but looking back on my Facebook history from 2009 and 2010 , I was shocked to see the frequency of my posts and their content. It turns out that I didn't have near the amount of discretion that I seem to remember myself having. I posted a lot of statuses simply updating people on what I was doing at the moment, or about a more special event like getting concert tickets. I think this type of sharing was encouraged by Facebook at that time, because the status bar would say, "Your Name is..." and was waiting for you to fill in the blank. Since this time in the evolution of Facebook, I feel like the site has gotten much less focused on individual interaction and conversations like the status updates at that time seemed to promote, and more about curating a specific picture of yourself for others. Facebook seems to be much more image based these days, and the Share button allows people to constantly share articles that carefully define their political or religious beliefs for others. I'm not sure if my personal digital journey is at all tied to this phenomenon, but I definitely post with a lot less frequency today, and have gone back and deleted all personal information on sites that I don’t monitor regularly, like Myspace. I like guarding my privacy a little bit closer online than I used to, but this episode of digital time travel did make me miss the days when I was still engaged in and excited about the connecting powers of a social network, and not focused on the cynical, superficial aspects that they sometimes breed.

[samtxu-blog]

The Man who Investigates the Man who Investigates Me: BLARNEY

http://digitalamericasp16.wikispaces.com/BLARNEY

[samtxu-blog]

[samtxu-blog]

The Man who Investigates the Man who Investigates Me: MUSCULAR

http://digitalamericasp16.wikispaces.com/MUSCULAR

[samtxu-blog]

The Man who Investigates the Man who Investigates Me

http://digitalamericasp16.wikispaces.com/PRISM

[samtxu-blog]

FASCIA

http://digitalamericasp16.wikispaces.com/FASCIA

[samtxu-blog]

Reading a few articles relevant to my interests on ProPublica via TOR.

[samtxu-blog]

Becoming a Part of Something Bigger Than Ourselves: the Epic World of Neopets (McGonigal ch. 6)

Today I’m going to analyze the game Neopets, probably my favorite game of all time, where I spent countless hours of my elementary and middle school time.

Neopets is an online game focused on the ownership of virtual pets. The game was originally marketed for a younger audience, but it has a large and loyal fan base of adult users, showing just how immersive the game of Neopets is. I believe that Neopets users are so invested in the game because of McGonigal’s principle of an “epic” game, showing the intrinsic desire of humans to search for meaning outside of ourselves.

McGonigal states, “a good working definition of “epic” is something that far surpasses the ordinary, especially in size, scale, and intensity” (98). Neopets is an epic game because it takes place in an entire secondary world, with its own economy, stock market, and newspaper, among other things, all of which users control. The main objective of the game is to adopt and feed your pets. Feeding your pets is extremely cheap and fast to do, which leaves the user with the rest of their time on the site to devote to secondary tasks, such as creating and running your own shop or playing games in order to get enough money to buy rare items or experiences. McGonigal has created three criteria that a game and its world must meet to qualify for her definition of epic. First, epic games “create epic contexts of action: collective stories that help us connect our individual gameplay to a much bigger mission” (98). Periodically, community quests are released in which users can contribute their money and gaming skills to save the world from some outside attacker, bringing together the whole community for one purpose. Additionally, epic games must take place in “epic environments: vast, interactive spaces that provoke feelings of curiosity and wonder“ (98). The planet Neopia consists of 21 distinct sub worlds, all of which are explorable. Finally, epic worlds engage us in epic projects” that are carried out over months or years (98). The structure of the game, which encourages the creation of a whole new second life, similar to the one we lead now in regards to structure, but with the freedom to pursue our own interests. This leads players to come up with “life goals” within the game that cannot be accomplished in a short amount of time.

People are drawn to epic games and worlds like Neopets because they lend themselves to the creation of the feeling that we are a part of something bigger than just ourselves. As McGonigal says, accomplishing our goals alongside others who have similar goals in mind feels meaningful to us as humans, ensuring that epic games will never go out of style.

[hermionetargaryen]

War. HUH!

https://youtu.be/r-bA9FYB8HY « a powerful message of war and interracial relationships.  Highly recommended for supplementation to my post.

Young gamers shown in the video Monday insisted that they could readily distinguish between war video games and real war.  I, however, was skeptical if one could consciously understand that difference.  One cannot control the subconscious mind.  I believe that violent, war-based video games can have negative impacts on behavior.  It could also be negative to gamers’ mental health to play violent video games on a consistent basis.  

It is an interesting, but possibly insignificant, fact that the individuals responsible for the Columbine and Aurora shootings were gamers.  Meaningful studies on the effect of video games and shootings have not been completed, however, because shooting incidents like Columbine and Aurora are extremely rare among the total population of gamers.  It is an interesting note, however, because it leads me to think that these shooters were possibly desensitized to violence and rationalized it as a solution to whatever their problems were.  Another probably insignificant fact is that boys are more likely to play violent video games than girls.  Perhaps this is due to social conditioning that tries to make girls more nurturing and obedient and boys more aggressive and dominant.  However, according to the International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences in 2015 (found via Wikipedia), differences in violent behavior between the sexes have been a consistent finding.  Males have been found to engage in more physical aggression; females engage in more passive-aggression.  Unprovoked aggressive behavior has also been shown more frequently in males.  

The most studies can conclude about the effect of violent video games on behavior is that they can have short-term negative effects.  A Iowa State University study showed that video games, like Call of Duty, increased player’s level of physical and psychological arousal.  Aggressive behavior was also increased following a video game.  Subject were told to give other students hot sauce, even though they did not like it.  Subjects that had recently played video games gave bigger dollops of hot sauce to the unfortunate students.  How long these negative effects last, however, is less concrete.  It could be as short as a few minutes.  

Correlation studies have also been used to study the effect of violent video games on behavior.  One study by Brock University showed that when high schoolers played violent video games for longer durations, they had more conflicts with their peers.  With correlational studies, its important to consider other factors.  Perhaps the kids that have more conflicts in school are innately more violent, so they are drawn to violent video games.  Another study showed that while video game sales have approximately doubled since 1996, violent crimes have approximately halved from 1994-2010.  Players give the explanation that these video games allow a nonviolent outlet for violent feelings or thoughts.  Most psychologists, however, disagree with this explanation and cite other factors for the decrease in violent crime.

A proposed mechanism for how video games influence thought and behavior is that children mimic the major people, or characters, in their life.  If a child has a violent parent, for example, then he/she will have greater problems with self-control and containing their own violent outbursts.  In the same way, if someone plays violent video games for a long period of time, violent behaviors may become more frequent.  For the most part, psychologists agree that violent video games play a part in influencing violent behavior.  How large that part is and how long it persists is still up for debate, and those answers may vary widely based on the study subject. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/studying-the-effects-of-playing-violent-video-games.html?_r=0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_crime

[samtxu-blog]

I think your post makes it clear that there is some type of correlation between violent video games and the potential capacity for violence in gamers. This gets me thinking about how we can attempt to control or attempt to counteract violence when it is rooted in the game industry. Who is responsible for an individual’s violent behavior when it is connected to video games? Is it the creators of the game, the gamer’s family, the gamer themselves? Or maybe a combination of the three? I think that this distinction is so difficult to make that it could be some time before we are able to address the effects of violence in games effectively as a society.

[experiencelifemore79-deactivate]

Wait, What? 3/9

Do you think that being able to use real currency in an online game makes an individuals achievements any less meaningful? Why or why not?

What do you think the implications are if people are allowed to hand over their account to someone else to play for them? Is this defeating the idea of playing for our own enjoyment, if we are just handing off the hard work to someone else?

Why exactly do you think that often the gold farmers would still play WoW after their 12 hour shifts? 

[samtxu-blog]

I think that the ability to use real life currency in an online game devalues achievements within the game. Having to work hard for an achievement or purchase within a game is what instills it with meaning. When you use an item or see your new level, you think of all the work and tasks it took you to get there. When you simply buy an item or status with real money, you lose this sense of satisfaction, resulting in the game itself losing meaning. Additionally, it can get discouraging for other players when they have to work for achievements while others can simply purchase them in a fraction of the time, which will lower the feeling of community within a game.

[digizenk-deactivated20160727]

My parents love The Big Bang Theory.  It’s their favorite TV show.  They own the first 5 seasons on DVD and thus I recalled this scene when reading ‘Life of the Chinese Gold Farmer’ by Julian Dibbel, as Sheldon and Howard engage in RTM themselves.  I knew people sold virtual items online but I did not know what it was called (RMT), nor did I know that it was a multi-million dollar business.  Sheldon gained from this exchange (selling the ‘Sword of Azeroth’ on eBay, while Howard purchased the Sword of Azeroth, gaining the weapon but losing money in the process.

The Big Bang Theory being the mainstream show that it is indicates that virtual economy is more wide-stretching than an outsider to the video-game world would ever imagine.  I would argue that RMT also operates to further suck players into games, which already include membership fees and expansion packs among other things.  Perhaps it is worth the money for players, however gold farming takes gaming too far, encouraging irresponsible spending and furthermore, cheating.  RMT is similar to someone stealing hundreds of dollars in Monopoly money in order to get ahead and win the game, but the difference is that the money is real in RMT, and the RMT virtual economy presents unhealthy situations to those who engage in it.

The virtual economy created through RMT was created by a demand to succeed in a video-game, be that WoW or EVE or another game.  Because of this great demand subversive activity, which many people feel is cheating including the programmers of these games, has permeated these MMORPGs to the point that, in one example in 2006, a user on EVE managed to scam scores of players and make off with over a hundred grand through a ‘bank’ set up using RTM [1].

This player, who went by the name of Cally, started up an ‘Eve Investment Bank,’ which quickly gained followers and took in more and more currency.  Cally was the sole owner and controller of said ‘Eve Investment Bank’ and, once growing tired of it, cleaned out the bank, getting 700 billion ISK (the game’s currency) and another 100 billion in assets (what these virtual assets are I am not sure).  The value of this ISK translated to over 100,000 in US dollars, and ‘Cally,’ like most other people would, sold the ISK and took the money.

This is one of many examples of how RMT damages players monetarily, an abuse of the gaming system.  The gaming industry has grown to the point that it has the potential to draw players into a ‘money hole,’ in which money is spent in order to advance in a game.  Does advancement to a new level or an acquisition of a new weapon advance somebody in life, however?  To draw Dibbel’s piece back to McGonigal’s ideas, Dibbel’s work illustrates how video-games can negatively affect lives rather than inspire progressive change, as McGonigal tries to convince the reader.  Although not the fault of game developers, the existence of RMT is creating a negative atmosphere for gaming in both the game itself and, more importantly, in the players’ financial wellness.  This is further proof that McGonigal’s theory of positive gaming is unfortunately unrealistic, as things such as RMT deteriorate the value of gaming and work to undermine the possible ‘goodness’ of gaming.

[1] http://news.softpedia.com/news/Eve-Online-Economy-Suffers-700-billion-ISK-Scam-33737.shtml

[samtxu-blog]

You make a very interesting point when you tie Dibbell’s article back to McGonigal’s argument about the effects of video games on gamer’s lives. Like we discussed in class, McGonigal tends to gloss over the negative effects of games, but they are very real, as the existence of RMT shows. What struck me when reading Dibbell’s article is how impossible it seems to regulate the market for RMT. This impossibility leads me to believe that the presence of gold farms and the illegal purchase of currency or items will always be present in games, and instead of glossing over problems like this one, game theorists like McGonigal could use their expertise to combat these negative aspects of gaming.

[samtxu-blog]

Blogify the World | Erin Andrews

On International Women’s Day, I wanted to make a post about women in the sports industry. I’ve been thinking about this topic after the recent news coverage of the court case of Erin Andrews, in which she is suing her hotel and her stalker for damages related to the illegal video recordings of her that were made public in 2009.

Its obvious for someone who follows sports and channels like ESPN, as I do, that women are not given quite the same treatment as male journalists. Women are often regulated to sideline or postgame reporting, and are rarely given lead anchor spots on shows like Sportscenter. They are also treated unfairly in regards to their appearance, and are held up to appearance standards that do not apply to men. While there has been recent progress within the industry, like when former professional softball player Jessica Mendoza became the first women to call an MLB playoff game, instances like the one Erin Andrews finds herself in shows that the field still has a while to go in regards to equality of representation and treatment of men and women sports journalists.

Andrews revealed in court that ESPN forced her to do an interview immediately following the publication of the illegally obtained videos to ensure audiences that she did not make and post the videos herself as a publicity stunt. The fact that the network would jump to such a conclusion and make Andrews herself comment on it shows a total double standard in the industry. They would not allow her to return to work until she addressed the situation. ESPN reacted in a similar manner when another anchor, Jalen Rose, was arrested for a DUI, taking him off the air until the situation was dealt with. The fact that the company would equate the release of secretly-taped footage of Andrews with the intentional law-breaking of Rose makes the sexist nature of the industry, and of a large part of society as a whole, clear.

Andrews, as an educated and credentialed journalist, deserves the exact same treatment of any other employee of her network. Just because she works in a male dominated industry, it does not mean that she is a second-class employee. In fact, it is even more important to make sure that women’s contributions are seen as equally valid in industries such as this one, in order to create a final product that contains relevance for all groups of people that make up the audience.

Source

[jdball2011-blog]

Farming for Loot!

“For every 100 gold coins he gathers, Li makes 10 yuan, or about $1.25, earning an effective wage of 30 cents an hour, more or less…

along with a rudimentary workers’ dorm, a half-hour’s bus ride away, are the entire physical plant of this modest $80,000-a-year business…”

What!?  This to me was crazy!  I had heard of people buying accounts from such services, but I didn’t know how much people were making while making these accounts.  If they work 12 hours a day, for five days and earn $80,000 a year, that’s roughly $26 an hour.  That to me is ridiculous.  I have never really understood why people buy accounts when they could put in a few more hours in doing in reaching the same goal, with no money added.  I understand that people may want to skip the hard and boring parts of a game, but I just have the feeling that this tactic would make you less likely to stay with the game, it may become boring.  On the other hand, this sounds like as an awesome and boring job.  You set a new account and just start looting for resources? That sounds super boring, but if you’re making $26/hour, where do I sign up?  I guess it would help you play on your own account, if you aren’t bored of the game.

If you aren’t willing to put in the time, what’s there to keep you playing?  If companies are making this type of money in China, why have I not heard of a company in America that does this, or anywhere else?  Where can I get a job like this?

[samtxu-blog]

If you could find a way to start your own farming business that could make $80,000 a year, I agree that would be a pretty sweet gig. What I got from the reading is that it’s not as cool of a job if you are not the owner of the business. Workers like Li only average 30 cents an hour pay, which raises questions of worker exploitation. The article talks about how game companies have traditionally gone after game farm owners, but I think the people who buy coins in the secondary market should share some of the blame as well, because no one should have to work for 30 cents an hour.

[samtxu-blog]

In homemade World of Warcraft video clips that circulate on YouTube or GameTrailers, with titles like “Chinese Gold Farmers Must Die” and “Chinese Farmer Extermination,” players document their farmer-killing expeditions through that same Timbermaw-ridden patch of WoW in which Min does his farming — a place so popular with farmers that Western players sometimes call it China Town. Nick Yee, an M.M.O. scholar based at Stanford, has noted the unsettling parallels (the recurrence of words like “vermin,” “rats” and “extermination”) between contemporary anti-gold-farmer rhetoric and 19th-century U.S. literature on immigrant Chinese laundry workers.

The Life of the Chinese Gold Farmer

In this passage, Julian Dibbell is drawing a parallel between Western treatment of the Chinese gold farmers and common western sentiment towards Chinese people in general. By evoking this example of deep-seeded racism towards asians in the US, the author is implying that player’s attacks on farmers are racially motivated. The use of words like vermin or rat shows the dehumanization of Chinese farmers, which players then use as an excuse to harass and kill them within the game. If they are not a real player, then there is no guilt in their behavior to them. This is similar to the rhetoric of some racists and xenophobes.

How much of the vitriol against gold farmers could be attributed to racism? Do you think farmers would be treated the same if they were US based, for example? How would this affect the game companies’ strategies for dealing with farmers?

[samtxu-blog]

Wait, What? | Gold Farms

3/9

How much responsibility should the makers of a game like World of Warcraft hold in regards to the potential exploitation of workers in gold farms, like Li?

How does the following quote from a gold farm worker give a different perspective to McGonigal’s argument about the gamification of work tasks? “It’s not all work. But there’s not a big difference between play and work.” Someone who games for a living still draws a line between gaming for fun or obligatory gaming. Does the fact that it is obligatory automatically take some of the fun out of a game?

Do you personally think it effects the integrity of a game when currency can be bought with real money rather than earned? One could argue that it makes the stakes even higher, and thus more fun/engaging.