Knowing the Way. Managing Epistemic Topologies in Virtual Game Worlds
- 394 Downloads
This is a study of interaction in massively multiplayer online games. The general interest concerns how action is coordinated in practices that neither rely on the use of talk-in-interaction nor on a socially present living body. For the participants studied, the use of text typed chat and the largely underexplored domain of virtual actions remain as materials on which to build consecutive action. How, then, members of these games can and do collaborate, in spite of such apparent interactional deprivation, are the topics of the study. More specifically, it addresses the situated practices that participants rely on in order to monitor other players’ conduct, and through which online actions become recognizable as specific actions with implications for the further achievement of the collaborative events. The analysis shows that these practices share the common phenomenon of projections. As an interactional phenomenon, projection of the next action has been extensively studied. In relation to previous research, this study shows that the projection of a next action can be construed with resources that do not build on turns-at-talk or on actions immediately stemming from the physical body—in the domain of online games, players project activity shifts by means of completely different resources. This observation further suggests that projection should be possible through the reconfiguration of any material, on condition that those reconfigurations and materials are recurrent aspects of some established practice.
Key wordsconversation analysis collaborative gaming coordinated action ethnomethodology gameplay massively multiplayer online game projectability recognizability virtual action
The work reported was supported by the Linnaeus Centre for Research on Learning, Interaction, and Mediated Communication in Contemporary Society (LinCS). It has been financed by the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation and the Swedish Research Council by means of the project ‘Learning, interactive technologies and the development of narrative knowing and remembering’. The study has also been funded by the Swedish Research Council through a grant to the project ‘Representation in imaginative practice’. We also wish to express our gratitude to Charles Goodwin, Christian Greiffenhagen, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
- Auer, P. (2005). Projection in interaction and projection in grammar. Text, 25(1), 7–36.Google Scholar
- Bennerstedt, U. (2008a). Sheeping, sapping and avatars-in-action: An in-screen perspective on online gameplay. In O. Leino, G. Calleja, & S. Mosberg Iversen (Eds.), Proceedings of the [Player] conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 26 to 29 (pp. 28–52). Copenhagen: Nørrebros Bogtryk ApS.Google Scholar
- Bennerstedt, U. (2008b). Welcome to the digital puppet show: Positioning work and make-believe methods in role play Mmorpg servers. In O. Leino, G. Calleja, & S. Mosberg Iversen (Eds.), Proceedings of the [Player] conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 26 to 29 (pp. 53–86). Copenhagen: Nørrebros Bogtryk ApS.Google Scholar
- Bennerstedt, U., & Linderoth, J. (2009). The spellbound ones: Illuminating everyday collaborative gaming practices in a Mmorpg. In C. O’Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann, & A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL 2009), Rhodes, Greece, June 8 to 13 (pp. 404–413). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Bowers, J., Pycock, J., & O’Brien, J. (1996). Talk and embodiment in collaborative virtual environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, Canada, April 13 to 18 (pp. 58–65). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Dourish, P., Adler, A., Bellotti, V., & Henderson, A. (1996). Your place or mine? Learning from long-term use of audio–video communications. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). An International Journal, 5(1), 33–62.Google Scholar
- Drew, P. (1995). Social intelligence and interaction: Expressions and implications of the social bias in human intelligence. In E. Goody (Ed.), Interaction sequences and anticipatory interactive planning (pp. 111–138) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Duchenaut, N., & Moore, R. J. (2004). The social side of gaming: A study of interaction patterns in a massively multiplayer online game. In Proceedings of the ACM conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Chicago, IL, November 6 to 10 (pp. 360–369). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Fraser, M., Hindmarsh, J., Benford, S., & Heath, C. (2003). Getting the picture: Enhancing avatar representations in collaborative virtual environments. In D. N. Snowdon, E. F. Churchill, & E. Frécon (Eds.), Inhabited information spaces: Living with your data (pp. 133–150). London: Springer.Google Scholar
- Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
- Gee, J. P. (2008). Learning and games. In K. Salen (Ed.), Ecology of games (pp. 21–40). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
- Goodwin, C. (2006). Human sociality as mutual orientation in a rich interactive environment. Multimodal utterances and pointing in aphasia. In N. Enfield & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of human sociality (pp. 96–125). London: Berg.Google Scholar
- Harper, R., Hughes, J., & Shapiro, D. (1991). Harmonious working and CSCW: Computer technology and air traffic control. In J. Bowers & S. D. Benford (Eds.), Studies in CSCW. Theory, practice and design (pp. 225-234). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
- Heath, C., & Luff, P. (1992b). Explicating face to face interaction. In N. Gilbert (Ed.), Researching social life (pp. 306–327). London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Hindmarsh, J., Fraser, M., Heath, C., Benford, S., & Greenhalgh, C. (1998). Fragmented interaction: Establishing mutual orientation in virtual environments. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, Seattle, Washington, USA (pp. 217–226). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Hornecker, E. (2005). A design theme for tangible interaction: Embodied facilitation. In H. Gellersen, K. Schmidt, M. Beaudouin-Lafon, & W. Mackay (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW 2005), Paris, France, September 18 to 22 (pp. 23–43). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Irani, L., Hayes, G. R., & Dourish, P. (2008) Situated practices of looking: Visual practices in an online world. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, San Diego, CA, November 8 to 12 (pp. 187–196). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Jørgensen, K. (2008). Audio and gameplay: An analysis of Pvp battlegrounds in World of Warcraft. Game studies. The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 8(2), http://gamestudies.org/0802/articles/jorgensen.
- Juul, J. (2005). Half real: Video games between real rules and fictional worlds. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
- Kendon, A. (1985). Behavioral foundations for the process of frame attunement in face-to-face interaction. In G. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), Discovery strategies in the psychology of action (pp. 229–253). London: Academic.Google Scholar
- Kendon, A. (1990). Spatial organization in social encounters: The F-formation system. In A. Kendon (Ed.), Conducting interaction: Patterns of behavior in focused encounters (pp. 209–238). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Linderoth, J. (2004). Datorspelandets Mening: Bortom Idén Om Den Interaktiva Illusionen. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
- Linderoth, J. (2008). The struggle for immersion. Narrative re-framing in World of Warcraft. In O. Leino, G. Calleja, & S. Mosberg Iversen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Proceedings of the [Player] conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 26 to 29 (pp. 242–274). Copenhagen: Nørrebros Bogtryk ApS.Google Scholar
- Linderoth, J., & Bennerstedt, U. (2007) Living in World of Warcraft: The thoughts and experiences of ten young people. Department of Education, University of Gothenburg. Report for the Swedish Media Council, http://www.medieradet.se/upload/Rapporter_pdf/World_of_Warcraft_eng.pdf.
- Luff, P., Heath, C., Kuzuoka, H., Yamazaki, K., & Yamashita, J. (2006). Handling documents and discriminating objects in hybrid spaces. In Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2006 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montréal, Québec, Canada, April 22 to 27 (pp. 561–570). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Manninen, T., & Kujanpää, T. (2005). The hunt for collaborative war gaming—case: Battlefield 1942. Game studies. The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 5(1), http://www.gamestudies.org/0501/manninen_kujanpaa/.
- Moore, R. J., Hankinson-Gathman, C. E., Duchenaut, N., & Nickell, E. (2007b). Coordinating joint activity in avatar-mediated interaction. In Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2007 Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA (pp. 21–30). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Nardi, B., & Harris, J. (2006) Strangers and friends: Collaborative play in World of Warcraft. In Proceedings of the Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW´06), Banff, Alberta, Canada, November 4 to 6 (pp. 149–158). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Reynolds, P. C. (1993). The complementation theory of language and tool use. In K. R. Gibson & T. Ingold (Eds.), Cognition, tool use, and human evolution (pp. 407–428). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Ryave, A. L., & Schenkein, J. N. (1974). Notes on the art of walking. In R. Turner (Ed.), Ethnomethodology (pp. 265–278). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
- Sacks, H. (1989). Lectures 1964–1965. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
- Schegloff, E. A. (1996b). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammar and interaction (pp. 52–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Schegloff, E. A. (1998). Body torque. Social Research, 65(3), 535–596.Google Scholar
- Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Selting, M. (2000). The construction of units in conversational talk. Language in Society, 29, 477–517.Google Scholar
- Steinkuehler, C. (2004). Learning in massively multiplayer online games. In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 521–528). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Streeck, J. (1995). On projection. In E. Goody (Ed.), Interaction sequences and anticipatory interactive planning (pp. 87–110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Sudnow, D. (1983). Pilgrim in the microworld. New York: Warner Books.Google Scholar
- Tulbert, E., & Goodwin, M. H. (2008). Choreographies of attention. Multimodality in a routine family activity. Los Angeles: UCLA Sloan Center on Everyday Lives of Families.Google Scholar
- Turner, R. (1974). Ethnomethodology. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
- Woodcock, B. (2008). An analysis of Mmog subscription growth. Version 23.0, http://www.mmogchart.com.