Advertisement

For Better or Worse: Game Structure and Mechanics Driving Social Interactions and Isolation

  • Dmitri WilliamsEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Game developers write code that governs and impacts our behaviors. The resulting positive and negative social outcomes are the inevitable consequence of some designs, even when those consequences are unintended. To make this point, the chapter lays out a theoretical groundwork from computer-mediated communication and references a series of empirical research examples. The operating assumptions are that online communities are real, code impacts behaviors, and developers working in the “mechanics-design-aesthetics” framework make this code in an attempt to create experiences. Games have real community effects as the result of what we can call “social architecture.” Games with heavier social architectures have more social interactions and more vibrant communities than those that don’t.

Keywords

Computer-mediated communication Community Social architecture Code Effects Online community 

References

  1. Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  2. Bain, J. (1986). Structure versus conduct as indicators of market performance: The Chicago-School attempts revisited. Antitrust Law and Economics Review, 17–50.Google Scholar
  3. Caplan, S., Williams, D., & Yee, N. (2009). Problematic Internet use and psychosocial Well-being among MMO players. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(6), 1312–1319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caragliu, A., Bo, C. D., & Nijkamp, P. (2011). Smart cities in Europe. Journal of Urban Technology, 18(2), 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Castronova, E., Williams, D., Huang, Y., Shen, C., Keegan, B., Ratan, R., & Xiong, L. (2009). As real as real? Macroeconomic behavior in a large-scale virtual world. New Media & Society, 11(5), 685–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coppola, K. (2007). Virtual outbreak. New Scientist, 193, 39–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dibbell, J. (2001). A rape in cyberspace; or how an evil clown, a Haitian trickster spirit, two wizards, and a cast of dozens turned a database into a society. In D. Trend (Ed.), Reading Digital Culture (pp. 199–213). Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. Elson, M., & Breuer, J. (2014). Isolated violence, isolated players, isolated aggression: The social realism of experimental research on digital games and aggression. In T. Quandt & S. Kröger (Eds.), Multiplayer: The social aspects of digital gaming (pp. 226–233). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Griffiths, M. (2014). An overview of online gaming addiction. In T. Quandt & S. Kröger (Eds.), Multiplayer: The social aspects of digital gaming (pp. 195–201). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Hintjens, P. (2016). Social architecture. Peter Hintjens.Google Scholar
  12. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004, July 24–29). MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research. Paper presented at the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, San Jose, CA.Google Scholar
  14. Kaur, J. (Writer). (2016). Two men fall down cliff while playing Pokemon Go.Google Scholar
  15. Kim, A. (2000). Community building on the web: Secret strategies for successful online communities. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lehdonvirta, V., & Castronova, E. (2014). Virtual economies: Design and analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  18. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  19. Nardi, B. (2010). My life as a night elf priest: An anthropological account of world of Warcraft. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  20. Ostrom, E., & Hess, C. (2007). Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Pearce, C. (2009). Communities of play: Emergent cultures in multiplayer games and virtual worlds. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Pena, J., Hancock, J. T., & Merola, N. A. (2009). The priming effects of avatars in virtual settings. Communication Research, 36, 838–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (2000). The formation of group norms in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 341–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sellers, M. (2006). Designing the experience of interactive play. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.), Video Games: Motivations and Consequences of Use. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Social value: Finding the true influencers in social games and mobile apps. (2013). Retrieved from Los Angeles, CA:Google Scholar
  27. Victor, J., & Mester, A. (2016). Pair of Pokemon Go players arrested at Toledo Zoo. The blade. Retrieved from http://www.toledoblade.com/Police-Fire/2016/07/14/Pair-of-Pokemon-Go-players-arrested-at-Toledo-Zoo.html
  28. Walther, J. (2006). In V. Manusov & M. Patterson (Eds.)., The Sage handbook of nonverbal communication Nonverbal dynamics in computer-mediated communication, or :( and the net :('s with you, :) and you :) alone (pp. 461–480). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Williams, D. (2006a). Groups and goblins: The social and civic impact an online game. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(4), 651–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Williams, D. (2006b). On and off the ’net: scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 593–628.Google Scholar
  31. Williams, D. (2015). Social impact in design and acquisition. Paper presented at the game developers conference. San Francisco.: http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1022255/Social-Impact-in-Design-and
  32. Williams, D. (2016). Social impact: Leveraging community for monetization, UA and design. Paper presented at the Game Developers Conference. San Francisco.: http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1023356/Social-Impact-Leveraging-Community-for
  33. Williams, D., Caplan, S., & Xiong, L. (2007). Can you hear me now? The impact of voice in on online gaming community. Human Communication Research, 33(4), 427–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Williams, D., Ducheneaut, N., Xiong, L., Zhang, Y., Yee, N., & Nickell, E. (2006). From tree house to barracks: The social life of guilds in world of Warcraft. Games and Culture, 1, 338–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williamson, O. (1994). Transaction cost economics and organizational theory. In N. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), Handbook of economic sociology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Yee, N. (2006). The demographics, motivations, and derived experiences of users of massively multi-user online graphical environments. Presence-Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 15, 309–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. (2007). The Proteus effect: Self transformations in virtual reality. Human Communication Research, 33, 271–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations