#joykingdom

Warming my hands with the heat of the toaster, the familiar breakfast smell filling the kitchen, I often find myself with a spare minute; a short space of time in which I’m forced to wait, with no direct purpose outside of passing the time. Although today I’d probably move quickly to sit on the central heating vent, two years ago I would have been straight onto my smartphone, and into Candy Crush. The thrill! The exhilaration! The excitement! Candy Crush had it all...except, of course, the means by which to heat me up...or finish the preparation of my breakfast...or any other form of tangible assistance...but has social gaming finally crossed this physical barrier?

Social games, or games that have been developed specifically for the networked frameworks provided by social media platforms, are often arguably known for “being a total time sink for players and a complete annoyance for their friends,” (Swallow, 2013, pp.1). The coding design of Candy Crush, for example, relentlessly encourage players to promote the game to their social network connections. However gaming in the wider sense, from “agon” or competitive social games like Farmville, to “mimicry” or simulation games like World of Warcraft, provides an outlet for the play and socialisation of real communities in the digital space, (Caillois, 1961). The crossover between our physical reality and the created reality of digital gaming environments has brought with it a number of challenges, including in both the formation and the regulation of social ethics, norms, and practices.

Similarly to the challenges facing cyber-safety and digital citizenship, those facing gaming communities are centered around the negotiation of rules and control of experiences occurring within such spaces. The “law and architecture” of gaming environments “function through the underlying code” of the game design, and this code defines the parameters in which “cultural norms [emerge] from the contexts of play,” (de Zwart et al, 2014, pp.77-79). The responsibility of policing the development and function of gaming communities is a murky area; though developers generally integrate an End User License Agreement (EULA) as a requirement of use, the “practical realities of the limited involvement of...platform [providers],” paired with the geographical and regulatory challenges of policing a digital space, have seen new social structures and expectations form in these secondary realities, (de Zwart et al, 2014, pp.79).

Whilst gaming does bring forth challenges for social ethics and connection, it is also argued to bring promise of advances in education and pedagogical practices. Panelists at a 2013 Stanford University (who carries a reputation as having one of the best education schools in the United States) discussion noted the importance of embracing gaming methods within the wide education system. Highlighting games as the ideal “architecture for engagement,” as well as their strength in accounting for people’s “motivation and needs for interaction and self-expression,” it can be seen gaming is an invaluable tool that provides new opportunities for learning, (Mackay, R.F, 2013, pp.1). Abandonment, for example, is one occurrence common in gaming, but is a “measurement that does not exist in a traditional classroom,” and, furthermore, is “far [more] significant than...low scores,” (Mackay, R.F, 2013, pp.1).

Social gaming, though perhaps at times plagued by an unfavourable reputation, does too provide an outlet for good; Facebook games like WeTopia and Joy Kingdom, both free to play, “turn players’ points into monetary donations to benefit children’s and animal charities,” and are examples of social games acting as tools for “real change,” (Swallow, 2013, pp.1). Though gaming environments may indeed only exist in their own designed definition of time, space, and sociality, they are increasingly entering our physical world...I guess the question becomes, how can we embrace this entrance for good, and not evil?

References

Caillois, R 1961. ‘Man, Play and Games,’ in Farrell, C 2018. Gaming Communities, lecture, Digital Communities MDA20009, Swinburne University of Technology, delivered 11 May 2018.

de Zwart, M, & Humphreys, S 2014. ‘The Lawless Frontier of Deep Space: Code as Law in EVE Online,’ Cultural Studies Review, 20:1.

Mackay, R. F 2013. ‘Playing to learn: Panelists at Stanford discussion say using games as an educational tool provides opportunities for deeper learning,’ Stanford News, Stanford University Communications.