• 沒有找到結果。

2.2 Identity in Cyberspace

2.2.2 Massively Multiplayer Online Gamer Identity

As a site of online collaboration or social network, massively multiplayer online

games (MMOGs) have been giving clues to the authoring of identities as situated in

the virtual communities. As a matter of fact, MMOGs are not the earliest

technology-mediated environments where people pursue their desire for fantasy. Back

to 1980s, a class of virtual worlds known as Multi-User Dungeons (MUDs)8 fulfilled one’s dream of playing out adventures as he/she acted in a character engaging in

fictional practices in the computational space. The character interactions in the virtual

reality are primarily text-based; players may invoke commands to direct certain texts

to appear on the screen of each other. To investigate the relationship between

role-playing and identity work through MUDs, most previous researchers (e.g. Turkle,

1994, 1995) have focused on meaning making from sociological or psychological

perspectives. The collected data based on participant observations and interviews

have shown that MUDs have evocative power in that players enter the world to think

8

or work through personal concerns and different aspects of themselves. In other words,

“online identities” in studies on virtual social space of MUDs have been related to the

true identity of the players, which could even serve as a piece of evidence of the

blurred boundaries between real life and virtual space.

Along the development of technology, alternative digital worlds have been

created, where players no longer have to rely on descriptions to perform actions. From

graphical 2-D chat environments to the advent of 3-D space like EverQuest, World of

Warcraft, Lineage in the recent decade, online game worlds have held their stance as a

sizable part of the interactive entertainment industry, gradually becoming what we

commonly refer to as MMOGs today. In the fields of sociology and anthropology (or

sociolinguistics and anthropologic linguistics), aside from quantitative surveys that

have been conducted to explore play patterns (e.g. Seay, Jerome, Lee, & Kraut, 2004),

motivations for play MMOGs (e.g. Yee, 2002), and perceptions of in-game social

roles (e.g. Friedline & Collister, 2012), most research works devote themselves to

participant-observation ethnography, where conversation analyses and interviews are done to gather traces of participants’ collaborative play, player communities, and the

work of gamer identity.

In previous literature, MMOGs are constantly emphasized as a social

construction or mechanism for socialization (e.g. Ducheneaut & Moore, 2005; Seay et

al., 2004; Steinkuehler, 2004; Steinkuehler, 2008). Although bunches of conventions

about how to behave in the virtual society, such as twinking (Jakobsson & Taylor,

2003), are not intended by the online intermediaries, overall speaking MMOGs are

designed in a way that makes player collaboration essential for achieving high-end

goals and success within the game. For example, there are tasks or quests that are

difficult to accomplish if players do not team up to complement each other in terms of their characters’ “inborn” strengths and weaknesses and engage in strategic interaction

through a chat channel. In fact, most MMOGs have expansive grouping and guild systems by which players are able to create “actual” social organizations within the

virtual world. Great efforts have been made in the field to describe the emergent

culture, or more specifically, the types of social interaction on the ground of the game’s framework. According to Ducheneaut and Moore (2005), three types of social

skills are found to be vital for proving one’s competence as a player, including

self-organization into small groups, instrumental coordination with other roles (or

classes), and sociability with chatting. Nardi and Harris (2006), on the other hand,

introduce the multiplicity of collaborative play with regard to informal encounters

with strangers, more structured collaborations with friends and strangers, downtime

acts of fun, and misbehaving through spamming. Such findings normally sum up with

the notion of community where players share a collective activity of having fun and

learn to recognize community-valued goals through playing with others. In line with

this, the theory of situated learning plus community of practice (see Section 2.1.3) is one way of tapping into MMOG players’ joint participation in light of enculturation

and apprenticeship. Particularly interesting is when one considers the “newbie versus

veteran” distinction implicit in a gaming community of practice. That is, through

social learning and participation, novice players or newbies move from periphery to

the center of the virtual community (Steinkuehler, 2006). Their learning resources

may include in-game discussion with fellow players, out-game discussions on forums

and websites, observation, and in-situ teaching from more experienced players, or

veterans (Ducheneaut & Moore, 2005). As pointed out by Steinkuehler (2004),

participation in valued community practices is in this way consequential for a player’s

membership and identity in the game.

Taking MMOGs as communities, researchers have also emphasized the role

discursive interaction plays in maintaining social relationships among the members.

As pointed out by Ducheneaut and Moore (2005), players spend even more time

simply talking with others than engaging in combat. Regarding the content of talk,

Seay et al. (2004) reports that MMOG players communicate to exchange support and

advice, exercise sociability, and coordinate tasks and activities. As for the forms of

their language, it is discovered that they take on linguistic practices such as

specialized word choice and syntax, abbreviations and truncations, and typographical

and grammatical errors (Steinkuehler, 2006; Turkle, 1995). With the view that

language is a social practice particular to the players of an MMOG, prior literature has

resorted to thick descriptions (Geertz, 1973) of in-game communication to unveil the utterances’ social consequences in social networking. It is implied from such

examination that language is being used to construe reality of not only the game

world but also the player community, with its peculiar cultural and cognitive

structures. In this sense, the utterances in question could be seen to index the

interactants’ membership within the community. In other words, the interactants have

agency in deploying linguistic or discursive resources to present themselves on the

screen, as the kinds of people appreciated by the community or not. Another research

type focusing on virtual discourse involves the use of Conversation Analysis, with

discourse feature such as turn continuation, cohesion, and reference (e.g. Collister, 2006). The result is associated with players’ endeavor to demonstrate orientations to

each other and to the game world. Just like the community-based studies mentioned

earlier, such an analysis of conversation in MMOGs does not take identity as the

starting point or major issue to deal with in research. Particular linguistic or discursive practices are not presented as having specific connections to participants’ construction

of identities. In other words, it is still unclear how MMOG players comprehend and

act on who they are in the frame of identity theories.

Up till now, identity as an issue has been covered mostly as one’s membership in the community. There are indeed scholars who give full attention to players’

individual identities in relation to each other, instead of the collective identity as a

community member. The most cited characterization of players should be, again, the

distinction between newbie and veteran, or peripheral and central participant (in terms

of the concept of community of practice), as it directly concerns the ability to participate with other members and is the most important dimension in judging one’s

standing in the virtual community. Steinkuehler (2008) raises one such discussion on

the difference between newbies and veterans in Lineage II. Besides the continuum

that runs from newcomers and old timers, there have been great variations in

dimensions of player categorizations. Bartle (1996), for example, organizes primarily four types of players based on the question “What do people want out of a MUD?”

The four stereotypical players include achievers (who play to achieve game-related

goals), explorers (who play to explore interesting features or design of the game),

socializers (who play to socialize with others), and killers (who play to kill off others’

fun by causing their distress). Despite the classification, the study ends with a

reminder that it is the combination of the four that makes MUDs unique. Following

this work, Yee (2002) proposes five motivation factors for why people play MMOGs:

relationship (to develop relationships with others), immersion (to enjoy being

immersed in the fantasy world), grief (to enjoy the game by annoying others),

achievement (to become powerful and reach goals set by the game), and leadership

(to enjoy leadership positions within the game). Since each gamer has a score for each

factor, the research is not intended for mutually exclusive types of players but for a

clearer understanding of different facets or aspects of a person during gameplay. Still

concerning micro characterization of MMOG players, Friedline and Collister (2012)

examine the relationship between a player’s social power and his/her levels of

experience, and, furthermore, the relationship between a power role and the use of

language. Two categories of language are identified, respectively collaborative

language and aggressive language. While the former (e.g. compliment, indirect order)

is associated with inexperienced players and powerful participants who tend to

promote harmonious social interaction, the latter (e.g. threatening speech act, direct

language) is associated with domineering power roles and spammers.

As shown, MMOG player identity is still a nascent topic in the field of

sociolinguistics and anthropologic linguistics. Language has not been clearly shown

to mediate between gamer identity and the virtual community, which leaves a niche to

be filled by the present study.