An interesting link for gamers, sociologists, psychologists, economists, and lawyers:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6870901/
It is about how items earned in Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPGs) can have a real world value and the problems around that. MMORPGs like Everquest and SIMS Online have always fascinated me. For those of you who aren't into video games, the premise of the MMORPG is a brilliant one. The idea is this:
A virtual world is set up around the rules and theme of the game (gravity, currency, weapons, items, etc.). People pay to set up a character in that world. Let me restate that. Millions of people (if it's a popular game) pay to be part of the game. That means that when you play the game the vast majority of characters you're dealing with are being controlled by other, intelligent (well...more intelligent than common AI) individuals. That makes the game ever-changing and almost always very interesting, just like the real world.
The big difference between the MMORPG environment and the real world is that you generally have much more power/control in the MMORPG environment. You play a character who has abilities and resources, and all you have to do to gain more power/control is play more. The longer you play the stronger you get and the more control you have over your own little world.
A while back I read an article about some players of SIMS online (this article made me wish I was a Sociology graduate student...I would definitely do some sort of thesis on the emerging online world of the SIMS). One of the more interesting parts of the article was about a 14-year-old girl who had been playing the game several hours a day since it first came online. Early on she decided the SIMS world needed a brothel, so she set one up. She quickly amassed large amounts of money selling other people's characters for sex. She earned so much that her property started to have value in the real world (see above article for more on this idea), so she started selling her SIMS property online. So what we have is a 14-year-old making real money as an online brothel manager. Weird.
Weird, but I understand it. Your average person wants control over their lives. They can find it in games, not just MMORPGs, but in all kinds of games. According to CNN the fastest growing gaming market is online puzzle and gambling games. Do you know who plays those? Your mom, aunt, and grandmother who are sitting at home all day. So it isn't just geeky little guys in their basements playing games all the time. As games become more elaborate, realistic, and engrossing I'm sure we'll see more and more people plugging in and trading their real lives for virtual ones.
Don't get me wrong. I don't see much of a problem with gaming in moderation. It can be a good way to unwind, and is, at the very least, more engaging than your average television program. The problem can arise when gaming becomes a dominant part of your life, and the MMORPG is designed to do just that.
I don't know how it is actually implimented, but W(orld) O(f) W(arcraft) is suppose to have game dynamics built in that force moderation.
Though I heard that BEFORE WOW came out. So, I have no idea what ACTUALLY is happening in the game.
Posted by: Taylor at February 24, 2005 10:08 PMHaven't played World of Warcraft myself for more than a few minutes, but based on the amount that my brother plays it I have to conclude that a) it's more addicting than raw crack cocaine, and b) the moderation thing is very weak or non-existent.
Posted by: James at February 25, 2005 04:05 PMGame developers, like Blizzard, are increasingly deciding that all virtual property on the servers are property of the developer, and not the individual who's character possesses it. Blizzard has a zero tolerance stance on outside sales of in-game properties, characters, and accounts. If anyone is caught selling anything inside the game for real money, the account is closed. I believe Sony Online has the same stance. It is an interesting debate, how much is a player's time worth? It's too bad they've cracked down to the extent they have.
Posted by: jer at March 2, 2005 03:20 PMI guess that's one way to simplify the issue. It seems like the player would have some right to the things he's "earned". Whoever figures out how to most justly deal with these complicated intellectual property questions is much smarter than I am.
Posted by: aduff at March 3, 2005 08:54 AM