Previously to reading this week’s article, I had watched an interesting documentary specifically about gold farming ethics as well as the real world money exchange in online games. The program followed a couple who together played City of Heroes and their usage of a Gold Farming Company to power level the wife up to the same level as her husband because she herself didn’t have as much time as her husband to play. She wanted to have fun playing with him and her lower level prevented that.
“Current Analysis and Future Research Agenda on “Gold Farming”: Real-World Production in Developing Countries for the Virtual Economies of Online Games” discussed the growing business of Gold Farming in games. How Gold Farming was outsourced to developing countries with lower dollar value such as China and providing jobs for those countries, in turn profiting the economy in those countries that then profits the countries hiring them to gold farm, also the ethical “cheating” conflict behind the usage of gold farming to advance players ahead of others. And lastly what actions the game companies are taking to stop the underground business of gold farming.
As for my experience of gold farming, in the recent years most Asia based games such as Fly For Fun and Gunbound are effectively putting a stop to gold farming by converting to become part of it in order to profit from it, since they cannot stop it anyway. They rather regulate it than have it be “underground” so to speak. Those familiar with Gaia Online are sure to recognize how they have taken measures to do this as well with their system of Gaia Cash and special highly valuable Monthly Collectables sent to only paying players. This to me seems like the most effective way to deal with the gold farming. It gets rid of the all the time to determine and ban gold farming players, it profits the game company, prevents the players paying for the gold farming getting scammed, while allowing the other players to still continue enjoying the other features of the game if they choose not to. It seems as though in Asia that the mentality is that it is alright for paying players to advance since they are paying real money to pay so they have the right to advance. At the same time non-paying players can choose to pay at anytime if they want to receive the same advantages. The paying players are happy playing the way they are and do not inhibit the other players from enjoying their games any differently either, everyone is happy.
I’d have to propose though that I can see this way of thinking is more common in Asia for their collectivistic culture unlike more western cultures which are more individualistic in thinking. Which I can see, would lead them to see it as more acceptable with this method taken by game developers as long as “everyone can have fun playing the game” no matter how they play it. In contrast individualistic culture would probably be more from the perspective of individual advancement, which could be a reason to cause the difference in the acceptance of allowing other players to advance because they pay more. It is more desirable for individualistic cultures to achieve renown by becoming better than the other game players through means of legitimate playing. This can tie in with “The Social Network Game Boom”, where it discussed the lightened ramification of cheating between friends. Where in collectivistic cultures others besides ones-self are always acknowledged, we can connect this to how they don’t take the cheating in the games as seriously as long as they are playing the games for just fun. Much like is said in “Cheaters: A Special Report” by Bowling, “game designers design the games to have the players feel awarded by self achievement felt reaching the top level. Those who choose to cheat are more so cheating themselves out of the reward of the game rather than ruining the experience of others”.
When the purpose of a game is to compete with one another, “cheating” with bots and patches are just not accepted anywhere for the whole point of competing would then be to match the player against each other to see who is the better player. However another question is raised, through reading “Computer Game Modding, Intermediality and Participatory Culture”. What are acceptable forms of modification of a game until it is considered cheating and not modifications meant for enjoyment? I myself have used cheat codes placed inside the The Sims franchise as well as patches made by the online community for enhance my own enjoyment of playing the game. With or without the cheats I can still have fun; it all depends on how I wish to play since the cheats do change the game play in order to make it fun to play as it is said in the article.
All in all games I think that games’ main purpose is to be used to have fun, and that no matter how you play are playing as long as you are having fun and are not preventing others from the same right, the game serves its purpose. In competition though where the point of the game changes to instead compete, it isn’t really fair for any kind of outside advantage such as faster internet, a supped up computer, not just bots and usage of glitches for self advantage, or anything else beyond the achieved skill of the player.
No comments:
Post a Comment