CS Social Studies

[CSN NewsBot]

In case you missed it a few days back, an interesting article about Counter-Strike has appeared on BBC NEWS. The article's source, Professor Talmadge Wright from Loyola University in Chicago, has apparently spent some time analyzing the social structure of Counter-Strike, its community, and the various chat messages that fly on the screen:

To outsiders this game talk can be impenetrable and lead people to misinterpret what is going on.



Players tended to bring their offline culture with them when they play, said Prof Wright.



It was often obvious when teenage boys were playing, he said, because there was much more trashtalk and sexist or homophobic insults flying around.



But, said Prof Wright, it was a mistake to think that this meant that gamers were misanthropists.



"The most common emotion when people are playing is laughter," said Prof Wright.



The only reason that people can get away with insulting friends and foes was because they knew them so well, he said.

Over-all it's an interesting study and a great article. To discount general immaturity as an outlet for fantasy, however, is just as questionable as claims made by studies which say games are negative. For example, many of the insults exchanged in CS are about being an ass rather than some sort of good-natured ribbing.



To be fair, however, this is the first time I've ever seen anything mainstream look at the strategy and tactics that are used in the CS community. The game is not "shoot anything that moves" and simply isn't as black-hearted as that stereotype lets many believe.

[uber]

Wasnt this already posted ? Yes, two days ago. Rizzuh, you teh suck as they say ! haha gg

Added @ [time="1045263589"]

Haha clever edit DOES make you look good :)

[-Dice]

This article is interesting not only that it portrays games as good, but also that it took a serious look at games instead of writing them off as nerd entertainment. Which they are, but they're good for us!

[JdeFalconr]

Edited by [user="2579"] @ [time="1045265092"]

This article was a very enjoyable read. It's always gratifying to read about someone taking the time to seriously have a look into the game.

Mark Ward of BBC wrote...

It was often obvious when teenage boys were playing, he said, because there was much more trashtalk and sexist or homophobic insults flying around.

Wow by that criteria then the majority of CS players must be teenage boys. Oh wait...they are...::shudder::

"It gives people an option of actively participating in some kind of fantasy role they could not do in real life that allows them to play with their own feelings," said Prof Wright.



"It is an area that's bricked off from everyday life that you can enter and leave at will," he said. "It offers you a way to play with things you may be scared of in a safe way where there are very few consequences."

Yeah rizzuh I agree with you, I don't think this bit about fantasy and CS being some sort of experimental outlet is quite on the mark. In fact I think it misses the mark completely. I'm speaking for myself here, but when I play CS I'm not doing so because I really want to know what it feels like to commit acts of terrorism.



But ooh what an ethical dilemma this could bring up. Even if we're "experimenting" or "playing with things" that are known to be wrong in real life (i.e. blowing up buildings with C4 or shooting people) is it therefore okay to do these things when there aren't consequences?



I guess you could argue then that we aren't actually carrying out the aforementioned types of actions in the game of CS. But is knowingly "going through the motions" the same thing as actually doing it? Or as Prof. Wright put it in the above quote are we really "playing with our feelings" or "experimenting" if there's not a strong dimension of reality to what we do in CS?



There is a difference between actually committing an action and doing so "falsely." For example, for the action of smashing an object with a baseball bat there's a difference between the action of actually smashing the object and the action of going through the motions of smashing the object (to give the impression of doing so) and yet not actually smashing the object. Whether this is a continuum or a black-and-white difference is another question, although I would suggest that it's the latter.



The question becomes, then, at what level of "realness" in a game (such as CS) do actions begin to have true ethical connotations and has CS reached that point?



For instance: say you're playing CS and you're shooting at someone's head with the USP, and for sake of argument let's say your intention is to follow the game and to actually shoot them in the head with the USP with the effect of "killing" that target. At what point does that action in CS have the connotations of the real life action of taking an actual USP and trying to shoot a real person in the head with it?



-whew- that was alot of rambling. What do you guys think?

[Tazz]

[Dr. Funk]

Yea, though I am a teenage boy, I do hate immature, tk'ing, homophodic, whiners, who happen to be born within the last 10 (thats to shudder about) to 20 years.

[NuclearTeddyBear]

JdeFalconr wrote..

For instance: say you're playing CS and you're shooting at someone's head with the USP, and for sake of argument let's say your intention is to follow the game and to actually shoot them in the head with the USP with the effect of "killing" that target. At what point does that action in CS have the connotations of the real life action of taking an actual USP and trying to shoot a real person in the head with it?

That's a very interesting question, but I don't think that CS has reached that level. I don't think it's possible, for me at least, for any FPS game to reach that level, as long as it is controlled by way of keyboard and mouse. I suppose that one could argue that playing a game in an arcade, i.e. Time Crisis 1 or 2 would reach a high enough level of realism so that it could be compared to real life, but I don't think that any computer game could ever reach that state, in my mind at least.



Even the physiological differences between real life and gaming would make the two incomparable. There is a colossal difference between raising a real gun and aiming it at a person's head and simply moving your wrist up a little and moving your index finger slightly down. As for a psychological difference, well, I suppose that depends on the person.

[|hobbes|]

man u guys totaly lost me

[lockhart]

underlining stuff is really cool, especially when it is bold and italicized.

in other news, this study may be from the mainstream media, but it is something that is only recognized within the community. no one is going to be like 'wow that online game is actually good for my child who sits in front of it 8+ hours every day'

[MikeJ]

For an article written by a professor it just seemed to kind of skim the surface and relay what we (gamers) already know. I was hoping for something a little more intricate that went deeper past the surface of what is already apparent to anyone who actually sits down and plays an online action game for more than 30 minutes.

[SinaC]

CS is actually about the Devil

[FAF]

SinaC wrote..

CS is actually about the Devil

Ina fact, if you play the crickets .wav from azzy really slowly, you can actually hear satan and all his little devils trying to persuade you to kill your parents.....seriously. Oh, and to go play Q3 instead.

[Eagle25]

FAF wrote..

Ina fact, if you play the crickets .wav from azzy really slowly, you can actually hear satan and all his little devils trying to persuade you to kill your parents.....seriously. Oh, and to go play Q3 instead.

lol actually the sound is creepy... but no devil trying to lure me into killing my parents :P

[Dr. Funk]

Led Zeplin - Stairway to Heaven

Verse #3, If theres a bustle in your headgrove

Backwards - Thats Crazy!

[Darkhorse]

Edited by [user="2095"] @ [time="1045341623"]

there was much more trashtalk and sexist or homophobic insults flying around.

laff