activity theory and WoW

Please pay special, close attention to chapter 3, “Play as Aesthetic Experience,” which introduces the concepts of activity theory and aesthetic experience that are integral to Nardi’s project.

If you review Nardi’s work, you will see that activity theory (Wikipedia) is her primary theoretical grounding. (Parenthetically, one of the things I like about teaching online is that I can point you to a Wikipedia page about activity theory rather than writing some version of that here myself, or lecturing in class about it; btw, you’ll see that Nardi is extensively cited on that Wikipedia page.) However, I will review a few main concepts here that Nardi introduces. Basically activity theory examines psychology and behaviors in terms of socio-cultural structures. Nardi identifies three primary elements of activity: object, conscious actions, and operations (see pp 41-42). The object is a goal you want to achieve. Conscious actions are the things you focus upon to achieve that goal. And operations are other activities that support conscious actions but do not require conscious attention (e.g. for me, the physical act of typing while I consciously act to compose this post for the object/goal of teaching you something).

Nardi connects activity theory with John Dewey’s (Wikipedia) concept of aesthetic experience. Dewey’s work is closely associated with activity theory and with the work of Vygotsky, whose psychological theories are foundational to activity theory. As Nardi explains, for Dewey, aesthetic experience is “a subjective disposition toward activity” (43). In other words, its how you feel about what you are doing. We can also thread this work back into our earlier discussions of Csikszentmihalyi and flow (which Nardi also does). Nardi then introduces three elements of aesthetic experience: means-ends relations, phases, and collective expression. For Dewey a positive aesthetic experience has to be more than a means to end (e.g.  you go to work to get paid or maybe take a class to get credit or a degree). The means themselves have to be meaningful and enjoyable. Aesthetic experiences also have phases, so you can continue to develop; you’re moving forward in some structured way. Finally, there are opportunities for collective expression, so that we are fully participating in our experiences. Clearly, for those who are passionate about World of Warcraft, the game delivers in these ways even though each person will have unique aesthetic experiences and find different parts of the game engaging.

In chapter five, Nardi introduces some game theory and discusses how games interact with Dewey’s concept of aesthetic experience. This discussion invites us to think about the ways that play and games interact with other aspects of our lives: school, work, church or other institutional associations, family and friends. We can “play around” without playing a game, which is a particular kind of activity. Nardi talks about the “magic circle,” the notion that a game invites us into a separate social space, though she also recognizes how games and “real life” interpenetrate. Part of McGonigal’s argument is that we can import game logic and the aesthetic experience of gaming into other parts of our lives.

Dewey is best know as an educational philosopher. He wasn’t writing specifically about games. He wanted to make school an active, engaging, and positive aesthetic experience. However we see most of the gamers Nardi studies do not have positive associations with work or school. Maybe they are just playing a part online, but I think there’s more to it than that.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “activity theory and WoW”

  1. I believe this is an interesting theory to apply to gaming. Dewey was expressing this in general terms of human experience, but the word aesthetic can and is applied to art, beauty and taste, all of which can be found in WoW. I agree, there has to be more to the WoW phenomena. Is it a chance to escape, live a different life for a brief moment in time?

    1. I think the whole cycle of receiving quests, the early ones that were, I assume, quick, clear, and easy to do, actually doing them, and then doing more challenging quests does have a sort of gravitational pull to it. Add that to a group of people who are trying to do the same thing and are willing to work with you, and there’s a lot of reason to keep doing those quests. Then on top of this, the virtual characters might look cool, have awesome armor, good weapons, or something like that. There aren’t the same sorts of judgements made in game as in real life when seeing another person face to face. As long as someone is relatively sociable and helpful when it comes to doing the quests online, then they are easy to consider a friend. The player hangs out with those friends through the game, just like the player might hang out with people in real life. Since they’re so focused on the game and the goals, they have common ground to talk, discuss, and socialize about. In the end, this appears to be a good portion of the formula that keeps people coming back to WoW and other games like it… kind of like the guy said in the other video that Professor Reid posted: it was “the other players” that really made it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s