How male young adults construe their playing style in violent video games

Abstract

This study explores the various ways in which male young adults engage with violence in video games. Based on an ethnographic study ( N = 26) with triangulation of diary reports, focus group interviews and a video commentary model, three conceptual axes are distinguished along which players differ in their enactment of video game violence: narration versus action, discovery versus mission-based play and reaction versus strategic play. The results suggest that individual playing styles result in exposure to different quantities and a different quality of virtual violence.

Player experiences in a massively multiplayer online game: A diary study of performance, motivation, and social interaction

“…Open-ended diary data were solicited through two essay boxes in the online form. Similar to Ribbens and Malliet (2015), participants were asked to describe their gaming experience in general during that session. Because we also wanted participants to reflect specifically on harassment and trash-talking, we also included a more specified prompt with another essay box that asked participants to describe any negative interactions that occurred in the game.…”

“…A few studies have used diaries to gather richer data about the gameplay experience. Ribbens and Malliet (2015) had 26 males play a violent video game of their choosing and record their thoughts every 45 minutes of play. Two studies used diaries to track players’ engagement with games and characters over time (Iacovides et al, 2015; Mallon and Lynch, 2014).…”

The enjoyment of shooting games: Exploring the role of perceived realism

“…First, it conveys a popular genre which attracts lots of players (ESA, 2017). In addition, shooting games contain considerable amounts of violence (Greitemeyer & Mügge, 2014), enabling players to act out violent behavior in a realistic way (Breuer et al, 2012;Ribbens & Malliet, 2015). Finally, the first-person viewpoint present in many shooting games is an important reason why players perceive game content as more realistic (Denisova & Cairns, 2015).…”

“…The Entertainment Software Association reported in 2016 for the United States that 27.5% of sold games, with 9 out of the top 20 best-selling games, were shooting games (ESA, 2017). Despite the criticism on shooting games for simulating violence in a realistic manner (Anderson et al, 2010;Greitemeyer & Mügge, 2014) and the predominantly negative media coverage of violent game effects (Sørensen, 2013), a string of research suggests that harmful effects can only occur with players who actively select and enjoy playing violent shooting games (Ribbens & Malliet, 2015;Slater, 2015).…”

Thinking Outside the ‘Murder Box’: Virtual Violence and Pro-social Action in Video Games

“…Alongside this, Redmond (2006:104) has written of the 'devastatingly accurate sense of humour' and 'uproarious satire' presented in earlier iterations of the game -something Leonard refers to as the 'pimping of a corporate ghettocentric imagination ' (2006:50). Ribbens and Malliet (2015) have also considered the problematic relationship between violent conduct and meaning-making activities and practices. What this brief sojourn through the field underscores is the level of complexity present in the data with regards to the types of violence empirically tested.…”