Conference PaperPDF Available

A Brief Social History of Game Play.

A Brief Social History of Game Play1
Dmitri Williams, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Who has played video games? Where have they played them? And how have games
helped or hindered social networks and communities? This chapter answers these historical
questions for the birthplace of video games—the United States—although many other
industrialized countries have had similar patterns. In the U.S., our collective stereotype conjures
up an immediate image: Isolated, pale-skinned teenage boys sit hunched forward on a sofa in
some dark basement space, obsessively mashing buttons. In contrast, the statistics and accounts
tell a very different story—one of often vibrant social settings and diverse playing communities.
Why do American conceptions of gamers diverge from reality?
The explanation is that for video game media, the sociopolitical has been inseparable
from the practical. Social constructions, buttressed by the news media over the past 30 years,
have created stereotypes of game play that persist within generations. This chapter will explain
both the imagery and the reality. Moving from the descriptive to the analytical, it begins with the
basic trends and figures: who played, when, where and why, and how changes in technology
have impacted the social side of gaming. An immediate pattern appears—for both industrial and
political reasons, the early 1980s were a crucial turning point in the social history of video game
play. What began as an open and free space for cultural and social mixing was quickly
transformed through social constructions that had little to do with content, the goals of the
1 The author wishes to thank Kurt Squire, Constance Steinkuehler and the editors for their comments on a draft of
this chapter.
producers, or even demand. The legacy of that era persists today, influencing who plays, how we
view games, and even how we investigate their uses and effects.
Setting the Stage
Figure A gives industry revenues for home and arcade play, standardized to 1983 dollars.
The data show what game historians have already presented through narratives (Herman, 1997;
Herz, 1997; Kent, 2000; Sheff, 1999): a slow adoption during the 1970s lead to a massive spike
in popularity during the Atari heyday of the early 1980s, followed by the collapse of that
company and the industry’s eventual revival in the late 1980s by Nintendo. The late 1980s also
saw the beginning of play moving from public to private spaces. Over the past 10 years, games
have steadily become more popular to the point where they are now considered mainstream
media, competing with newspapers, television, radio and film for attention and dollars.
$1,00 0
$2,00 0
$3,00 0
$4,00 0
$5,00 0
$6,00 0
1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001
Home Game
Arcade Game
Figure A. Industry breakdown: Home game vs. arcade sales, in millions of dollars.2
Aside from the early hobbyist era (Levy, 1994), commercial gaming efforts did not gain
traction until the early 1970s. Long before arcades and Atari, the first mass-marketed home game
machine, Magnavox’s Odyssey, aimed for the mainstream family audience. Seeking to break the
nascent link between gaming technology and male youth culture, Magnavox marketed their
machine as the new electronic hearth, complete with advertising tableaux of families joined in
domestic bliss around the new machines. Such tableaux can have powerful idealizing and
norming functions (Marchand, 1985). From 1972 until the early 1980s, manufacturers tried to
promote the idea of gaming as a mainstream activity. This meant convincing parents that console
games could unite their families, while also convincing single adults that arcade games had sex
appeal. It is a measure of the strong stereotypes about age and gaming that the following will
surprise many readers: As a niche hobby, these marketing efforts had some early success. Game
play in public spaces began as an adult activity, with games first appearing in bars and nightclubs
before the eventual arcade boom. Then, when arcades first took root, they were populated with a
wide mixing of ages, classes and ethnicities. This mixing was quite similar to what Gabler
(1999) describes for turn-of-the-century nickelodeons—populist, energetic, and ultimately
There is no doubt that mainstream corporate and political forces helped to dull down
these public spaces (a theme to be taken up shortly). However, the single biggest cause in the
decline of gaming in the 1980s was the spectacular collapse of the Atari corporation, an event so
2 For comparability, these data have been adjusted for inflation and standardized to their values in 1983. Unadjusted
values would show higher totals in recent years. Data Source: Amusement & Music Operators Association,
Nintendo, PC Data, NPD, Veronis Suhler, Vending Times (1978-2001).
traumatic that it appeared to destroy the entire industry. But while pundits and investors alike
thought Atari’s collapse was proof of a faddish product and a fickle consumer, it was really no
more than inept management (Cohen, 1984; Sheff, 1999). In actuality, the rise of Atari and the
game industry had created a new kind of consumer, one increasingly comfortable with
interactive electronic devices. The Nintendo revival of the late 1980s proved that demand had in
fact not magically disappeared (it continued to flourish in Japan). Still, Nintendo’s marketing and
distribution solidified games as the province of children for the next 10 years.
The Crash and the New Consumer
At first, the industry’s collapse was easy to explain as just another example of short
attention-span American tastes: first disco polyester, then Pet Rocks, and now Pac-Man.
However, a closer look at the demographics and demand shows that video games helped usher in
a new kind of consumer, one increasingly aware of new tools and new possibilities. Consumers
were beginning to embrace home computers, compact discs, and the concept of digital systems
as convenient and powerful entertainment tools.
The demand for video games should be viewed as part of a larger trend in entertainment
consumption. Games’ initial rise and temporary decline occurred during periods of overall
increasing demand for entertainment products. Large increases in productivity and income gains
have increased Americans’ incentives to work even more while also giving families more
discretionary income: less time, but more money. Much of this trend is due to the large-scale rise
in hours worked by U.S. women (Schor, 1991). Time has become scarcer, and Americans have
been steadily spending more and more of their income to enjoy it to the fullest (Vogel, 2001). In
1970, Americans were spending 4.3% of their incomes on recreation and entertainment, but by
1994, that figure had grown to 8.6% (The national income and product accounts of the United
States, 1929-1976, 1976; Survey of current business, 1996). It follows that consumers have been
quick to adopt digital technologies that can be enjoyed more efficiently. For example, Americans
spend a great deal of time playing card games and board games (Schiesel, 2003), but it is far
easier and faster (if more expensive) to play Risk on a computer than on a tabletop with dice.
A New Electronic Hearth: The Rise of Home Computing and Games
Throughout the 1980s, a combination of economic and technological forces moved play
away from social, communal and relatively anarchic early arcade spaces, and into the controlled
environments of the sanitized mall arcade (or “family fun center”) or into the home. The idea of
a home game machine—once confusing and new to consumers3— seemed less remarkable in a
home with microprocessors embedding in everything from PCs to blenders. This acceptance can
also be viewed as part of a general transition of technology-based conveniences away from
public areas and into private ones (Cowan, 1983; Putnam, 2000).
Since their inception, video games have been harbingers of the shift from analog to
digital technology for both consumers and producers. They made major portions of a generation
comfortable and technoliterate enough to accept personal computers (Lin & Leper, 1987; Rogers,
1985) electronic bulletin boards, desktop publishing, compact disks and the Web, and have
pushed the development of microprocessors, artificial intelligence, compression technologies,
broadband networks and display technologies (Burnham, 2001). Games functioned as stepping
3 For example, the first home game machine, the Magnavox Odyssey, had trouble with consumers in part because
many incorrectly assumed it would only work on a Magnavox television set (Herman, 1997).
stones to the more complex and powerful world of home computers. Figure B shows the dual
trends in adoption for home game systems and home computers. Notably, games preceded
computers at every step of adoption, and have continued to be in more homes since their arrival.
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1986 1989 1990 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Home Video
Figure B. Consoles and computers come to the home, 1977-2000 (% penetration).4
The Rise of Networks
The last major trend affecting the social site of gaming is the more recent move towards
networked game play. Beginning with text-based networked games called “MUDs” and
proceeding to graphical versions called “MMRPGs,” online games have emerged as an important
4 Data Source: Consoles, Nintendo of America, Amusement & Music Operators Assoc., The
Economist,; Computers, National Science Foundation, Roper surveys, Census Bureau, Statistical
Abstracts of the United States.
new and social game format (see Chan & Vorderer, in
this volume). But although the history of these PC-
based games suggests a vibrant social universe
( Dibbell, 2001, 2003; Mulligan & Petrovsky, 2003;
Turkle, 1995), the casual gamer is unlikely to invest
the time or money to wade into them. Such games are
extremely profitable, but are still a minor part of game
play (Croal, 2001; Palumbo, 1998). Instead, it is the
current wave of more mainstream online game
adoption that has firms investing (Kirriemur, 2002),5
and will have social implications. This adoption is
promising because it has begun to expand the game
market beyond the traditionally younger, male audience that plays console games. Data from the
Pew Internet and American Life Project (see Table 1) illustrate that higher percentages of racial
minorities and women are playing than white men, and that surprisingly large numbers of older
people play.6
The major drivers for this phenomenon are not the games themselves, but the addition of
other players via the Internet (Griffiths, Davies, & Chappell, 2003; Kline & Arlidge, 2002). As
one online gamer said, “[meeting new people is] the most interesting aspect of the game. This
gives it a social dimension. There’s another person behind every character” (Pham, 2003)(p. C1).
5 Cell phone-based games have a similar appeal, and may drive phone use (Schwartz, 1999).
6 These data were graciously supplied to the author by Senior Research Scientist John Horrigan of the Pew Internet
and American Life Project in an email.
Table 1
Online Gaming Demographics
National adult sample, respondents
who answered yes to “ever play a
game online?”
All users 37%
Men 37%
Women 38%
Whites 34%
Blacks 48%
Hispanics 54%
18-29 52%
30-49 34%
50-64 28%
65+ 38%
Note. Data were collected by the Pew
Internet and American Life Project in
June and July, 2002.
The presence of competitors and collaborators introduces a social element that has been missing
from some gamers’ experiences since the early-1980s heyday of the arcade (Herz, 1997).
Social Play
Gamers in general—but especially arcade players (Garner, 1991; Meadows, 1985;
Ofstein, 1991)—were able to enter a world based purely on talent and hard work, not social
status. The resulting social element of game play has always been one of the medium’s strongest
appeals (see Raney, Smith and Baker, in this volume). For those who felt marginalized,
unchallenged, or unable to participate in other mainstream activities, game play allowed for the
contestation of issues that were less easily dealt with in everyday life. For the awkward, the
underclass, or the socially restricted player, success at a game translated into a level of respect
and admiration previously unavailable outside of the arcade. There was no gender or status bias
in arcade competition, and the machine didn’t care if the player was popular, rich or an outcast.
As Herz put it, “It didn’t matter what you drove to the arcade. If you sucked at Asteroids, you
just sucked.” (Herz, 1997, p. 47). Much like on playing fields, social conventions and
interactions within an arcade were separate from those of “real life.” Inside the arcade, gamers
assumed roles separate from their outside personae and adhered to a strict set of rules governing
game play, including a ban on physical aggression and a recognition of the hierarchy of skill
(Ofstein, 1991).
Arcades were social magnets in the early 1980s, attracting a range of players to their
populist settings. An 18-year old girl was quoted in Newsweek describing her local arcade:
“Look at all these people together—blacks, whites, Puerto Ricans, Chinese. This is probably the
one place in Boston where there are not hassles about race” (1981). Class barriers were similarly
low in the early years. Herz notes their similarity to pinball parlors where
sheltered suburban teens might actually come into contact with working-class kids, high-school
dropouts, down-and-out adults, cigarettes, and other corrupting influences, which made the place
a breeding ground for parental paranoia, if not for crime. (Herz, 1997, p. 44)
As forbidden fruit, the appeal to video gamers was apparent. Not only could people mix with
others of different ages, ethnicities and classes that they were otherwise constricted from being
near, they could form friendships, compete, and establish an identity. Said one player, looking
back on the era, “Sure, all my favorites were there, but it was the magic of the place at large, and
the people there that were a major draw” (Killian, 2002).
While early arcades represented a key social site for play, consoles and PC games in
homes were equally important. Mitchell (1984) studied 20 families from a range of backgrounds
to see what the impact of adding a console game machine was to family life. She found that
family and sibling interaction increased, that no detrimental trends were found in schoolwork
(there was actually a slight improvement), that none of the children or parents became more
aggressive, that boys played more than girls, that girls gained a sense of empowerment, and that
all of the families saw games as a bridge to personal computers. She further concluded that home
video games brought families together more than any other activity in recent memory, chiefly by
displacing time spent watching television (Mitchell, 1985). Murphy (1984) found that homes
with video games had similar family interactions to those that did not. Instead, in nearly every
case, links to deviant behavior were found to correlate with parental variables such as
supervision and pressure for achievement.
The Causes of New Media Ambivalence
Games are a contentious subject in modern American society not solely because of their
inherent qualities, but because they are a wholly new medium of communication, something
guaranteed to provoke suspicion and ambivalence. In America and elsewhere, the advent of
every major medium has been greeted with utopian dreams of democracy, but also with tales and
visions of woe and social disorder or unrest (Czitrom, 1982; Neuman, 1991). This pattern has
been consistent and has maintained itself dating from the telegraph (Standage, 1999), and
persisting through nickelodeons (Gabler, 1999), the telephone (Fischer, 1992), newspapers, (Ray,
1999), movies (Lowery & DeFluer, 1995), radio (S. Douglas, 1999), television (Schiffer, 1991),
and now with both video games and the Internet. Video games are simply the latest in a long
series of media to endure criticism. Typically, the actual source of the tension lies not in the new
medium, but in preexisting social issues. The tensions over new media are surprisingly
predictable, in part because the issues that drive them are enduring ones such as intra-class strife
and societal guilt.
Understanding how and why the medium is assigned blame can tell us a great deal about
the tensions and real social problems that are actually at issue. Often, focusing attention on the
medium is a convenient way of assigning blame while ignoring complex and troubling problems.
Media coverage of new technology often generates a climate in which consumers of news media
are terrified of phenomena which are unlikely to occur. Just as importantly, they are also guided
away, purposefully or not, from complicated and troubling systemic social issues (Glassner,
1999). This is not a new trend, and not particular to America. Across a wide variety of cultures,
the dangers most emphasized by a society are not the ones most likely to occur, but are instead
the ones most likely to offend basic moral sensibilities or that can be harnessed to enforce some
social norm (M. Douglas, 1992; M. Douglas & Wildavsky, 1982). Most tragically, the guilt over
mistreatment of our children can manifest itself in a painfully unjust way by casting the children
themselves as the source of the problem. Resorting to the trope of the “bad seed,” or blaming an
external force like media, provides an excuse to ignore the primary risk factors associated with
juvenile crime and violence, which are abuse from relatives, neglect, malnutrition, and above all,
poverty (Glassner, 1999).
The evidence presented so far suggests that strong social forces have shaped our
reactions to games, and the subsequent comfort level of certain groups to remain players.
This phenomenon has a direct point of origin in the early 1980s, and represents a host of
social issues not directly related to games themselves. Most prominently, arcades were
threatening to conservative forces. As seen in media coverage, arcades were mixing
grounds for homeless children and lawyers, housewives and construction workers, and
countless other socially impermissible combinations. The lashing out against arcades that
followed was, according to the research, unjustified. For example, Time reported that
children in arcades were susceptible to homosexual cruisers, prostitution and hard liquor
(Skow, 1982). It was no coincidence that the years 1981 and 1982 marked the start of the
news media’s dystopian frames of misspent youth, or fears of injury, drug use and the
like (Williams, 2003)—and that this was precisely the period of the conservative Reagan
administration’s rise to power. In seeking to throw off what it perceived as the general
social, cultural and moral malaise of the 1970s, the Reagan administration campaigned on
a platform that especially highlighted the culpability and irresponsibility of single
“welfare queen” mothers (Gilens, 1999). This political agenda lead to frames about
truancy, unsupervised children and the negative influences of electronic media—
especially arcades—working as babysitters for unconscionable working mothers.
Internet Cafés: Old Wine in New Bottles
Just as with arcades, the uncontrolled space of the Internet has predictably raised
concerns about who is interacting with whom, and what morally questionable activities might be
taking place. The case of Internet cafés—a modern combination of anarchic arcade space and
private network—shows the same patterns and concerns reoccurring.
Much like early arcades, many Internet cafés are marked by the same dark lighting and
socially inclusive atmosphere (McNamara, 2003; Yee, Zavala, & Marlow, 2002). The networked
game play inside the cafés is in many ways a return to the aesthetic and values of the early
arcades: the spaces are morally questionable, challenging, anarchic, uncontrolled, racially diverse
and community oriented. Fears and reaction to the Internet cafés are also remarkably similar to
arcades, probably owing to a parallel set of concerns and punditry centering around computer
use. Table 2 illustrates that the same themes occur 20 years apart, suggesting that the same issues
of social control and parental guilt are still operating.
These current concerns may or may not be valid ones, but the history of moral panics and
public criticisms of public amusement gathering spaces—whether it is a nickelodeon, pinball
hall, or arcade—suggests that they are likely overstated and hiding other social tensions.
Table 2
Comparing Coverage of Early Arcades With Current Coverage of Internet Cafés
Early Arcade Coverage (1981-
Internet Café Coverage
The site operator
defends the activity
“I baby-sat a bunch of kids here
all summer. It may have cost
them money, but they were here,
they were safe, and they didn’t
get into trouble.”*
“I think that anything that helps
keep kids off the street and out of
trouble is a good thing . . . Here
there are no cigarettes, no drugs,
no alcohol. Here the kids come to
be with their friends.”**
Conservative elders
are provoked
“Taking a cue from the pool-
troubled elders of the mythical
River City, communities from
Snellville, Ga., to Boston have
recently banned arcades or
restricted adolescent access.Ӡ
“It’s not hard to imagine what
Professor Harold Hill would have
said upon entering the dim
recesses of Cyber HQ in Eagle
Rock. ‘Trouble, with a capital T
and that rhymes with C and that
stands for computer game.’”**
Note. *(Skow, 1982) **(McNamara, 2003) †(Langway, 1981)
Areas of Struggle: Age, Gender and Place
Games, much like other new technologies, have been a means of social control. This is
illustrated by presenting the everyday practices, the social construction and the framing of three
issues surrounding game play: age, gender and place.
Dad, put down the joystick and back away slowly: Games and Age
During the mid-1980s and the 1990s, video games were constructed as the province of
children. Today, as an all-ages phenomenon once again, they have begun to reenter the social
mainstream. Is this adoption the result of American culture’s slow and steady acceptance of
gaming technology, or simply the result of an aging user base? The evidence suggests that there
were both cohort and age effects (Glenn, 1977) at work over the last quarter-century. Today,
youths adopt game technology at the same time as many Generation X players continue to play
past adolescence. As a result, the average age of players has been rising steadily and, according
to the industry, is now 29 (Top Ten Industry Facts, 2004). One cohort effect is relatively easy to
isolate: the generations that ignored video games in the late 1970s and early 1980s have
continued to stay away. Those who played and stopped rarely returned; by 1984, Baby Boomers
had dramatically decreased their play, probably because of the powerful social messages they
were suddenly getting about the shame and deviancy of adult gaming (Williams, 2003). Another
reason may have been that the culture of games still caters primarily to adolescents, despite
adults who want more mature content (Kushner, 2001; Russo, 2001).
It should be reemphasized that the popular conception of game use as a purely child-
centric phenomenon did not emerge until well after games had entered the popular
consciousness, and home games became widespread. This is not surprising since the initial video
game boom occurred in adult spaces such as bars and nightclubs. But it was not until the late
1990s that this frame finally began to dissipate, perhaps because such reporting had become so at
odds with actual use. For example, Roper data showed that adult home game play was at 43%
during 1993, the same year Time reported that grownups “don’t get it” (Elmer-DeWitt, 1993).
But they did “get it,” and in the 1990s, adults were seemingly able to come out of the video
games closet. Much of this stems from the social cache (and disposable income) that Generation
X members gained upon entering independent adulthood. This trend was also likely reinforced
by a transition within news magazines to younger writers for the video games beat.
Gender Gaps
The research shows a clear gender gap in video game play, but one that has only been
measured for adolescents. Nearly every academic study and survey of the social impact of
games, regardless of its focus, has noted that males play more often than females (Buchman &
Funk, 1996; Dominick, 1984; Griffiths, 1997; Michaels, 1993; Phillips, Rolls, Rouse, &
Griffiths, 1995). Some of the gender preferences may be the results of socialization and parental
influence (Scantlin, 1999). Parents may have been discouraging girls at the same time they were
encouraging boys to play. For example, Ellis (1984) found that parents exerted far more control
over their daughters’ ability to go to arcades than their sons’.
Why should this be? The explanation involves the gendering of technology. For males,
technology has long been an empowering and masculine pursuit that hearkens back to the
wunderkind tinkerers of the previous century. The heroic boy inventor image was first made
fashionable through the carefully managed and promoted exploits of Thomas Edison and then
Guglielmo Marconi (S. Douglas, 1987). Since then, technology has remained a socially
acceptable pursuit for boys, and one that may offer them a sense of identity and empowerment
that they are not getting elsewhere (Chodorow, 1994; Rubin, 1983). One theory maintains that
boys are driven to technology in large part because it helps them develop their self-identity at a
time when, unlike girls, they are being forced into independence (Chodorow, 1994). Male tastes
are privileged through content as well, reinforcing the choice.
This explanation fits the experience of the males, but does not fully explain the dearth of
females pursuing technological interests, who continue to remain on the sidelines of science and
technology. For example, women are dramatically underrepresented as engineers and scientists,
despite outperforming men in science and math in high school (Seymour, 1995). The percentage
of female engineering Ph.D.’s who graduated in 1999 was an all-time high of only 15%.7 If there
are fewer women in technology, it must be for one of two reasons. One, women are not capable
or naturally interested in technology, or two, women have been systematically socialized away
from technology. Despite media framing, there is no evidence to suggest that biology plays a
role. There is, however, ample evidence pointing to a social construction of science as a male
pursuit (Jansen, 1989).8 Flanagan argues that this is a direct result of the threat that female
empowerment through technology poses to male power; women who use technology are not only
less dependent on men but less monitored and controllable (Flanagan, 1999). The world of video
games is a direct extension of this power relationship (McQuivey, 2001). Female characters,
when they do appear, tend to be objects rather than protagonists, resulting in generally negative
gender stereotypes (J. Funk, 2001; Gailey, 1993; Knowlee et al., 2001). Additionally, a male,
heterosexual viewpoint is assumed, with most characters playing the role of the strong, assertive
man seeking glory through violence with the reward of female companionship (Consalvo, 2003).
But while women experience frustration with their inability to identify with in-game characters,
male designers are largely unaware of the problem (K. Wright, 2002).
The effects of such social constructions are very real: the connection between video game
play and later technological interest has become a gender issue in early adolescence, and persists
7 Data are from the National Science Foundation’s Survey of Earned Doctorates Summary report, 1999.
8 A recent study of implicit attitudes found that both women and men see science as a male domain (O'Connell,
throughout the lifespan. Females are socialized away from game play, creating a self-fulfilling
prophecy for technology use: girls who do not play become women who do not use computing
technology (Cassell & Jenkins, 1999; Gilmore, 1999), and certainly do not aspire to make games.
In my interviews with game makers over two years, I spoke with almost no women. It is no
surprise, then, that an industry-wide masculine culture has developed in which a male point of
view is nearly the only point of view. Despite the untapped sales potential of the female
audience, this culture is unlikely to undergo any sea change in the near future so long as men
dominate the ranks of game makers.
Place, the Final Frontier
In addition to the powerful social forces that have moderated gamers’ behavior and
access to the technology, changes in both technology and space have impacted play. As Spigel
(1992) has shown, the introduction of a new technology or appliance into the home can have a
tremendous impact on social relations within families and communities. Writing from a more
community-based perspective, Putnam has argued about the negative impact that electronic
media have on local conversation and sociability (Putnam, 2000). Putnam has suggested that
video games are yet another media technology that is further atomizing communities by bringing
individuals out of public spaces. But in this case, Putnam’s line of analysis misses the actual
sequence of events, and presumes incorrectly that game play, regardless of location, is isolating.
The diversity of early arcade play had been drastically reduced by the mid 1980s (Herz,
1997), when games were played primarily in homes (J. B. Funk, 1993; Kubey & Larson, 1990).
For play to be social, a group had to gather around a television set. Evidence suggests that in the
mid-1980s, home play hit a low point for sociability (Murphy, 1984). The correlation for
sociability and home console play was still positive, but was not as large as for arcade play (Lin
& Leper, 1987). One reason for this temporary drop was that the earliest home games usually
only allowed for one or two players, as compared to the four-player consoles that became
popular in the early 1990s. Once more games and console systems were made to satisfy the
demand for more players, the trend reversed. By 1995, researchers were finding that play was
highly social again (Phillips et al., 1995).
Some of the move toward the home was precipitated by advances in technology, and
some by changes in the home itself. Over thirty years, technology has lowered the cost of
processing and storage to the point where home game units are comparable to arcade units;
convenience has moved games into homes. But other less obvious forces have kept game
technology moving into more isolated spaces within homes. From 1970 to 2000, the average U.S.
home size rose from 1,500 square feet to 2,200 square feet, but this space became more
subdivided than ever before (O'Briant, 2001). Ten percent more homes had four or more
bedrooms than in 1970, even though Americans are having fewer children ("In census data, a
room-by-room picture of the american home," 2003). Consequently, there is less shared space
within homes and more customized, private space for individuals. More than half of all U.S.
children have a video game player in their bedroom (Roberts, 2000; Sherman, 1996). In much
the same way that Putnam described televisions moving people off of communal stoops and into
houses, games and computers have been moving people out of living rooms and into bedrooms
and home offices.
Games, along with other mass media, may have separated families within their own
houses causing less inter-generational contact, while at the same time opening up access to new
social contacts of all types via networked console systems and PCs. The result is a mix of
countervailing social forces—less time with known people and more exposure to new people
from a broader range of backgrounds. Whether or not this virtual networking is qualitatively
better or worse for social networks than in-person game play is an issue that has received little
attention. However, despite the physical separation of game players, the desire to play together
has remained constant.
If the social history of video games can teach us anything, it is that humans will use
games to connect with each other, that technology changes the means (and thus the quality) of
those connections, and that this will all generate concern. These conclusions have implications
for researchers, both in how we should study gaming and in how we should consider gamers.
The Academic Agenda, and a Suggestion
The political climate and news media coverage have had a direct and dramatic effect on
the gaming research agenda. The most prominent figure in the U.S. health care system, Surgeon
General C. Everett Koop, was widely cited when he claimed in 1982 that video games were
hazardous to the health of young people, created aberrant behavior, increased tension and a
disposition for violence (Lin & Leper, 1987). Although there was no science to back this
assertion, researchers understandably went looking for it. In reviewing the resulting literature 10
years later, Funk concluded “Despite initial concern, current research suggests that even frequent
video game playing bears no significant relationship to the development of true
psychopathology. For example, researchers have failed to identify expected increases in
withdrawal and social isolation in frequent game players” (Funk, 1992, p. 53-54).
The effects work on violent games and aggression has similar origins. However, simply
because the motivations for the research have their roots in sociopolitical fears does not mean
that the research must necessarily be invalid. Looking for effects is certainly a worthwhile
activity. However, where the research can be found lacking is in its failure to incorporate social
variables. The typical experiment has included bringing subjects into a laboratory and then
having them play alone. Without the social context in place, it is not clear what such studies are
capturing. Sherry suggests that the dominant format of laboratory studies of players playing
alone against a computer may be testing for an effect that does not occur normally (Sherry, 2003;
Sherry & Lucas, 2003). The long history of social play lends weight to such criticisms.
Again, this is not to say that effects will not be found. Instead, it is to suggest that social
variables have been ignored in the models. In fact, some social variables may well cause stronger
effects. Others may moderate or reverse them. Although many of the leading researchers on
media violence have recently noted this omission (C. Anderson et al., 2003), no work has
included social variables. Until experimentalists incorporate the actual circumstances of play,
they will be open to criticisms of external validity. The solution does not involve creating new
theories. The social learning approach used by most effects researchers is based on observational
modeling and is in fact highly applicable and adaptable to social settings. The problem is that the
settings and the social actors who might be modeled have been excluded.
In the fast lanes of the Information Superhighway, the speculations and initial research on
gaming and online community have begun. Despite Putnam’s ominous warnings about the
Internet (2000), some researchers (Howard, Rainie, & Jones, 2001; Rheingold, 1993; Wellman &
Gullia, 1999) have borrowed from Habermas (1998), Anderson (1991) and Oldenburg (1997) to
explore the civic and social utopias that might be created in online spaces, including games.
Others (Nie, 2001; Nie & Erbring, 2002; Nie & Hillygus, 2002) have argued that far darker
outcomes are likely, especially in games (Ankney, 2002). This utopian/dystopian research
agenda will be the backdrop as we enter an era of virtual gaming communities. Will these
networked games help us cross social boundaries and create new relationships, or take us even
farther away from our dwindling civic structures? While empirical evidence remains scant, some
may wonder where the game player is in the discussion.
Players Aren’t Passive
Games research is the child of mainstream U.S. social science communication research.
As such, it is not particularly surprising that attention has remained focused on what games do to
people rather than what people do with games. One problem with this preference is that the
games-playing audience is plainly an active one. Some researchers have argued that this activity
will make effects stronger (C. Anderson & Bushman, 2001). That may turn out to be true.
Nevertheless, digital interactive media have made audience agency obvious to even the casual
observer. These new media have destabilized the assumptions of an inactive or gullible consumer
by rudely introducing media which have an inescapably active—or interactive—component.
Power, agency and control have spread both upstream to the producer and downstream to
the consumer (Neuman, 1991). It is difficult to suggest that Internet users do not have a high
level of choice, agency and activity. Likewise, video games are plainly an active medium. The
starting point for video game research should be a theoretical framework that allows for active
users in real social contexts. But when game players go so far as to actively participate in the
creation of the content, we must consider them anew. For example, more than one-quarter of
EverQuest players say they have made some original artwork or fiction based on the game
(Griffiths et al., 2003). Counter-Strike players create wholly new forms of self-expression within
their game (T. Wright, Boria, & Breidenbach, 2002). “Modders” take the content creation tools
given to them by the manufacturers and create new worlds and objectives consistent with their,
not the producers’ preferences (Katz & Rice, 2002; "PC Gamer "It" list," 2003). Researchers
considering direct effects or limited effects models will have to come to grips with a population
that takes a vigorous role in the practice and creation of their medium, not simply its
As Stephenson (1967) noted long ago,
Social scientists have been busy, since the dawn of mass communication research, trying to
prove that the mass media have been sinful where they should have been good. The media
have been looked at through the eyes of morality when, instead, what was required was a
fresh glance at people existing in their own right for the first time. (p. 45)
The social history of video games makes plain that we should consider not only the active
ways that gamers participate in the medium, but the long tradition of the way they play together.
... They indicate that the probability of pursuing a career in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) is increased threefold in girls who play videogames in comparison with those who do not. This, however, also works the other way round, as noted by Williams [20]: "girls who do not play become women who do not use computing technology ( . . . ) and certainly do not aspire to make games" (p. 16). ...
... The gamer stereotype also seemed to affect other participants, who distanced themselves from the label of being a "real gamer" on the suggestions that "real" gamers play every day (FG13), are heavily invested in their games, and are part of online communities (FG14), as well as playing specific types of games, such as MMOPRGs (FG2, FG12, FG16); "like I wouldn't call myself a gamer even if I play The Sims 30 h a week" (FG16, 23, lab technician). Although female gamers spend approximately as much time on gaming as their male counterparts [4,20], several participants expressed that gaming is still primarily perceived a male activity by the society and community around them (FG5, FG14, FG16, FG18). ...
Full-text available
The literature on online gaming has generally focused on male gamers and has been dominated by negative aspects of gaming. The present study addresses the gender gap in this field by exploring experiences of female gamers further by unravelling several positive experiences alongside some potentially harmful tendencies connected to gaming, including female gamers’ wishes and ambitions for their future gaming. A total of 20 female adult gamers across Europe were interviewed and results were analysed using thematic analysis. Four main themes were identified: (i) to be or not to be a (female) gamer; (ii) improving social skills and levelling up on mental health; (iii) not always a healthy escape; and (iv) there is more to explore. The present study is one of few empirical studies regarding the construction of self-image, and experiences of female gamers. It has showed participants have a history as gamers from adolescence, but still face problems derived from the stigmatised internal gender self-image. Externally, female gamer stigmatisation may result in sexism, gender violence, harassment, and objectification. Additionally, females may decide against identifying as gamers, engaging in social gaming interaction, or hold back from online gaming in general, thereby missing out on the opportunities for recreation as well as social and psychological benefits that gaming brings. There is, therefore, urgent need for more research and actions to promote change, equity, education, and security for female gamers as well as their male counterparts. Game developers would benefit from understanding this large gamer demographic better and tailoring games for women specifically.
... In this perspective, the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community has researched how digital technologies are used by people affected by natural and man-made disasters, as well as how novel devices can be designed to support both citizens and formal responders in managing the consequences of crises. To this aim, commercial video games are certainly relevant, because they represent an immediately available resource when people have to cope with the negative consequences of a crisis, also given their increasing popularity among the general population (Juul, 2009;Williams, 2006) and the fact that the number of video gamers across the world is expected to rise to 3.07 billion by 2023 (Clement, 2021). However, this kind of games has received scarce attention in previous work on technology and crises, which has focused more on the design of novel games with a serious purpose (e.g., Chittaro & Buttussi, 2015). ...
The COVID-19 pandemic led to dramatic changes in people's lives. The Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community widely investigated technology use during crises. However, commercial video games received minor attention. In this article, we describe how video game play impacted the life transformations engendered by the pandemic. We administered a qualitative online survey to 330 video game players who were living in Italy during the lockdown measures. We found that the COVID-19 pandemic altered the participants' sense of time and space, reshaped both their intimate and wider social interactions, and elicited a wide spectrum of disturbing emotions. Players escaped from this unsatisfying reality into video game worlds, searching for a new normality that could compensate for the unpredict-ability and dangerousness of the pandemic life, as well as seeking uncertainty in the game environments to balance the flatness of the lockdown everydayness. In doing so, they "appropriated" the gaming technologies, which also led to several unexpected outcomes. Starting from these findings , we propose a model of escapism that points out four ways to escape from reality into video game worlds. Moreover, we outline some design implications that might inspire future strands of research in the field of crisis technologies.
... Additionally, the present study's sample was almost equal for gender representation. This may reflect more equal gender rates of video game play (Entertainment Software Association of Canada, 2015), with a marked shift away from the traditional "young White male" gamer stereotype (Williams, 2005). Current research estimates that 55% of online gamers are women (Paypal Canada, 2018). ...
... Despite statistics indicating that over 50% of US adults regularly play video games, only about 10% self-identify as gamers (Duggan, 2015). There is an aging stereotype that gamers are "isolated, pale-skinned teenage boys […] hunched forward on a sofa in some dark basement space, obsessively mashing buttons" (Williams, 2005). The gamer stereotype reflects the narrow conception of video games and contributes to the relative lack of video games in community spaces. ...
Full-text available
This chapter is a call to action for more video games in community spaces. Experiencing art in a community context changes the character of the experience in terms of presence, discovery, and enchantment. Video games, an interactive media art, are perhaps the most dominant form of art happening today; yet, compared to other art forms, video game experiences in community spaces are few and far between. Technical challenges and stifling economic forces commanding the game industry and game culture provide explanations for this scenario. These forces have shaped a limited conception of video games that widely dictates the types of games that are developed as well as how and where players consume them. However, while modern mainstream commercial games have largely evolved into a form unsuitable for community spaces, there exists historical and current design paradigms for video games intended for such spaces. In particular, the burgeoning medium of augmented reality (AR) fits naturally within community spaces, as demonstrated by mainstream examples such as Snapchat ART and Pokémon GO. Design patterns and formal elements that are better suited for community spaces emerge through an examination of the properties of access and attraction in the home video game, arcade cabinet, bar trivia, and AR experience formats. By uncovering the possibilities of video games in community spaces, the chapter raises awareness of a broader conception of video games and urges game developers toward applying their craft through AR in more community spaces.
... Development of electronic gaming, requiring a high degree of computing power, subsequently occurred within male-dominated university and government research settings (Cote, 2018). This ensured buy-in from, and design for, men, resulting in what Williams (2006) referred to as "an industry-wide masculine culture . . . in which a male point of view is nearly the only point of view" (p. 206). ...
Women are often viewed as outsiders in the videogaming environment, particularly in first-person shooter games. Perceived infringement on an overwhelmingly masculine space pushes women to the margins of online team-based games, where gender norms inform the presumption that they play supportive roles that are viewed as passive and unskilled rather than actively contributing to team objectives. This study explores why women continue to play these roles, even as they are belittled, how societal expectations of women translate to the gaming space, and consequences for gender as a social structure. Findings suggest similarities to gendered labor in that women report feeling obligated to shoulder tasks that nobody else desires, much in the same way that professional work characterized as feminine is devalued. In addition, women must perform emotion work as they game by hiding their role preferences, feeling shame at fulfilling harmful gender stereotypes, and justifying their utility.
In the 1980s, a video gamer stereotype emerged as isolated, pale-skinned, white, teen boy in a dark basement single-mindedly mashing buttons. While there may have been a grain of truth to this image, it is also believed that the growth of the video game industry has attracted new audiences and made playing video games more mainstream. Many media scholars have attempted to refute this stereotype with cross- sectional surveys. Rather than examining a snapshot of current gamers, we analyze changes in the characteristics of gamers over close to two decades. Time use data for the US that has been collected consistently for 18 years allow us to identify who the gamers are over time and many of their demographic characteristics. Over this period, video game playing has grown faster among older, female, more educated, and moderate-income, and non-White demographic groups. Or, it has become more mainstream. On the other hand, some proxies suggest that gaming still attracts an antisocial loner archetype. Gamers are increasingly more likely to live with their parents, remain unmarried, and they increasingly game alone for longer gaming sessions.
Full-text available
This paper aims to find out why many people refuse to identify as a gamer publicly. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate how the gaming community is structured, where the dominant culture positions it and how members themselves perceive their social role. This paper starts off to theoretically examine how social groups work by using subcultural theories, which include Ken Gelder’s six criteria of subcultures, to lay the groundwork for better understanding the video game culture and how one can approach it (3). As stated in the very beginning, the community that plays video games is enormously large. That is why a closer look will be taken on the term gamer, to comprehend to whom it refers. The central task of this paper lies in the two-part analysis. Firstly, supported by the evaluations of the mainstream press, the external perspective from the dominant culture on the social group of gamers is being captured and discussed. Secondly, an examination of internal communication on the online gaming platform Twitch shall gain insight into the mindset of a gamer which is subsequently interpreted. Finally, this study contrasts the results of both perspectives and evaluates them to one conclusion.
Full-text available
Based on previous research indicating that character portrayals in video games and other media can influence users’ perceptions of social reality, systematic content analyses have examined demographic trends in the way video game characters are portrayed. Although these studies have extensively documented character portrayals in traditional console and computer video games, there is a lack of content analyses examining character portrayals in the very popular massively multiplayer online game (MMO) genre. Such studies are needed because many characters in MMOs are customized avatars created by users, which may lead to different trends in character demographics. This content analysis examined representations of gender and race among 417 unique characters appearing 1,356 times in 20 hours of recorded content from four popular commercial MMOs, which was generated by five recruited users. Characters tended to be disproportionately male and white, with females and racial minorities appearing much less often. Implications for potential effects on users’ perceptions of social reality are discussed.
Video game developers make multimillion dollar decisions based on hunches, personal experience, and iteration. A theoretical model of video game player behavior – how one chooses, plays, and evaluate games – can provide an important framework for these decisions. According to social cognitive theory, one’s behavior can be understood as the result of expected outcomes resulting from direct and observational learning processes. Video game players use symbolic representations (quality perceptions) of their direct and observed experiences with video games to build expectations of whether playing a specific video game will satisfy their needs. A series of in-depth interviews and a subsequent survey with students of a large mid-western university was conducted to enumerate groups of similar players (player types), and video game quality perceptions. Both concepts were used to provide empirical evidence for a model to predict video game playing. Results show that, in prediction models, the best player types are those that include player type-specific quality perceptions.
Full-text available
Research on violent television and films, video games, and music reveals unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts. The effects appear larger for milder than for more severe forms of aggression, but the effects on severe forms of violence are also substantial ( r = .13 to .32) when compared with effects of other violence risk factors or medical effects deemed important by the medical community (e.g., effect of aspirin on heart attacks). The research base is large; diverse in methods, samples, and media genres; and consistent in overall findings. The evidence is clearest within the most extensively researched domain, television and film violence. The growing body of video-game research yields essentially the same conclusions. Short-term exposure increases the likelihood of physically and verbally aggressive behavior, aggressive thoughts, and aggressive emotions. Recent large-scale longitudinal studies provide converging evidence linking frequent exposure to violent media in childhood with aggression later in life, including physical assaults and spouse abuse. Because extremely violent criminal behaviors (e.g., forcible rape, aggravated assault, homicide) are rare, new longitudinal studies with larger samples are needed to estimate accurately how much habitual childhood exposure to media violence increases the risk for extreme violence. Well-supported theory delineates why and when exposure to media violence increases aggression and violence. Media violence produces short-term increases by priming existing aggressive scripts and cognitions, increasing physiological arousal, and triggering an automatic tendency to imitate observed behaviors. Media violence produces long-term effects via several types of learning processes leading to the acquisition of lasting (and automatically accessible) aggressive scripts, interpretational schemas, and aggression-supporting beliefs about social behavior, and by reducing individuals' normal negative emotional responses to violence (i.e., desensitization). Certain characteristics of viewers (e.g., identification with aggressive characters), social environments (e.g., parental influences), and media content (e.g., attractiveness of the perpetrator) can influence the degree to which media violence affects aggression, but there are some inconsistencies in research results. This research also suggests some avenues for preventive intervention (e.g., parental supervision, interpretation, and control of children's media use). However, extant research on moderators suggests that no one is wholly immune to the effects of media violence. Recent surveys reveal an extensive presence of violence in modern media. Furthermore, many children and youth spend an inordinate amount of time consuming violent media. Although it is clear that reducing exposure to media violence will reduce aggression and violence, it is less clear what sorts of interventions will produce a reduction in exposure. The sparse research literature suggests that counterattitudinal and parental-mediation interventions are likely to yield beneficial effects, but that media literacy interventions by themselves are unsuccessful. Though the scientific debate over whether media violence increases aggression and violence is essentially over, several critical tasks remain. Additional laboratory and field studies are needed for a better understanding of underlying psychological processes, which eventually should lead to more effective interventions. Large-scale longitudinal studies would help specify the magnitude of media-violence effects on the most severe types of violence. Meeting the larger societal challenge of providing children and youth with a much healthier media diet may prove to be more difficult and costly, especially if the scientific, news, public policy, and entertainment communities fail to educate the general public about the real risks of media-violence exposure to children and youth.
Full-text available
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
Full-text available
For a growing cohort of Americans Internet tools have become a significant conduitof their social life and work life. The surveys of the Pew Internet and American LifeProject track the diffusion of Internet technologies, revealing significant differences inuse between men and women, young and old, those of different races and ethnicgroups, and those of different socio-economic status. A user typology can be builtaround two variables: the length of time a person has used the Internet and the frequencywith which she or he logs on from home. We contend that use of email helpspeople build their social networks by extending and maintaining friend and familyrelationships
To describe U.S. youth's access and exposure to the full array of media, as well as the social contexts in which media exposure occurs. A cross-sectional national random sample of 2065 adolescents aged 8 through 18 years, including oversamples of African-American and Hispanic youth, completed questionnaires about use of television, videotapes, movies, computers, video games, radio, compact discs, tape players, books, newspapers, and magazines. U.S. youngsters are immersed in media. Most households contain most media (computers and video game systems are the exception); the majority of youth have their own personal media. The average youth devotes 6 3/4 h to media; simultaneous use of multiple media increases exposure to 8 h of media messages daily. Overall, media exposure and exposure to individual media vary as a function of age, gender, race/ethnicity, and family socioeconomic level. Television remains the dominant medium. About one-half of the youth sampled uses a computer daily. A substantial proportion of children's and adolescents' media use occurs in the absence of parents. American youth devote more time to media than to any other waking activity, as much as one-third of each day. This demands increased parental attention and research into the effects of such extensive exposure.