Difference between revisions of "Togetherness"

Revision as of 07:27, 14 April 2022

The one-sentence "definition" that should be in italics.

This pattern is a still a stub.

For a more thorough examination of the concept of Togetherness in the context of gaming, see Bergström 2012^[1].

Examples

Anti-Examples

optional

Using the pattern

Collins^[2]:

• Group solidarity, a feeling of membership
• Emotional energy in the individual: a feeling of confidence, elation, strength, enthusiasm, and initiative in taking action
• Symbols that represent the group: emblems or other representations (visual icons, words, gestures) that members feel are associated with themselves collectively; these are Durkheim’s “sacred objects”. Persons pumped up with feelings of group solidarity treat symbols with great respect and defend them against the disrespect of outsiders, and even more of renegade insiders.
• Feelings of morality: the sense of rightness in adhering to the group, respecting its symbols, and defending both against transgressors. Along with this goes the sense of moral evil or impropriety in violating the group’s solidarity and symbolic representations.

Multiplayer Games is a basic foundation for allowing Togetherness to emerge. While engaging in actual gameplay activities with one another, e.g. in Parties, is one form the pattern may take other possible forms can be that players together create a story (which can be represented by Game Instance Stories), that player shared misfortunes together (as described by Spectacular Failure Enjoyment), and that period with little or no gameplay allowed players to socialize without performing gameplay actions (i.e., interact with each other during Lull Periods).

Can Be Instantiated By

Backseat Gamers, Communication Channels, Friend Lists, Mutual FUBAR Enjoyment, Negotiable Game Instance Duration, Shared Penalties, Shared Rewards, Social Adaptability, Social Rewards, Synchronous Gameplay, Team Development, Team Strategy Identification, Teams, TvT,

Can Be Modulated By

Real-Time Games

Potentially Conflicting With

Drop-In/Drop-Out, Guilting, Player Elimination, Ragequitting, Unsynchronized Game Sessions

Diegetic Aspects

Interface Aspects

Narration Aspects

Consequences

Can Instantiate

Actor Detachment, Social Roles

with Cooperation or Negotiation

Reflective Communication

Relations

Given that Togetherness increases the likelihood for Social Interaction, it also makes it likely that players take upon themselves different Social Roles.

The focusing Togetherness can have upon creating a sense of belonging to a group through gameplay lessens the importance of extra-game reasons to break apart that group. In this sense, [[Togetherness] works toward players having Actor Detachment against each other.

with Cooperation or Negotiation

Reflective Communication

Can Modulate

-

Can Be Instantiated By

Backseat Gamers, Communication Channels, Friend Lists, Multiplayer Games, Mutual FUBAR Enjoyment, Negotiable Game Instance Duration, Shared Penalties, Shared Rewards, Social Adaptability, Social Interaction, Social Rewards, Synchronous Gameplay, Team Development, Team Strategy Identification, Teams, TvT,

Game Instance Stories in Multiplayer Games

Lull Periods in Multiplayer Games

Parties in Multiplayer Games

Spectacular Failure Enjoyment in Multiplayer Games

Can Be Modulated By

Real-Time Games

Possible Closure Effects

-

Potentially Conflicting With

Drop-In/Drop-Out, Guilting, Player Elimination, Ragequitting, Unsynchronized Game Sessions

History

New pattern created in this wiki.

References

1. ↑ Bergström, K. 2012. Playing for Togetherness - Designing for Interaction Rituals through Gaming. Doctoral thesis in Interaction Design, Gothenburg University.
2. ↑ Collins, R. 2004. Interaction ritual chains, Princeton University Press..

Acknowledgements

Karl Bergström