« The MMO Powerplant | Main | Non-linear Chat »

Jun 15, 2006

Comments

1.

Is a Bortle anything like a Bartle?

God, I'm sorry about that. I just couldn't help myself.

--matt

2.

Despite the fact that the Abstract is almost coma-inducingly obtuse to a layperson like me, the thesis ended up being quite a compelling read.

However, at the end of the day, it didn't present any conclusions that aren't obvious to anyone who has spent some serious time in Everquest.

I tried to explore myself, somewhat crudely and hamhandedly, the essence of the "addiction" on my own blog. The article is here: http://www.secularsense.org/2006/06/gods-among-mortals.html

3.

Matt Mihaly>Is a Bortle anything like a Bartle?

Maybe that's why she doesn't cite me...

Is a Mihaly anything like a Csikszentmihalyi? She doesn't cite him, either.

Probably a good thing in both cases.

Richard

4.

Its a good thing there is nothing surprising. It means its fairly accurate, and that its more useful for those that know nothing of mmorpgs and Everquest. Often these analyses are not to enlighten those "in the know." Most of the current ones are developing a building block for more extensive research.

5.

Fair enough, I realize that this wasn't written for me as a non-student of psychology. However as someone with an interest in the socio-economic aspect of these games, I'm fascinated by the idea of from whence their "juice" comes and why some games have it and some games don't. Everquest had it until Sony made the unbelievably boneheaded move of releasing Everquest 2. Now the ball is squarely in World of Warcraft's court, and I'm curious how, when and why that might come to an end.

6.

Insightful, especially the application of various analytical techniques to the interviews; it was enlightening how each technique revealed different results, and how the author synthesized them.

How the author showed that online interaction percolates out into interpersonal relationships not actually mediated by technology was also particularly intriguing to me.

Do you think that N might have so internalized the lesson M elucidated, that short summation answers communicate better than long, detailed ones (from N's five years spent playing Everquest, ages 15-20, and even before that being involved with various online role-playing communities) that would account for his style of answering Bortle in a way she at first found uncommunicative? I was suprised she didn't at least consider that as an explanation.

The comments to this entry are closed.