Gaming Styles Thesis

[Rairen]

I don't know if any FLers were pulled into the gamer survey from earlier in the year, but the findings were just published. It's an analysis and revision of the classic Socializer/Explorer/Achiever/Bastard (*cough* Griefer *cough*) categorization of gamers.

http://www.rofv.nl/survey/

[Raargant]

That's a MASTER level thesis? "Guys are PK'ers/achievers, girls are roleplayers."

....

[Rairen]

That was the part you took exception to? I thought the writing in general was subpar (heaven help him if he plans on getting a doctorate), even for leisure studies, but I didn't see anything amiss with that portion of his thesis... likely because I take a peculiar pleasure in anything that reinforces stereotypes. College jaded me towards all things 'counter-stereotypical'.

It was remarkable how much he didn't do with the subject, though. That was my true complaint, given how much data he did/could have collected.

Edit: I'll give you that my favorite irreverant part was where he lamented how hard it was to come up with a thesis for his topic.

[Celerity]

Yeah....I think I'm the strongly the explorer type

But maybe I'm the "ranker" type...

sitting in my secret corner getting tons of hours, getting to 50, training everything...then never getting caballed and doing it all over it again

you see a random character with a lot of hours and too many masteries but you've never heard of them? probably me...

[Raargant]

That was the part you took exception to? I thought the writing in general was subpar (heaven help him if he plans on getting a doctorate), even for leisure studies, but I didn't see anything amiss with that portion of his thesis... likely because I take a peculiar pleasure in anything that reinforces stereotypes. College jaded me towards all things 'counter-stereotypical'.

It was remarkable how much he didn't do with the subject, though. That was my true complaint, given how much data he did/could have collected.

Edit: I'll give you that my favorite irreverant part was where he lamented how hard it was to come up with a thesis for his topic.

I found the whole thing to be borderline nonsensical, actually; however, as I only read the abstract rather than the entire paper, I gave him some slack as perhaps the actual paper itself was better written. IE, I didn't bring up all the numerous stupid things such as "mere player" (wtf?) et. al.

[killalou]

Man...I so envy people who can write and run-on likes it nothing. I myself can probably wrap all 91 pages into 5 solid pages. I just dont know how people can write so much about a single topic. Oh well...

[Kinicky]

The thing was a full 91 pages?

Yeah... I NEVER would have read the entire thesis.

But guys - he did get a 'B' on it... so it must have been fairly good... :/

[Rairen]

I found the whole thing to be borderline nonsensical' date=' actually; however, as I only read the abstract rather than the entire paper, I gave him some slack as perhaps the actual paper itself was better written. IE, I didn't bring up all the numerous stupid things such as "mere player" (wtf?) et. al.[/quote']

He used 'cute' colloquialisms throughout. (I only did a skim of the main paper, itself, to review the history and questionnaire so someone dedicated to reading the entire thing is welcome to contradict me. ) It's the data that has value, and his introduction to basic gamer theory.

I think it would be valuable for a psychology student to take the same information and analyze it. The Leisure Studies guy, at heart, wanted to know who plays games. The psych guy would be (more coherently) able to say why.

But guys - he did get a 'B' on it... so it must have been fairly good... :/

Not all academic institutions - or even fields of academic studies within those institutions - are created equal. You get the wrong professor reviewing your work (... Oh, Professor Pound *sigh*) and what Raar and I are critiquing will get you slaughtered. I've received C's for less.

(To be fair, I could also turn in the same paper to someone else and get an A. It's horribly subjective.)

[Kinicky]

Not all academic institutions - or even fields of academic studies within those institutions - are created equal. You get the wrong professor reviewing your work (... Oh, Professor Pound *sigh*) and what Raar and I are critiquing will get you slaughtered. I've received C's for less.

Hehe - notice my little face at the end of my comment. I was actually being a bit sarcastic, commenting on the professor's lack of critiquing ability.

[Raargant]

He used 'cute' colloquialisms throughout. (I only did a skim of the main paper' date=' itself, to review the history and questionnaire so someone dedicated to reading the entire thing is welcome to contradict me. ) It's the data that has value, and his introduction to basic gamer theory.[/color']

I have a major issue with the way he gathered his data (and he admits to it as well):

The survey was basically self-selected on two levels; he didn't do a random sampling. What he did was put up the survey on a server.

This is, AFAIK, a huge issue. The first layer of self-selection came based upon his emails to the administrators; the administrators that did not respond, for whatever reason, skewed the data, and it doesn't appear as though he compensated for that. Out of the emails he sent out, how many admins replied? How many did not? He didn't provide that information.

The second layer of self-selection came from the players themselves; assuming the message/survey got through to the players from the admins, how might players who are willing to respond differ from players who do not respond? There is probably a real difference there, and again, it doesn't look as though he compensated for that. Out of the players who DID see the forum posting, what percentage replied? What percentage did not? I don't think even he knows that, much less the reader.

In polling and surveying, even one layer of self-selection can be a killer; two such major, major layers of self-selection effectively renders the survey junk, as far as I'm concerned.

There are other issues as well, such as his relying on a relatively 'old' model of multiplayer online gaming personalities, which may or may not have been altered due to the increase in MMORPG's in recent days, and not really accounting for possible differences between players when the model was first created and now, etc. etc. etc., but I won't go into it. The data is junk from my perspective, which means the analysis is as well. As the old adage goes, GIGO: Garbage in, garbage out.

Not all academic institutions - or even fields of academic studies within those institutions - are created equal. You get the wrong professor reviewing your work (... Oh, Professor Pound *sigh*) and what Raar and I are critiquing will get you slaughtered. I've received C's for less.

(To be fair, I could also turn in the same paper to someone else and get an A. It's horribly subjective.)

Too true.

[Ex-D&Der]

Fascinating stuff, limitations aside. I think the concept of a "griefer" is very useful.

[Rairen]

Hehe - notice my little face at the end of my comment. I was actually being a bit sarcastic' date=' commenting on the professor's lack of critiquing ability.[/quote']

I lose at interpreting smiley faces.

As for the numbers, I'm not a competent enough statistician to argue for or against and won't pretend to be otherwise. That said, there is still value in the data to us, non-thesis writing people. It may leave us holes, but hell, even if everything is spot on perfect, he has holes in his questioning.

(What'd you study again, Raar? If you tell me comparative literature, I'm a-gonna whap you.)

[Hegemon]

Both Raargant and myself attended "Hefty Joe's Trucking School for Gifted Youngsters".

EDIT: He studied Advanced Roadkill Cuisine, I was in the Apathy program.

[elfdude]

That was a pretty weak excuse for a paper.

[zionpsyfer]

In my opinion it was a superbly written and insightful paper. The concept that a persons personality may be reflected in their enjoyment of peripheral activities such as gaming, is an unexplored facet of psychology. Characterizations such as 'A typical explorer thing to say would be: “Hmm…” ' and 'killers are people of few words by saying things like: “Coward!” and “Die”. 'serve their role of dumbing down the rubric for those without any movie, book, video game or real life experience.

Alright, I was going to finish this with more dripping sarcasm but I am fresh out. Is this truly a master level?

It's a bad thing when someone with no psychology experience and minimal statistical knowledge is banging his head on his desk trying to wade through your dumbed down and obviously flawed paper. How did this warrant a B? The teacher must have found it as hard to read as everyone else and just gave up the ghost. Figuring that it wasn't worth the eye strain.

ExD&Der: If you want more insight into griefers, for $10 you can hop in SecondLife and get more experience than you'd ever want. They are nearly all under 18 and have some interesting views.

[The Forsaken]

Yes, this is a Masters Level thesis. You have to realize that getting a Masters is the new B.A. (or B.S. if you will) And of course, getting a Bachelors is equivalent to graduating High School 30+ years ago. Getting your Masters in (almost) any field isn't that hard if you put in a little time and effort. It's actually somewhat rude to bash his paper like this as well. And to even call the professor out on it? That just shows lack of knowledge. 99% of all thesis' are not graded by a solitary professor. (the 1% discrepancy is there so I have a safety net in case Raar wants to call me out on it.)

Whoever wrote this thesis obviously put some time in it, and I'd be rather upset at someone talking about mine in such a manner. So, I guess what I'm trying to get at is that I want to see links to ElfDude's and Zionsyfer's thesis papers so we can all understand what an 'unflawed' or a thesis that is not 'weak' truly is.

[Raargant]

Yes' date=' this is a Masters Level thesis. You have to realize that getting a Masters is the new B.A. (or B.S. if you will) And of course, getting a Bachelors is equivalent to graduating High School 30+ years ago. [/quote']

Just a bit exaggerated, don't you think? Unless of course you refer to it in terms of its ubiquitousness (which I'd concur with), as opposed to ease of achievement (which I rather wouldn't).

[The Forsaken]

Ahh, excuse me, I refer to it's usefulness.

30ish years ago you could make it fine with a High School diploma.

30ish years ago you could find a job very easily with a Bachelors.

Now days, the Bachelors is equivalent to the High School diploma. You can make it fine with just a B.A. (or B.S.) but it is going to be a lot harder to find a job considering everyone else is going for a Masters. (at least)

And quit using the Lawyer strategy of throwing in words that don't have anything to do with the context except to make others feel weird.

[Raargant]

Ahh, excuse me, I refer to it's usefulness.

30ish years ago you could make it fine with a High School diploma.

30ish years ago you could find a job very easily with a Bachelors.

Now days, the Bachelors is equivalent to the High School diploma. You can make it fine with just a B.A. (or B.S.) but it is going to be a lot harder to find a job considering everyone else is going for a Masters. (at least)

Ahh, gotcha. Yeah, I concur in that case. Higher education is becoming more and more important. But I think a large, large part of that is due to the fact that America, as well as most of the developed 1st world countries, is moving more and more away from being an industrial/manufacturing country, to a technological/service based country.

The latter, obviously, necessitates higher education.

[Kinicky]

Ahh, excuse me, I refer to it's usefulness.

Now days, the Bachelors is equivalent to the High School diploma. You can make it fine with just a B.A. (or B.S.) but it is going to be a lot harder to find a job considering everyone else is going for a Masters. (at least)

Actually, statistically, the percentage of the population achieving Master level and above is completely unchanged from what it was 30 years ago.

The difference is that now, everyone SAYS they are going to get a higher level degree. But the percentage that actually do has remained static.

Funny you should mention this, because I just got done reading a study that touches on this very thing.

EDIT: Of course, depending on the career field you choose to look at, these numbers will change one way or another. I'm fairly certain that 99% of surgeons have their doctorate. The remaining 1% spends a high percentage of their operating time looking over their shoulder for law enforcement.

[Rairen]

So' date=' I guess what I'm trying to get at is that I want to see links to ElfDude's and Zionsyfer's thesis papers so we can all understand what an 'unflawed' or a thesis that is not 'weak' truly is.[/quote']

*is only glad that she manged to escape the burn*

More seriously, I'm a lousy violinist. I really am. Oh, so not my calling. However, along the way, I was taught the characteristics of a good player, and can competently critique colleagues up to a certain level. Although being able to do something yourself is always the best endorsement, it is possible to give a thoughtful, mature critque of someone better than you.

When it came down to mentioning one professor, I was thinking of a primary reviewer. Doctorates, at least, have a 'big brother' who mutilates everything you do before you ever make it to the oral defense. Even, however, if I'm mistaken in thinking there is a similiar structure for Masters, groupthink is a scary, scary thing. Particularly when the people responsible for hiring coworkers want people who think like them (and often are no smarter than them.) This is the first time I've heard of the college/uni in question, and combined with a the course of leisure studies, it makes me twitchy.

... Ubiquitousness. He's got a point, Raar.

[Raargant]

*is only glad that she manged to escape the burn*

More seriously, I'm a lousy violinist. I really am. Oh, so not my calling. However, along the way, I was taught the characteristics of a good player, and can competently critique colleagues up to a certain level. Although being able to do something yourself is always the best endorsement, it is possible to give a thoughtful, mature critque of someone better than you.

To simplify things, just put it like this: You don't have to be hot to know someone is ugly.

Oh, and YOU pick a better single word than ubiquitousness. That was actually the most succinct way to express that statement AFAIK. Harrumph. Not to mention that the whole critiquing thing has me in a verbally technical state of mind.

[The Forsaken]

When it came down to mentioning one professor, I was thinking of a primary reviewer. Doctorates, at least, have a 'big brother' who mutilates everything you do before you ever make it to the oral defense. Even, however, if I'm mistaken in thinking there is a similiar structure for Masters, groupthink is a scary, scary thing. Particularly when the people responsible for hiring coworkers want people who think like them (and often are no smarter than them.) This is the first time I've heard of the college/uni in question, and combined with a the course of leisure studies, it makes me twitchy.

Well, Doctorate students that are writing a Thesis normally have a mentor that rips theirs apart before it even gets submitted so they can make revisions. On the Master level, I'm not so sure about that.

[zionpsyfer]

The Forsaken: I have to strongly disagree with you that one needs a master thesis to be critical of one. Is it a prerequisite to have been president to be critical of one? I'm sorry, but that logic is fallacious. I cannot disagree that my opinion would mean little to the one who has written it, or that it means little to most people for that matter. But it is my opinion. I do not represent it as anything else.

I have written papers. I'm not completely ignorant in this area. Prior to today I had an apparently unrealistic expectation of what a thesis would be in terms of care and attention to detail. Yes, the writer obviously put a lot of work into it. But I do not believe that he put in an excessive amount of care nor attention to detail. This is again my opinion and no, I still do not have a masters to base it off of.

I must also disagree on your representation of the value of degrees today. This is highly dependent on the field. I am not ignorant in this area either. When we interview candidates, a B.S. is more than sufficient for a job in software development. A candidate with a masters is usually peppered with questions regarding their motivation for applying. Those candidates are more appropriate for a management position, helping to determine project scopes and directions. I am aware that this varies from shop to shop. Indeed, one could argue that this misconception that all degrees have devalued over the years stems from an ignorance of the post-college workforce in general.

Yes I was harsh in my criticism. No, I do not have a thesis for you to read. Yes, my criticism stands. Yes, I am aware that one person does not read everyones theses. However I do not believe I would be wrong in claiming that someone is required to read them prior to grading and I would hope that someone would be available to critique them prior to submission.