Electronic sports (e-sports) represents an increasingly popular and profitable array of organizations, communities, and sets of practices, all of which place tremendous value on audiences; for example, playing games competitively, in front of a crowd, represents the legitimization of gaming as spectator sport. This article reports on an audiovisual ethnography of a community of competitive gamers for whom the video camera became not so much a research tool but a promotional resource. Examining the transformations the camera enacted, both to the practice of ethnographic fieldwork and to participants’ embodied performances of competitive gaming, this article explores the central role played by recording technologies in the production of e-sports. It concludes by considering some of the intersections of surveillance, gaming, and emergent leisure practices – including the use of digital recording technologies to collect social scientific data, at a time when watching and being watched is increasingly pervasive, pleasurable, and problematic.
AlbrechtslundADubbeldL (2005) The plays and arts of surveillance: studying surveillance as entertainment. Surveillance and Society3(2): 216–221.
2.
AllowayNGilbertP (1998) Video game culture: playing with masculinity, violence and pleasure. In HowardS (ed) Wired Up: Young People and Electronic Media. London: UCL Press, pp. 95–114.
3.
AndrejevicM (2005) The work of watching one another: lateral surveillance, risk, and governance. Surveillance and Society2(4): 479–497.
4.
AndrejevicM (2010) Surveillance and alienation in the online economy. Surveillance and Society8(3): 278–287.
5.
BloomL (1997) Locked in uneasy sisterhood: reflections on feminist methodology and research relations. Anthropology and Education Quarterly28(1): 111–122.
6.
BehrenshausenBG (2013) The active audience, again: player-centric game studies and the problem of binarism. New Media and Society15(6): 872–889.
7.
BoellstorffTNardiBPearceC. (2012) Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
8.
BorowyMJinDY (2013) Pioneering e-sport: the experience economy and the marketing of early 1980s arcade gaming contests. International Journal of Communication7: 2254–2274.
9.
BowmanNDWeberRTamboriniR. (2013) Facilitating game play: how others affect our performance at and enjoyment of video games. Media Psychology16(1): 39–64.
10.
BryceJRutterJ (2005) Gendered gaming in gendered space. In: RaessensJGoldsteinJ (eds) Handbook of Computer Games Studies. Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 301–310.
11.
CheeFTaylorNde CastellS (2012) Re-mediating research ethics: End-user license agreements in online games. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society32(6): 497–506.
12.
de CastellSBrysonM (1998) Re-tooling play: Dystopia, dysphoria, and difference. In CassellJJenkinsH (eds), From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and Computer Games. Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp. 232–261.
13.
EskelinenMTronstadR (2003) Video games as configurative performances. In WolfMJPPerronB (eds), The Video Game Theory Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 195–220.
14.
EverhartRB (1977) Between stranger and friend: some consequences of ‘long term’ fieldwork in schools. American Educational Research Journal14(1): 1–14.
15.
FuchsC (2010) Labor in informational capitalism and on the Internet. The Information Society: An International Journal26(3): 179–196.
16.
GallowayAR (2006) Gaming: Essays on Algorithmic Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
17.
GiddingsS (2007) Playing with non-humans: digital games as technocultural form. In: de CastellSJensonJ (eds) Worlds in Play: International Perspectives on Digital Games Research. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 115–128.
18.
GiddingsS (2009) Events and collusions: a glossary for the microethnography of videogame play. Games and Culture4(2): 144–157.
19.
GiddingsSKennedyH (2008) Little Jesuses and *@#?-off robots: on cybernetics, aesthetics, and not being very good at Lego Star Wars. In: SwalwellMWilsonJ (eds) The Pleasures of Computer Gaming: Essays on Cultural History, Theory and Aesthetics. Jefferson: McFarland, pp. 13–32.
20.
GoslingVKCrawfordG (2011) Game scenes: theorizing digital game audiences. Games and Culture6(2): 135–154.
21.
GlaserB (1982) The threat of stranger: vulnerability, reciprocity and fieldwork. In: SieberJ (ed) Ethics of Social Research: Fieldwork, Regulation and Publication. New York: Random House, pp. 49–70.
22.
Haig-BrownC (1992) Choosing border work. Canadian Journal of Native Education19(1): 96–116.
23.
HarawayD (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies14(3): 575–599.
24.
HarperT (2014) The Culture of Digital Fighting Games: Performance and Practice. New York: Routledge.
HarrisonJMacGibbonLMortonM (2001) Regimes of trustworthiness in qualitative research: the rigors of reciprocity. Qualitative Inquiry7(3): 323–345.
27.
HutchinsB (2008) Signs of meta-change in second modernity: the growth of e-sport and the world cyber games. New Media & Society10(6): 851–869.
28.
JinDY (2010) Korea’s Online Gaming Empire. Cambridge: MIT Press.
29.
KaneM (2008) Game Boys: Professional Videogaming’s Rise from the Basement to the Big Time. New York: Viking.
30.
KnoblauchHSchnettlerBRaabJ (2006) Video analysis: methodological perspectives of interpretive audiovisual analysis in social research. In: KnoblauchHSchnettlerBRaabJSoeffnerH-G (eds) Video Analysis: Methodology and Methods. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 9–26.
31.
LandsbergerHA (1958) Hawthorne Revisited. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
32.
LatherP (1986) Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review56: 257–277.
33.
LatourB (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
LaurierEPhiloC (2006) Natural problems of naturalistic video data. In: KnoblauchHSchnettlerBRaabJSoeffnerH-G (eds) Video Analysis: Methodology and Methods. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 183–192.
35.
LinHSunC-T (2011) The role of onlookers in arcade gaming: Frame analysis of public behaviors. Convergence17(2): 125–137.
36.
MarteyRMConsalvoM (2011) Performing the looking-glass self: Avatar appearance and group identity in Second Life. Popular Communication: The International Journal of Media and Culture9(3): 165–180.
37.
MaxwellJ (2013) Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
38.
McCormickR (2013) ‘League of Legends’ eSports finals watched by 32 million people. The Verge, 19 November.
39.
NewmanJ (2008) Playing with Videogames. London: Routledge.
40.
OakleyA (1981) Interviewing women: a contradiction in terms. In: RobertsH (ed) Doing Feminist Research. London: Routledge, pp. 30–61.
41.
PearceCArtemesia (2009) Communities of Play: Emergent Cultures in Multiplayer Games and Virtual Worlds. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
42.
PinkS (2006) Doing Visual Ethnography: Images, Media, and Representation in Research. London: Sage Publishing.
43.
RamirezDSaucermanJDietmeierJ (2014) Twitch plays pokémon: a case study in big G games. In: Proceedings of DiGRA 2014, 3–6August, Snowbird, UT.
44.
RomanL (1993) Double exposure: The politics of feminist material ethnography. Educational Theory43(3): 279–308.
45.
ShrumWDuqueRBrownT (2005) Digital video as research practice: methodology for the millennium. Journal of Research Practice1(1): 1–19.
46.
SmithDE (2005) Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People. Toronto: Altamira Press.
47.
SmithTObristMWrightP (2013) Live-streaming changes the (video) game. In: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Interactive TV and Video, Como, Italy, 24–26 June. New York: ACM.
48.
StaceyJ (1988) Can there be a feminist ethnography?Women’s Studies International Forum11(1): 21–27.
49.
StarSLGreisemerJR (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Musem of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science19(3): 387–420.
50.
SteinkuehlerCDuncanS (2008) Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and Technology17(6): 530–543.
51.
SündenJ (2009) Play as transgression: an ethnographic approach to queer game cultures. In: Proceedings of DiGRA 2009. 1–4September, London, UK.
52.
SwalwellM (2011) ‘More than a craze’: photographs of New Zealand’s early digital games scene. In: Proceedings of DiGRA 2011. 14–17 September 2011, Utrecht, NL.
TaylorN (2011) Play globally, act locally: the standardization of pro Halo 3 gaming. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology3(1): 228–242.
55.
TaylorTL (2006a) Play Between Worlds: Exploring Online Game Culture. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
56.
TaylorTL (2006b) Does WoW change everything? How a PvP server, multinational player base, and surveillance mod scene caused me pause. Games and Culture1(4): 318–337.
57.
TaylorTL (2012) Raising the Stakes: The Professionalization of Computer Gaming. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
58.
ThorneB (1997) Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
59.
VisweswaranK (1994) Fictions of Feminist Ethnography. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
60.
WakefordN (1999) Gender and the landscapes of computing in an Internet café. In: CrangMCrangPMayJ (eds) Virtual Geographies: Bodies, Space and Relations. New York: Routledge, pp. 178–202.
61.
WaxHR (1952) Field methods and techniques: reciprocity as field technique. Human Organization11(3): 34–37.
62.
WeemsL (2006) Unsettling politics, locating ethics: representations of reciprocity in postpositivist inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry12(5): 994–1011.
63.
WitkowskiE (2012) On the digital playing field: how we ‘do sport’ with networked computer games. Games and Culture7(5): 349–374.
64.
YeeNDucheneautNNelsonL. (2011) Introverted elves and conscientious gnomes: The expression of personality in World of Warcraft. In: Proceedings of CHI2011, Vancouver, Canada, 7–11 May. New York: ACM.
