This study conceptualizes a form of gamer activism termed “game-world violation” by investigating the Shining Nikki players’ collective mobilization against a collaboration with an idol to perform the game’s anniversary song. Using quantitative and qualitative analysis of social media posts and interviews, we show how players’ attachment to the game’s protagonist and a sense of ownership over the co-created symbolic world of the game enabled collective mobilization. By using interactional framing analysis, we document the emergence of three distinct mobilization frames to elucidate the process of player mobilization. As a result, players’ mobilization succeeded in forcing Papergames to abandon the collaboration, demonstrating how symbolic violations can underpin contention despite structural power asymmetries. Our findings highlight how the co-created symbolic world of a game can become a site of contention when game producers unilaterally alter the symbolic universe of a game.
AlhaKKinnunenJKoskinenE, et al. (2018) Free-to-play games: Paying players’ perspective. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international academic Mindtrek conference, Tampere, 10–11 October, pp.49–58. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
BurgessJJonesCM (2017) “Is it too much to ask that we’re allowed to win the game?” Character attachment and agency in the Mass Effect 3 ending controversy. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society37(3): 146–158.
6.
Cardona-RiveraRRobertsonJWareS, et al. (2014) Foreseeing meaningful choices. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment10(1): 9–15.
7.
ChewMM (2022) The significance and complexities of anti-corporate gamer activism: Struggles against the exploitation and control of game-worlds in 2000s China. Games and Culture17(4): 487–508.
8.
ColemanSDyer-WithefordN (2007) Playing on the digital commons: Collectivities, capital and contestation in videogame culture. Media, Culture & Society29(6): 934–953.
9.
CuiYCheWLiuT, et al. (2019) Pre-training with Whole Word Masking for Chinese BERT (arXiv:1906.08101; Version 1). arXiv. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1906.08101.
10.
de CerteauM (1984) The Practice of Everyday Life. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
11.
DevlinJChangM-WLeeK, et al. (2019) BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding (arXiv:1810.04805). arXiv. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1810.04805.
12.
EmersonRM (1962) Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review27: 31–41.
FendtMWHarrisonBWareSG, et al. (2012) Achieving the illusion of agency. In: OyarzunDPeinadoFYoungRM, et al. (eds) Interactive Storytelling. Cham: Springer, pp.114–125.
15.
FineGA (2002) Shared Fantasy: Role Playing Games as Social Worlds. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
GoffmanE (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
GottschalkS (2010) The presentation of avatars in second life: Self and interaction in social virtual spaces. Symbolic Interaction33(4): 501–525.
18.
GrootendorstM (2022) BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedure(arXiv:2203.05794). arXiv. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.05794.
19.
HarambamJAupersSHoutmanD (2011) Game over? Negotiating modern capitalism in virtual game worlds. European Journal of Cultural Studies14(3): 299–319.
20.
HartS (1996) The cultural dimension of social movements: A theoretical reassessment and literature review. Sociology of Religion57(1): 87–100.
21.
HongSH (2015) When life mattered: The politics of the real in video games’ reappropriation of history, myth, and ritual. Games and Culture10(1): 35–56.
22.
HumphreysS (2008) Ruling the virtual world: Governance in massively multiplayer online games. European Journal of Cultural Studies11(2): 149–171.
23.
JenkinsH (2006) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.
24.
JohnstonHKlandermansB (eds) (1995) Social Movements and Culture. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
25.
JosephDJ (2018) The discourse of digital dispossession: Paid modifications and community crisis on steam. Games and Culture13(7): 690–707.
26.
KhanolkarPRMcLeanPD (2012) 100-percenting it: Videogame play through the eyes of devoted gamers. Sociological Forum27(4): 961–985.
27.
KücklichJR (2009) Virtual worlds and their discontents: Precarious sovereignty, governmentality, and the ideology of play. Games and Culture4(4): 340–352.
28.
McAdamD (2000) Culture and social movements. In: CrothersLLockhartC (eds) Culture and Politics: A Reader. New York: St. Martin’s Press, pp.253–268.
29.
MannM (1970) The social cohesion of liberal democracy. American Sociological Review35(3): 423–439.
30.
MassanariA (2015) #Gamergate and the fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic technocultures. New Media & Society19(3): 329–346.
31.
MertensJ (2022) Broken games and the perpetual update culture: Revising failure with Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed Unity. Games and Culture17(1): 70–88.
32.
NoonanRK (1995) Women against the state: Political opportunities and collective action frames in Chile’s transition to democracy. Sociological Forum10(1): 81–111.
33.
ParkSDenooMGrosemansE, et al. (2023) Learnings from the case of Maple Refugees: A story of loot boxes, probability disclosures, and gamer consumer activism. In: Proceedings of the 26Th International Academic Mindtrek Conference, Tampere, 3–6 October, pp.267–278. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
34.
PearceC (2011) Communities of Play: Emergent Cultures in Multiplayer Games and Virtual Worlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
ReardonDCWrightDMaloneEA (2017) Quest for the happy ending to Mass Effect 3: The challenges of cocreation with consumers in a post-Certeauian age. Technical Communication Quarterly26(1): 42–58.
37.
ReineckeJAnsariS (2021) Microfoundations of framing: The interactional production of collective action frames in the occupy movement. Academy of Management Journal64(2): 378–408.
38.
SachidanandaVKesslerJSLaiY (2021) Efficient domain adaptation of language models via adaptive tokenization (arXiv:2109.07460). arXiv. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2109.07460.
SnowDABenfordRD (1992) Master frames and cycles of protest. In: MorrisADMuellerCM (eds) Frontiers in Social Movement Theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp.133–155.
41.
StokesBWilliamsD (2018) Gamers who protest: Small-group play and social resources for civic action. Games and Culture13(4): 327–348.
VicdanHUlusoyE (2008) Symbolic and experiential consumption of body in virtual worlds: From (dis)embodiment to symembodiment. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research1(2): 1–22.
48.
WaskulDLustM (2004) Role-playing and playing roles: The person, player, and persona in fantasy role-playing. Symbolic Interaction27(3): 333–356.
49.
WilliamsJPW (2009) Community, frame of reference, and boundary: Three sociological concepts and their relevance for virtual worlds research. Qualitative Sociology Review5(2): 3–16.
50.
ZelizerVA (1994) The Social Meaning of Money. New York: Basic Books.
51.
ZendleDMeyerRBallouN (2020) The changing face of desktop video game monetisation: An exploration of exposure to loot boxes, pay to win, and cosmetic microtransactions in the most-played Steam games of 2010-2019. PLOS ONE15(5): e0232780.
