l33tsp33k: How Gamers Speak with Impenetrable Efficiency

A qualitative case study of student game play is presented that describes how game player communication becomes increasingly complex, efficient, and impenetrable by those who have not actively played the game. Transcripts of gathered video tape reveal how student ‘gamer talk' became increasingly implicit, using terminology provided by the game and their shared context of playing the game. Over time, communication among game player group members generally became more efficient and less penetrable by members outside the group (such as new players), as players engaged in culture-building activities around their shared context. However, players occasionally became more explicit in their communication when grounding was required to reach shared meaning, such as in instances where players disagreed on the purpose of a particular game feature or strategy. Finally, implications are offered to suggest ways in which gamer cultures can be made more accessible to game designers and those guiding classroom interactions.

[1]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning Processes , 2003 .

[2]  A. Collins,et al.  Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning , 1989 .

[3]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  An Empirical Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning. , 2003 .

[4]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Interaction Analysis: Foundations and Practice , 1995 .

[5]  Andrew F. Monk,et al.  Common Ground in Electronically Mediated Communication: Clark's Theory of Language Use , 2003 .

[6]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Video Game Representations as Cues for Collaboration and Learning , 2009, Int. J. Gaming Comput. Mediat. Simulations.

[7]  Alessandro Duranti,et al.  Transcripts, Like Shadows on a Wall , 2006 .

[8]  Douglas Thomas,et al.  The Play of Imagination , 2007, Games Cult..

[9]  N. Sadat Shami,et al.  Synchronous interaction among hundreds: an evaluation of a conference in an avatar-based virtual environment , 2011, CHI.

[10]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[11]  Nick Yee,et al.  Changing the Rules: Social Architectures in Virtual Worlds , 2010, Online Worlds: Convergence of the Real and the Virtual.

[12]  T. Levine,et al.  Tests of a Theory of Communicative Responsibility , 2005 .

[13]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Empirical Studies of the Value of Conceptually Explicit Notations in Collaborative Learning , 2008 .

[14]  Markku Eskelinen,et al.  Towards computer game studies , 2001, Digit. Creativity.

[15]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  The effects of intended audience on message production and comprehension: Reference in a common ground framework , 1989 .

[16]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Towards a Systematic Study of Representational Guidance for Collaborative Learing Discourse , 2001, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Understanding friends and strangers: The effects of audience design on message comprehension , 1989 .

[18]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Coordination of knowledge in communication: Effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know. , 1992 .

[19]  Melinda S. Jensen,et al.  When Three Heads Are Better Than Two , 2006 .

[20]  Robert J. Moore,et al.  Gaining more than experience points: Learning social behavior in multiplayer computer games , 2004 .

[21]  Matthew J. Sharritt Evaluating Video Game Design and Interactivity , 2010 .

[22]  Robert J. Moore,et al.  Doing Virtually Nothing: Awareness and Accountability in Massively Multiplayer Online Worlds , 2007, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[23]  Matthew J. Sharritt,et al.  Game-based representations as cues for collaboration and learning. , 2011 .