The bodily presence in location-based mobile games. Part 1
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22394/2074-0492-2017-3-163-196Keywords:
presence, body, corporeality, mobile devices, location-based mobile games, Ingress the Game, Pokémon Go, augmented reality, public interactionsAbstract
The paper examines the transformation of bodily experience in location-based mobile games. Through the concept of presence, we consider the player's experience of place and relations with others. The concept of presence is quite ambiguous in different theoretical approaches. The Goffmani-an analysis of public behavior uses alternately both meanings of presence: presence as a physical location and presence as a level of involvement in what is happening. We rely on empirical data including interviews with players of Ingress the Game and Pokémon Go (10 interviews), video recordings of five gaming episodes (244 minutes) and players' comments about gaming experience (2 comments). We managed to find out that in spite of considerable enthusiasm for mobile devices, players spend a significant share of the game process in order to observe public decorum of co-presence with other passers-by. To achieve this goal, players have to demonstrate the reserves of involvement, switching attention from time to time from the phone to others, or to hide the fact of the game, disguising it for other activities, or to play together. Thus, players are constantly engaged in repairing their presence in a situation, the violations of which are connected with the loss of the proper degree of involvement in what is happening here and now.Downloads
References
Баньковская С.П. (2016) Видеосоциология: теоретические и методологические основания. Социологическое обозрение, 15 (2): 129-166
Гоффман Э. (2017) Поведение в публичных местах: заметки о социальной организации сборищ, М.: Элементарные формы.
Дуглас М. (2000) Чистота и опасность: анализ представлений об осквернении и табу, М.: Канон-Пресс-Ц.
Зиммель Г. (2000) Социология чувств: запахи. Из «Экскурса о социологии чувств». Новое литературное обозрение, 3 (43): 6.
Корбут А.М. (2012) Видео социо. Социологическое обозрение, 11 (2): 154-163.
Мосс М. (1996) Техники тела. Общества. Обмен. Личность, М.: Восточная литература: 242-264.
Arminen I., Licoppe C., Spagnolli A. (2016) Respecifying Mediated Interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49 (4): 1-20.
Baerg A. (2007) Fight Night Round 2: Mediating the Body and Digital Boxing. Sociology of Sport Journal, 24 (3): 325-345.
Boler M. (2007) Hypes, hopes and actualities: new digital Cartesianism and bodies in cyberspace. New Media & Society, 9 (1): 139-168.
Brown E., Cairns P. (2004) A grounded investigation of game immersion. CHI '04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vienna: ACM Press: 1297-1300.
Buchanan I. (1997) The Problem of the Body in Deleuze and Guattari, Or, What Can a Body Do? Body & Society, 3 (3): 73-91.
Bourdieu P. (1984) Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard university press.
Calleja G. (2011) In-game: from immersion to incorporation, Cambridge: The MIT Press. Cartwright L. (2012) Empathography I: Empathy in art. Empathography, Vienna: Löcker Verlag: 147-153.
Drako (2016) Nex Band -браслет для игры Ingress. Tehnot. (http://tehnot.com/nex-band-braslet-dlya-igry-ingress)
Goffman E. (1961) Encounters: Two Studies in the Sociology of Interaction, Ringwood: Penguin University Books.
Goodwin C. (2000) Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32 (10): 1489-1522.
Hatuka T., Toch E. (2014) The emergence of portable private-personal territory: Smartphones, social conduct and public spaces. Urban Studies, 53 (10): 2192-2208.
Heath C., Hindmarsh J.O.N., Luff P. (2010) Video in Qualitative Research: Analysing Social Interaction in Everyday Life, London: Sage.
Hindmarsh J., Heath C., Fraser M. (2006) (Im)materiality, virtual reality and interaction: Grounding the "virtual" in studies of technology in action. The Sociological Review, 54 (4): 795-817.
Humphreys L. (2017) Involvement shield or social catalyst: Thoughts on sociospatial practice of Pokémon GO. Mobile Media & Communication, 5 (1): 15-19.
Licoppe C. (2009) Recognizing mutual "proximity" at a distance: Weaving together mobility, sociality and technology. Journal of Pragmatics, 41 (10): 1924-1937.
Licoppe C. (2016) Mobilities and Urban Encounters in Public Places in the Age of Locative Media. Seams, Folds, and Encounters with 'Pseudonymous Strangers'. Mobilities, 11 (1): 99-116
Lynch M. (2002) From naturally occurring data to naturally organized ordinary activities: comment on Speer. Discourse Studies, 4 (4): 531-537.
Ohlheiser A. (2016) What happens when Pokémon GO turns your home into a gym. Washington Post.
Peterson A. (2016) Holocaust Museum to visitors: Please stop catching Pokémon here. Washington Post.
Pink S. et all. (2015) Tactile digital ethnography: Researching mobile media through the hand. Mobile Media & Communication, 4 (2): 1-15.
Rettberg J.W. (2014) Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Schegloff E.A. (1979) Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology, New York: Irvington: 23-78.
Souza e Silva A. de. (2017) Pokémon Go as an HRG: Mobility, sociability, and surveillance in hybrid spaces. Mobile Media & Communication, 5 (1): 20-23.
Varga I. (2005) The Body -The New Sacred? The Body in Hypermodernity. Current Sociology, 53 (2): 209-235.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
Коды статьи
- EDN YTPUKJ
- Тип статьи (РИНЦ) Научная статья (Научная статья)