- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago by .
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
So, while not an active WoW player presently, I happened to be browsing my old realm’s forum earlier and noticed an old thread looking for player volunteers. It sounds like an interesting thesis, and I was a bit surprised at the lack of responses in the thread itself(though I maybe shouldn’t have been; those forums have been relatively dead for ages).
Anyway, I was curious. What’s the status of the study? Did it find anything interesting? Did it not pan out? Is it still on-going?
I submitted a number of logs and I’m curious about the status myself. When might we get more information about how it’s progressing, or the results?
The study is done (we were operating on a 3-month grant with hopes of future studies building on our findings). It’s results have been accepted to an international Digital Humanities conference, DH2016, and will not be submitted for publication in journals until following the presentation there.
And we are very grateful to those who participated or spread the word, and look forward to working with those who would like to contribute in the future. As part of that gratitude, we can tell you that the study found what we were looking for and more.
Essentially, we expected to find quantifiable differences such as sentence length and complexity, with very different (social versus tradespeak) types of conversations in roleplay and out of it. The counts as transmedial narrativity, finding elements of storytelling in non-book forms. But what we found also qualifies as narrativity of the most straight-laced sort, literary narrativity.
Among the roleplay we were given, we found emotional give and take, relationship of characters driving action, and world-building that added something to the pixellated world.
Following the conference, we do hope to publish our findings somewhere accessible without a paywall, because we don’t want to ask any more of those whose contributions gave us the data we need to more than confirm what we hoped to find.