Literature Review
To kick us off, we started reading existing research work. Our literature review delved into various dimensions of toxic behaviors within gaming communities, drawing insights from multiple studies. We explored cultural influences and offline environments to understand their correlation with toxic behavior in multiplayer online games. Insights from studies on coping mechanisms, reporting behavior, and the impact of social ambiguity contributed to a nuanced understanding of toxicity dynamics. The synthesis of these diverse studies provided a comprehensive understanding of toxic behaviors in gaming, shedding light on triggers, manifestations, and potential interventions within the complex dynamics of gaming communities.
Previous Industry Efforts
We wanted to know how other games have implemented measures that would help promote positive behavior in game sessions while preventing toxic behaviors. During our research we came across DOTA 2. In addressing the widespread issue of toxic behaviors, DOTA 2 implemented a feature that modifies players' influence within the game based on their behavior and communication scores. These scores are consistently assessed during gameplay, offering insights into a player's conduct and interactions. Players with lower behavior and communication scores encounter limitations on certain in-game features. This deliberate restriction acts as a consequence, intended to motivate players to maintain higher standards of behavior and communication.
Screenshot of the behavior summary in DOTA 2. (Source) Studying the purpose and functioning of this feature, we concluded that:
- While a positive step, the initiative could enhance its approach by actively promoting positive behavior, incorporating in-game rewards or recognition for sportsmanship and cooperation, instead of solely relying on punitive measures.
- It's essential to weigh the impact of consequences on player satisfaction, as the act of removing features may lead to dissatisfaction and, in turn, contribute to more toxic behaviors. Striking a balance between consequences and maintaining an enjoyable gaming experience is crucial.
Focus Groups
During our focus group session, we engaged with six League of Legends players, each offering unique metaphors that often resonated with similar sentiments regarding key concepts. These concepts encompassed their strategies for dealing with in-game toxicity, personal roles within toxic scenarios, methods of regulation, and the reasons behind their choice to play or enjoy League of Legends. The participants demonstrated a thoughtful approach in selecting metaphors, skillfully connecting them to overarching themes, and provided well-reasoned explanations for their choices. The explored concepts included "Reporting," "Game Toxicity," "Losing LP (ranking)," "How I feel when my teammate isn’t pulling their weight," and "Communication with Team." Here are some of our findings:
- League of Legends dynamics, team-based nature, and frequent updates create an environment conducive to toxicity.
- Muting and reporting are prevalent methods to combat toxicity, with skepticism about their effectiveness.
- Despite encountering toxicity, participants continue playing due to the positive aspects of community, collaboration, and entertainment.
Expert Interviews
To gain deeper insights from our research findings, we conducted semi-structured interviews with renowned experts specializing in gaming, game design, and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI). The panel of experts encompassed individuals with extensive knowledge and experience in these domains. The interviewees comprised:
- Ravi Kawade (Professional DOTA 2 Player)
- Erik Harpstead (System Scientist at Carnegie Mellon’s HCII)
- Julian Frommel (HCI & Games Researcher at Utrecht University)
- Elaine Fath (Lead Game Designer at the Center for Transformational Play at Carnegie Mellon)
Interview session with Ravi Kawade.
