Glhf.

My boyfriend needed a girlfriend long before he met me. He represents a common stereotype of “gamers” who find themselves particularly attracted to one game that consumes their life. The game of his choice is League of Legends, a MOBA (Multiplayer Online Battle Arena), a subgenre of the larger RTS category (Real Time Strategy), played on a computer. Although he might explain it differently, the game is essentially digital capture the flag, with teams of 5 players each starting on opposite ends of a map (see Fig 1) and fighting to gain control of something on the opposing team’s side.  There are several strategic ways to do so, but ultimately the game is won when one team destroys the other’s “Nexus.” The Nexus is kind of like a hub, it’s the flag you want to capture. League of Legends fans can also feed their addiction interest with other out of game convergence points like fan art and the World Championships. Critics of video games might assert that gaming limits social interaction, but the world League of Legends embraces raises some surprisingly complex questions about how much social interaction is really going on, and how those virtual connections effect in-game representation and out-of-game equality. Although League of Legends might be a fun past time for some, problems arise when equalities and inequalities are considered. On the surface, every player is supposed to start each game as equal, but in reality, the inequalities founded in money, experience, and even race or gender, begin long before the player starts the game.

Gaming in itself is inherently interactive. Where Nayar might point to a voting process in a television show as an example of interactivity, all games are interactive in that every player controls the outcome of the game depending on his or her actions. The levels of interactivity vary, though; based on the actions a player chooses to take within the game. There is a small amount of what Nayar calls “interactive storytelling” to League of Legends though. Each champion has something called “Lore” or a background story, which sometimes converges with other character’s Lore. For example, one character “doesn’t get along” particularly well with another champion because his Lore dictates that a bear killed his wife. That character has some kind of attack bonus against bear-like champions then. This is an example of an “easter egg” interaction, which players can capitalize on but whose effects are almost negligible. The term “easter egg” doesn’t come specifically from League of Legends, it’s a term that pops up in many gaming worlds. Another humorous “easter egg” is a champion named Cougar who gives “XP” or “Experience Points” to players in the surrounding area…. Because she’s a cougar. Players are aware of the easter egg interactions, and can use them to small advantages, but for the most part keep the game setup on an equal playing field. The only difference easter egg interactions might make are to a player who is particularly well-read in the Lore. To him, finding an easter egg might make the game more enjoyable for him, because he also enjoys the backstory of each of the champions.

Another small form of interactivity that seems important to gamers but only highlights the beginning of a trend of monetary inequality is the customization of skins. The different skins that are available for each champion do not impact game play at all, but do exemplify what Nayar calls consumer cultures. The ability to customize—to distinguish yourself during gameplay—is something that Riot sells to its members. The exchange that takes place is called a macrotransaction in the gaming world. Sums of money, up to $100 an exchange would purchase, in League of Legends, “Riot points” which can be exchanged for skins. While skins don’t effect in-game performance at all, they are available exclusively to those who have the means to pay for them. Since customization is so important to members of the gaming community, the act of setting apart separate skins for a wealthier group of people contributes to the first in a trend of inequality amongst gamers.

The champions players use pose an interesting sociocultural concern, in both the game’s portrayal of minorities and women. Of the 115 characters available to play from, only one, “Lucian,” is black, and with the exception of some stereotypical and optional Asian skins, no champions are any other minority. The lack of minorities isn’t necessarily racist, but it is a glaring hole in game equality, especially for players who view champions as avatars or extensions of themselves. For anyone playing League of Legends who is a racial minority, there are next to no options for this virtual extension. Women are also characterized in incredibly objectified ways. Not a single female character that isn’t meant to be below the age of twelve is fully clothed, and all are especially well endowed. The fact that not a single woman is portrayed in a realistic light is both sexist and marginalizing for female players who want to access League of Legends. Riot is furthering the sociocultural inequity by only marketing its game to what are likely boys not from minority backgrounds. All other players are inclined to feel marginalized, whether through lack of representation for their race or through a false and sexist exaggeration of her gender.

The second area where inequities and sociocultural concerns appear for fans of League of Legends is inside the game space, in a few key convergence points. The first convergence point that players have access to is the most obvious “in-game interaction.” In game interaction with other players can come in three basic forms: real life friends, nonverbal interactions or commands, and in game discussions. The first, real life friends, allows the player to choose his teammates off of a list of friends he has entered into the game. Groups of friends can make up large parts of teams, and coordinating plans beforehand is a strategic option that is open to you. The amount of friends a player has and their individual ranks can greatly determine game outcomes, which leads to an inequality. While each player is supposed to start out essentially equal to everyone else, those players who have a) friends with computers and b) greater numbers of friends are already seriously advantaged if every member of the team is in the loop. Although the game attempts to pair large groups of friends with each other, if the game is even four friends and one “rando” versus a group of five, the five starts out on the upper hand immediately because of their ability to coordinate strategy. There is some in-game communication allowed (which will be addressed in “in-game discussions”), but gamers with real-life friends will often cross interfaces and “Skype” call their teammates during games for faster mobilization.

Nonverbal interactions, or commands are a small type of in-game interaction that attempt to equalize the divide between groups of friends and groups of “randos.” Commands are given on the keyboard and mark requests from teammates, like “assist me” or information like, “On my way,” “Enemy missing,” or “Danger.” Because only your team can see those requests, but every member of the team can see it, the gap between groups of friends and the so-called randos is somewhat breached. It is Riot’s attempt to make the game more open to people whose friends have no access to gaming, but it is a weak one. There are no given reasons for requests, like “there’s an ambush over here by players x, y, and z” and the time required for the message to send is much less effective than verbal communication.

In-game discussions encompass arguably the largest range of communication available to League of Legends players, but it also can cause the most problems. Players can type text that both teams can see into a box on the screen. Tradition dictates that players type “glhf” or “good luck have fun” before each game and “gg” or “good game” immediately after the game is ended. Tradition, however, ends there. Discussions can range from strategy, to useless chatter to angry venting by a losing member. While the game has an option to block basic swear words from appearing on your screen, things like racist or sexist slurs can still occur in the game. The in-game communication isn’t actually necessary to game play, at least not cross team communication. There is just a tradition in the gaming world to have the option to meet with and interact with the people you are virtually interacting with. Still, the problem remains. Riot’s solution is either smart or lazy, but “the Tribunal” is a big step toward leveling the sociocultural problems that can occur within in-game contact.

The Tribunal begins the list of out-of-game interactions available to players, and is Riot’s (the game developer) biggest push toward maintaining a neutral socio-cultural stance in game interactions. Players can report racist or sexist comments or actions to the tribunal (evidence is usually in the form of a screen shot) and members of the community vote on whether or not to ban the offending gamer. The Tribunal increases access and equality for all players because gamers understand that being offensive in some way will result in severe consequences. It is not, however, Riot determining who gets punished. The members decide what is acceptable to say and what isn’t, which is a true step toward digital equality. The tribunal is most like the “global village” that all you need is a computer, a username and password to join.

Another out-of-game interaction that players can access is the World Championships. The competition, which takes place from September to October, is available on several interfaces. At the most basic level, players can access a live stream of the game, including game footage, player stats, and live commentary. The next option of participation is attending the actual championships in Los Angeles. Fans can buy tickets and watch the game on a screen behind a block of ten gamers. Some even choose to dress up as their favorite “champions.”  Nayar would say that these fans are accessing a level of interactivity, because even though they can’t influence the outcome of the game, they are accessing the champions’ identities as presented in the storyline and crossing interfaces with them. Nayar might also say that this second level of access is less equal than the first, because only those with the means and the money to get to Los Angeles get to enjoy the increased benefits of “closeness” to great players and Riot developers. The third, most coveted, and least equal level to the World Championships is the rank of player. Players are selected based on their performances in “ranked games.” You must rise through the ranks, (i.e. Bronze, Silver, Platinum, Diamond) to the highest rank “Challenger” in order to even be considered for a team. Even though team sponsorship takes care of the flight to LA and matching jackets, players from a higher socio-economic background start out in an advantaged position. The time required to get to such a level is a massive opportunity cost for someone who might otherwise use that time to get a job or stay in school. Some players at that level actually drop out of school to practice, which is something that anyone without some kind of outside means can’t do. The level of advantage one needs to start out at to achieve the rank of player seriously limits equality for anyone less advantaged that might want to become a professional player.

 A third convergence point for League of Legends players takes place in the forums. Players can discuss games, game plots, and even post fan art of their favorite champions. Riot encourages fan art (see Fig. 3) as a point of interactivity through contests on the forum. Fans can’t control the lives of players but fan art can serve as an expression of individuality in ways that skins for champions can’t. Artists can choose to follow the narrative paths set by Riot in the Lore, or they can branch out into realms of plot for their art.

League of Legends is theoretically designed so that every player starts off on equal footing for each 40-minute game, and nothing but in-game prowess help. Out of the game, things are also supposed to be equal, from the “tribunal” to the World Championships streamed live for the world to see. Careful examination, however, reveals systematic places for inequalities to occur on every step in the gaming world. Champions are limited to either majority images of men or scantily clad women. The World Championships are most accessible to those who can afford the massive opportunity cost of giving up your life for a video game. In-game discussions can take a turn for the worse when prejudiced gamers voice their opinions. Even the seemingly helpful tribunal is only dictated by other gamers, people with their own biases, rather than a hopefully neutral Riot. While League of Legends may contain more convergence points for gamers to socialize than other games, the inequalities that lie at those points cannot be ignored anymore.

gg.