THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AVATAR’S CAPI- TAL AND PLAYER’S GAMING ORIENTATION: A STUDY IN FINAL FANTASY XIV Henry Korkeila University of Tampere Faculty of Communication Sciences Information Studies and Interactive Media Master’s Thesis May 2017 UNIVERSITY OF TAMPERE, Faculty of Communication Sciences Information Studies and Interactive Media KORKEILA, HENRY: The Relationship Between Avatar’s Capital and Player’s Orien- tation: A Study in Final Fantasy XIV Master’s Thesis, 80 pages, 8 appendix pages May 2017 The world’s digitalization has changed our lives in numerous ways. Digitalization has changed how people consume entertainment and video games are just one example of this. Persistent online game worlds where a massive number of players can interact with each other around the clock were non-existent two decades ago. Player studies is still in its infancy, because it is not fully understood yet what kind of lives the players have in these online virtual worlds. One way to look at the lives of the players is to examine the types of capitals they have. The players of video games do have, in fact, multiple types of capitals at their disposal in the digital game worlds. In this study, the capitals are re- ferred to as resources available to an avatar in various forms. However, what kind of players have which types of capitals are still largely unexplored. This study attempts to find an answer to that problematic issue. This study investigates the relationship between avatar's capitals and player’s gaming ori- entation. This study employs Bourdieu's theory of capitals (Social, Economic, Cultural and Symbolic) and Yee's Motivations for Play in Online Games scale to investigate the relationship between avatar's capitals and player’s gaming orientation via an online sur- vey (n = 905). Aimed at players of a Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game, Final Fantasy XIV. The results show that player orientation is associated with avatar's available capital. Cul- tural capital was predicted by player’s gaming orientation related to immersion, game mechanics and socializing with other players. Economic capital was predicted by player orientation related to achievement, relationships with other players and teamwork. Social capital was predicted by player orientation related to social and escapism. Symbolic cap- ital was predicted by player orientation related to achievement, relationship and team- work. More research is needed to form a more holistic understanding of avatar's capitals by focusing on different MMORPGs, genres and platforms. Keyterms: Capital, Video Games, MMORPG, Player Types, Final Fantasy XIV Preface The process of writing this thesis has not been easy by any means. Coming from a family with little to no academic education and with a bachelor’s degree from Tampere Univer- sity of Applied Sciences, the learning curve has been steep and harsh. Prior to my studies at the University of Tampere, I had no idea how to write thoughtfully, critically and aca- demically correct. During these two years, I have tried to always perform a bit better every day so that this thesis could stand proudly amongst other academic publications. There is still much to learn and I am eagerly looking forward to doing just that, learn. I would like to thank my ever-patient mentor, Juho Hamari, for answering my questions and thoughts in a diligent and dedicated manner, sometimes after midnight. Juho’s guid- ance has been exemplary and I feel I have learned more about academia and the writing process from him than other classes and courses combined. Whereas courses revolve around singular themes, writing thesis spans across courses and has demanded me to think about writing in ways that never were talked in those courses. Fortunately, Juho’s com- mentary has been directly to the point with perfect argumentation that allowed me to un- derstand why something should be written in a different narrative and so on. Thank you, Juho. Lastly, I want to thank my partner for patiently listening to my rambles and babbles about the thesis and topics related to that. It must have been confusing to hear thirty minutes of me thinking aloud how should I approach certain topics present in the thesis regarding topics you have not accustomed to and read about. Thank you for making me explain very basic definitions and terms to you, so that I can understand them better by asking me more “why?”-questions than I have ever heard in my life. Thank you, Jenni. Tampere, 13.05.2017. Henry Korkeila Contents 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................. 1 2 THEORY .............................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Capital ........................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Capital and Video Games .............................................................................. 7 2.2.1 Social Capital ................................................................................. 9 2.2.2 Economic Capital ......................................................................... 12 2.2.3 Cultural Capital ............................................................................ 16 2.2.4 Symbolic Capital .......................................................................... 19 2.3 Player Orientations and Motivations ............................................................ 21 2.4 Combining Player Orientations and Capitals ................................................ 26 2.4.1 Achievement ................................................................................ 27 2.4.2 Immersion .................................................................................... 30 2.4.3 Social ........................................................................................... 34 3 RESEARCH METHODS .................................................................................... 37 3.1 Game ........................................................................................................... 37 3.2 Measurement ............................................................................................... 38 3.3 Participants .................................................................................................. 39 3.4 Analysis Methods ........................................................................................ 41 3.5 Validity and Reliability ................................................................................ 42 3.6 Omitted items .............................................................................................. 45 4 RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 49 5 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 52 5.1 Cultural Capital ........................................................................................... 52 5.2 Economic capital ......................................................................................... 55 5.3 Social capital ............................................................................................... 58 5.4 Symbolic capital .......................................................................................... 60 6 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................. 63 6.1 Implications ................................................................................................. 63 6.2 Limitations .................................................................................................. 65 6.3 Future .......................................................................................................... 67 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 70 LUDOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................... 80 APPENDIX ................................................................................................................ 81 1 INTRODUCTION Video games are becoming increasingly popular and so does the attention video games attract in multiple aspects, such as society around and inside the games. Being a gamer in the contemporary society still bears a somewhat negative stigma, but less so when com- pared to ten, twenty or even thirty years ago. Being a gamer is becoming increasingly acceptable in everyday society because video games reach wider audiences (see, e.g. Mäyrä, Karvinen and Ermi 2016, 2-3). That leads to questions about players’ identities in and around games. Players have multiple alter egos and they are identified differently in games and they might differ from the person that is behind the character and how he behaves in games from other alter egos the player has. Players and their avatars are living another (social) life in games; games that are outside the scope of what is understood to comprise our daily realities. Therefore, games and the players’ lives in them originate a new research fields in sociology and psychology. The constant rising popularity of MMORPGS in the last fifteen years has attracted mas- sive attention in the forms of numerous research articles and other academic publications. Most studies related to MMORPGs have focused on World of Warcraft (WoW) by Bliz- zard Entertainment (2004), and