Research Article
PDF Zotero Mendeley EndNote BibTex Cite

Potansiyel Bir Karşı-Hegemonya Alanı Oluşturma Aracı Olarak Devasa Çok Oyunculu Çevrimiçi Oyunlar

Year 2021, Volume , Issue 34, 65 - 89, 29.06.2021
https://doi.org/10.16878/gsuilet.957432

Abstract

Devasa çok oyunculu çevrimiçi oyunların (Massively Multiplayer Online Game - MMOG) yeni bir direniş ve karşı-hegemonya alanı oluşturmayı sağlamada etkili olup olmadığını ortaya koymayı amaçlayan bu çalışma, oyunların oyuncuları pasif ve apolitik bireyler haline getirip getirmediğini sorgulamaktadır. Çalışma kapsamında, çevrimiçi oyunların oyuncuları organize olmaya, kendi kültürel pratiklerini geliştirmeye, kendi direniş ve karşı-hegemonya alanlarını yaratmaya teşvik edip etmediği; ayrıca onlara belli bir politik duruş sergileme fırsatı verip vermediği MMOG oynayanlar aracılığıyla analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında 493 oyuncuya çevrimiçi anket uygulanmış, yanıtlarından elde edilen veriler bu dört çerçevede değerlendirilmiştir. Yapılan istatistiksel analizler neticesinde, MMOG oyunların oyuncuları kendi kültürel pratiklerini geliştirmeye (grupla özdeşleşme), oyun grupları içinde kurallar temelinde bir arada var olmaya (oyunla özdeşleşme), kendi aralarında örgütlenmeye (sosyal etkileşim), eleştirel, düşünsel, stratejik tutum ve davranış gösterebilme yetilerini ortaya koymaya, kendi sosyal, kültürel ve siyasal duruşlarını göstermeye teşvik etmeye (oyun ve gerçek dünya arasındaki etkileşim); oyunlarda kurulan sanal topluluklar aracılığıyla aktif özneler olarak yeni bir direniş ve karşı hegemonya yaratmaya yönelik hareketlere dahil olmalarını (çevrimdışı aktivizm) sağlamaya teşvik ettiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bununla birlikte çok oyunculu çevrimiçi oyun oynayan oyuncular, kendi kamusal alanları olarak gördükleri “alana” bir müdahale söz konusu olmadığı sürece herhangi bir faaliyette bulunmazlar. Kendi alanlarına müdahale edilmediği sürece pasif bir durumda olmaları bu noktada, direniş ve karşı hegemonya hareketleri bağlamında zayıflatıcı bir unsur olarak değerlendirilebilir.

References

  • Bakardjieva, M. (2003). “Virtual Togetherness: An Everyday-Life Perspective”, Media, Culture & Society. Cilt: 25, 291-313.
  • Barrett, M. (2004). Marx’tan Foucault’ya İdeoloji.İstanbul: Doruk Yayınları.
  • Bayraktutan, G. (2016). “Toplumsal Hareketleri ve Değişimi Dijital Oyunlar Üzerinden Düşünmek”, Özgürleşmenin Yolları. Der. Erdal Dağtaş, 366-378, Ütopya Yayınevi: Ankara.
  • Bekhtina, V.J. (2002). “Psychological Research of MUD Gamers”, Yayınlanmamış Diploma Tezi. Psychology Department, Moscow State Üniversitesi, Rusya.
  • Bernstein, B. (2003). Class, Codes and Control Volume 1 Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language. Routledge: Londra ve New York.
  • Bevc, T. (2007). “Konstruktion von Politik und Gesellschaft in Computer-spielen?”, Computerspiele und Politik. (içinde), Ed. Tobias Bevc, Cilt 5, 25-55.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On The Theory of Action. Stanford University Press: Stanford, Kaliforniya.
  • Caillois, R. (2001). Man, Play and Games. Çev. Urbana ve Chicago: Meyer Barash, University of Illionis Press.
  • Cassell, J. ve Jenkins, H. (1998). “Chess For Girls?: Feminism and Computer Games”, From Barbie to Mortal Combat: Gender and Computer Games. (içinde) (Ed.) Justine Cassell ve Henry Jenkins, s. 2-45, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Castells, M. (2012). “Ağ Toplumunda İletişim, İktidar ve Karşı-İktidar”, Yeni Medya Üzerine. (içinde) çev. Tülin Sepetci, 14-45, Antalya: Akdeniz Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Chadha, M.; Avila, A. ve Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2012). “Listening In: Building a Profile of Podcast Users and Analyzing Their Political Participation”, Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 9: 388-401.
  • Deuze, M. (2007). Media Work.Polity Press, Digital Media and Society Series: BirleŞik Krallık.
  • Deuze, M. (2006). “Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture”, The Information Society. 22(2): 63-75.
  • Downey, J. ve Fenton, N. (2003). “New Media, Counter Publicity and the Public Sphere”, New Media & Society. 5(2), 185-202.
  • Fleissner, P. ve Romano, V. (2007). Digitale Medien-Neue Möglichkeiten für Demokratie und Partizipation? Trafo: Berlin.
  • Frasca, G. (2003). “Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology”, Video Game Theory Reader.(içinde), M. J. P. Wolf ve B. Peron (Ed.) New York: Routledge, 221- 235.
  • Fromme, J. (2003). “Computer Games As A Part Of Children‟s Culture”, The International Journal of Computer Game Research. Mayıs, Cilt: 3, Sayı: 1.
  • Fuchs, C. (2008). Internet and Society-Social Theory in the Information Age. Routledge: New York.
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H. ve Valenzuela, S. (2010). “Weak Ties, and Civic Engagement The Mediating Path to a Stronger Citizenship: Online and Offline Networks”, Communication Research. XX (X), 1-25.
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H.; Veenstra, A. S.; Vraga, E. K.; Wang, M.; DeShano, C. L.; Perlmutter, D. D.; Shah, D. V. (2007). “Online and Offline Activism: Communication Mediation and Political Messaging Among Blog Readers”, The Annual Convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Bildiri Sunumu. Ağustos 9-12, 2007, Washington, DC.
  • Gramsci, A. (2011). Prison Notebooks Volume 1. Columbia University Press, ABD.
  • Gramsci, A. (2007). Hapishane Defterleri. Belge Yayınları: İstanbul.
  • Habermas, J. (1991). The Structural Transformation of The Public Sphere. MIT Press: Cambridge.
  • Hemminger, E. (2009). The Mergence of Spaces Experiences of Reality in Digital Role-Playing Games.Edition Sigma: Almanya.
  • Huizinga, G. (1980). Homo Ludens: A Study of The Play-Element in Culture. Büyük Britanya: Redwood Burn Ltd. Trowbridge&Esher.
  • Joyce, M. C. (2010). “Introduction: How To Think About Digital Activism?”, Digital Activism Decoded The New Mechanics of Change. Idebate Press: New York & Amsterdam.
  • Klimecki, R. ve Willmott, H. (2011). “Hegemony”, Key Concepts in Critical Management Studies. (içinde) Der. M. Tadajewski, P. Maclaran, E. Parsons, SAGE Publications, 130-134.
  • Küklich,, J. (2007). Online-Rollenspiele als Soziale Experimentierräume”, Computerspiele und Politik. (içinde), Ed. Tobias Bevc, Band 5, 7-23.
  • Laclau, E. ve Mouffe, C. (2008). Hegemonya ve Sosyalist Strateji: Radikal Demokratik Bir Politikaya Doğru. İletişim Yayınları: İstanbul.
  • Mouffe, C. (2000). “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?” Social Research. 66(3): 746-758. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • Papacharissi, Z. (2009). “The Citizen is The Message - Alternative Modes of Civic Engagement”, Journalism and Citizenship New Agendas in Communication. (içinde) Ed. Zizi Papacharissi, 29-42, New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Rushkoff, D. (2003). “Open Source Democracy: How Çevrimiçi Communication Is Changing Offline Politics”, Demos. http://www.demos.co.uk/files/OpenSourceDemocracy.pdf
  • Schindler, F. (1999). “Spielen und Reflektieren Search & Play Plus-eine Datenbank für Computerspiele”, Medien+Merziehung. Nr. 2, Nisan, 85-88.
  • Schudson, M. (1998). The Good Citizen – A History of American Civic Life. Martin Kessler Books, The Free Press: Londra.
  • Shah, D. V.; Cho, J.; Nah, S.; Gotlieb, M. R.; Hwang, H.; Lee, N.; Scholl, R. M. ve McLeod, D. M. (2007). “Campaign Ads, Online Messaging, and Participation: Extending The Communication Mediation Model”, Journal of Communication. 57, 676–703.
  • Smith, A. (2011). “The Internet and Campaign 2010”, Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/oldmedia/Files/Reports/2011/Internet%2 0and%20Campaign%202010.pdf
  • Steinkuhler, C. A. (2004). “Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games”, 6. International Conference on Learning Sciences International Society of Learning Sciences, 1-38, Santa Monica, Kaliforniya.
  • Storey, J. (2009). Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction. Pearson: İngiltere.
  • Utz, S. (2000). “Social Information Processing in MUDs: The Development of Friendships in Virtual Worlds”, Journal of Online Behavior. 1(1).
  • Van Looy, J.; Courtois, C. ve De Vocht, M. (2010). “Player Identification in Online Games: Validation of a Scale for Measuring Identification in MMORPGs”, Fun and Games. Eylül 20115-17, 126-134.
  • Yee, N. (2006). “The Demographics, Motivations and Derived Experiences of Users of Massively-Multiuser Online Graphical Environments”, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.15, 309-329.

Jeux en ligne massivement multijoueur comme moyen potentiel de construction de sphères contre-hégémoniques

Year 2021, Volume , Issue 34, 65 - 89, 29.06.2021
https://doi.org/10.16878/gsuilet.957432

Abstract

Cette étude, qui vise à révéler si les jeux en ligne massivement multijoueur sont efficaces pour créer un nouveau champ de résistance et de contre-hégémonie, questionne si les jeux rendent les joueurs des individus passifs et apolitiques. L’étude fait recours aux joueurs eux-mêmes afin de savoir si les jeux en ligne les encouragent à s'organiser, à développer leurs propres pratiques culturelles, à créer leurs propres champs de résistance et de contre-hégémonie ; s’ils leur donnent la possibilité de prendre une position politique. Pour ce faire, une enquête en ligne est menée avec la participation de 493 personnes et les données obtenues ont été évaluées selon ces quatre titres susmentionnés. À la suite des analyses statistiques, il a été conclu que les jeux en ligne massivement multijoueur encouragent les joueurs à développer leurs propres pratiques culturelles (identification avec le groupe) ; à coexister au sein des groupes de jeu sur la base des règles (identification avec le jeu) ; à s’organiser entre eux (interaction sociale) ; à montrer leurs attitudes et comportements critiques, intellectuels et stratégiques ; à montrer leurs prises de position sociale, culturelle et politique (interaction entre le jeu et le monde réel) ; à s'impliquer dans des mouvements visant à créer une nouvelle résistance et une contre-hégémonie (activisme hors ligne) à travers des communautés virtuelles établies dans les jeux, en tant que des sujets actifs. Cependant, les joueurs qui jouent aux jeux en ligne massivement multijoueur ne s'engagent dans aucune activité à moins qu'il y ait une intervention dans « l’espace » qu'ils considèrent comme leur espace public. Le fait qu’ils restent passifs, à moins que leurs espaces ne soient perturbés, peut être considéré comme un facteur d'affaiblissement dans le contexte des mouvements de résistance et de contre-hégémonie.

References

  • Bakardjieva, M. (2003). “Virtual Togetherness: An Everyday-Life Perspective”, Media, Culture & Society. Cilt: 25, 291-313.
  • Barrett, M. (2004). Marx’tan Foucault’ya İdeoloji.İstanbul: Doruk Yayınları.
  • Bayraktutan, G. (2016). “Toplumsal Hareketleri ve Değişimi Dijital Oyunlar Üzerinden Düşünmek”, Özgürleşmenin Yolları. Der. Erdal Dağtaş, 366-378, Ütopya Yayınevi: Ankara.
  • Bekhtina, V.J. (2002). “Psychological Research of MUD Gamers”, Yayınlanmamış Diploma Tezi. Psychology Department, Moscow State Üniversitesi, Rusya.
  • Bernstein, B. (2003). Class, Codes and Control Volume 1 Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language. Routledge: Londra ve New York.
  • Bevc, T. (2007). “Konstruktion von Politik und Gesellschaft in Computer-spielen?”, Computerspiele und Politik. (içinde), Ed. Tobias Bevc, Cilt 5, 25-55.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On The Theory of Action. Stanford University Press: Stanford, Kaliforniya.
  • Caillois, R. (2001). Man, Play and Games. Çev. Urbana ve Chicago: Meyer Barash, University of Illionis Press.
  • Cassell, J. ve Jenkins, H. (1998). “Chess For Girls?: Feminism and Computer Games”, From Barbie to Mortal Combat: Gender and Computer Games. (içinde) (Ed.) Justine Cassell ve Henry Jenkins, s. 2-45, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Castells, M. (2012). “Ağ Toplumunda İletişim, İktidar ve Karşı-İktidar”, Yeni Medya Üzerine. (içinde) çev. Tülin Sepetci, 14-45, Antalya: Akdeniz Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Chadha, M.; Avila, A. ve Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2012). “Listening In: Building a Profile of Podcast Users and Analyzing Their Political Participation”, Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 9: 388-401.
  • Deuze, M. (2007). Media Work.Polity Press, Digital Media and Society Series: BirleŞik Krallık.
  • Deuze, M. (2006). “Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture”, The Information Society. 22(2): 63-75.
  • Downey, J. ve Fenton, N. (2003). “New Media, Counter Publicity and the Public Sphere”, New Media & Society. 5(2), 185-202.
  • Fleissner, P. ve Romano, V. (2007). Digitale Medien-Neue Möglichkeiten für Demokratie und Partizipation? Trafo: Berlin.
  • Frasca, G. (2003). “Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology”, Video Game Theory Reader.(içinde), M. J. P. Wolf ve B. Peron (Ed.) New York: Routledge, 221- 235.
  • Fromme, J. (2003). “Computer Games As A Part Of Children‟s Culture”, The International Journal of Computer Game Research. Mayıs, Cilt: 3, Sayı: 1.
  • Fuchs, C. (2008). Internet and Society-Social Theory in the Information Age. Routledge: New York.
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H. ve Valenzuela, S. (2010). “Weak Ties, and Civic Engagement The Mediating Path to a Stronger Citizenship: Online and Offline Networks”, Communication Research. XX (X), 1-25.
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H.; Veenstra, A. S.; Vraga, E. K.; Wang, M.; DeShano, C. L.; Perlmutter, D. D.; Shah, D. V. (2007). “Online and Offline Activism: Communication Mediation and Political Messaging Among Blog Readers”, The Annual Convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Bildiri Sunumu. Ağustos 9-12, 2007, Washington, DC.
  • Gramsci, A. (2011). Prison Notebooks Volume 1. Columbia University Press, ABD.
  • Gramsci, A. (2007). Hapishane Defterleri. Belge Yayınları: İstanbul.
  • Habermas, J. (1991). The Structural Transformation of The Public Sphere. MIT Press: Cambridge.
  • Hemminger, E. (2009). The Mergence of Spaces Experiences of Reality in Digital Role-Playing Games.Edition Sigma: Almanya.
  • Huizinga, G. (1980). Homo Ludens: A Study of The Play-Element in Culture. Büyük Britanya: Redwood Burn Ltd. Trowbridge&Esher.
  • Joyce, M. C. (2010). “Introduction: How To Think About Digital Activism?”, Digital Activism Decoded The New Mechanics of Change. Idebate Press: New York & Amsterdam.
  • Klimecki, R. ve Willmott, H. (2011). “Hegemony”, Key Concepts in Critical Management Studies. (içinde) Der. M. Tadajewski, P. Maclaran, E. Parsons, SAGE Publications, 130-134.
  • Küklich,, J. (2007). Online-Rollenspiele als Soziale Experimentierräume”, Computerspiele und Politik. (içinde), Ed. Tobias Bevc, Band 5, 7-23.
  • Laclau, E. ve Mouffe, C. (2008). Hegemonya ve Sosyalist Strateji: Radikal Demokratik Bir Politikaya Doğru. İletişim Yayınları: İstanbul.
  • Mouffe, C. (2000). “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?” Social Research. 66(3): 746-758. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • Papacharissi, Z. (2009). “The Citizen is The Message - Alternative Modes of Civic Engagement”, Journalism and Citizenship New Agendas in Communication. (içinde) Ed. Zizi Papacharissi, 29-42, New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Rushkoff, D. (2003). “Open Source Democracy: How Çevrimiçi Communication Is Changing Offline Politics”, Demos. http://www.demos.co.uk/files/OpenSourceDemocracy.pdf
  • Schindler, F. (1999). “Spielen und Reflektieren Search & Play Plus-eine Datenbank für Computerspiele”, Medien+Merziehung. Nr. 2, Nisan, 85-88.
  • Schudson, M. (1998). The Good Citizen – A History of American Civic Life. Martin Kessler Books, The Free Press: Londra.
  • Shah, D. V.; Cho, J.; Nah, S.; Gotlieb, M. R.; Hwang, H.; Lee, N.; Scholl, R. M. ve McLeod, D. M. (2007). “Campaign Ads, Online Messaging, and Participation: Extending The Communication Mediation Model”, Journal of Communication. 57, 676–703.
  • Smith, A. (2011). “The Internet and Campaign 2010”, Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/oldmedia/Files/Reports/2011/Internet%2 0and%20Campaign%202010.pdf
  • Steinkuhler, C. A. (2004). “Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games”, 6. International Conference on Learning Sciences International Society of Learning Sciences, 1-38, Santa Monica, Kaliforniya.
  • Storey, J. (2009). Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction. Pearson: İngiltere.
  • Utz, S. (2000). “Social Information Processing in MUDs: The Development of Friendships in Virtual Worlds”, Journal of Online Behavior. 1(1).
  • Van Looy, J.; Courtois, C. ve De Vocht, M. (2010). “Player Identification in Online Games: Validation of a Scale for Measuring Identification in MMORPGs”, Fun and Games. Eylül 20115-17, 126-134.
  • Yee, N. (2006). “The Demographics, Motivations and Derived Experiences of Users of Massively-Multiuser Online Graphical Environments”, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.15, 309-329.

Massively Multiplayer Online Games as a Potential Means of Building Counter-Hegemonic Spheres

Year 2021, Volume , Issue 34, 65 - 89, 29.06.2021
https://doi.org/10.16878/gsuilet.957432

Abstract

This study aims to reveal whether massive multi-player online games (MMOG) are effective in creating a new field of resistance and counter-hegemony while questioning whether games make players passive and apolitical individuals. To this end, whether online games encourage players to organize, develop their cultural practices, create their own spaces of resistance and counter-hegemony, and allows them to take a specific political stance were analyzed through those who played MMOG in the study. As a method, an online questionnaire is conducted with 493 people, and the data obtained were evaluated under four factors. According to the findings of the statistical analysis, MMOGs encourage players (1) to develop their cultural practices (identification with the group); (2) to coexist within game groups based on rules (identification with the game); (3) to organize among themselves (social interaction), (4) to show critical, intellectual, strategic attitudes and behaviors; (5) to demonstrate their social, cultural and political stance (interaction between the game and the world); and lastly, through active virtual in-game communities, (6) to encourage the players as active subjects to engage in movements aimed at creating a new resistance and counter-hegemony (offline activism). However, players who play MMOGs do not engage in any activity unless there is an interference in the “space” that they see it as their public space. Consequently, being in a passive state as long as players are not intervened can be considered as a weakening factor in the context of resistance movements and counter-hegemony.

References

  • Bakardjieva, M. (2003). “Virtual Togetherness: An Everyday-Life Perspective”, Media, Culture & Society. Cilt: 25, 291-313.
  • Barrett, M. (2004). Marx’tan Foucault’ya İdeoloji.İstanbul: Doruk Yayınları.
  • Bayraktutan, G. (2016). “Toplumsal Hareketleri ve Değişimi Dijital Oyunlar Üzerinden Düşünmek”, Özgürleşmenin Yolları. Der. Erdal Dağtaş, 366-378, Ütopya Yayınevi: Ankara.
  • Bekhtina, V.J. (2002). “Psychological Research of MUD Gamers”, Yayınlanmamış Diploma Tezi. Psychology Department, Moscow State Üniversitesi, Rusya.
  • Bernstein, B. (2003). Class, Codes and Control Volume 1 Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language. Routledge: Londra ve New York.
  • Bevc, T. (2007). “Konstruktion von Politik und Gesellschaft in Computer-spielen?”, Computerspiele und Politik. (içinde), Ed. Tobias Bevc, Cilt 5, 25-55.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On The Theory of Action. Stanford University Press: Stanford, Kaliforniya.
  • Caillois, R. (2001). Man, Play and Games. Çev. Urbana ve Chicago: Meyer Barash, University of Illionis Press.
  • Cassell, J. ve Jenkins, H. (1998). “Chess For Girls?: Feminism and Computer Games”, From Barbie to Mortal Combat: Gender and Computer Games. (içinde) (Ed.) Justine Cassell ve Henry Jenkins, s. 2-45, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Castells, M. (2012). “Ağ Toplumunda İletişim, İktidar ve Karşı-İktidar”, Yeni Medya Üzerine. (içinde) çev. Tülin Sepetci, 14-45, Antalya: Akdeniz Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Chadha, M.; Avila, A. ve Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2012). “Listening In: Building a Profile of Podcast Users and Analyzing Their Political Participation”, Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 9: 388-401.
  • Deuze, M. (2007). Media Work.Polity Press, Digital Media and Society Series: BirleŞik Krallık.
  • Deuze, M. (2006). “Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture”, The Information Society. 22(2): 63-75.
  • Downey, J. ve Fenton, N. (2003). “New Media, Counter Publicity and the Public Sphere”, New Media & Society. 5(2), 185-202.
  • Fleissner, P. ve Romano, V. (2007). Digitale Medien-Neue Möglichkeiten für Demokratie und Partizipation? Trafo: Berlin.
  • Frasca, G. (2003). “Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology”, Video Game Theory Reader.(içinde), M. J. P. Wolf ve B. Peron (Ed.) New York: Routledge, 221- 235.
  • Fromme, J. (2003). “Computer Games As A Part Of Children‟s Culture”, The International Journal of Computer Game Research. Mayıs, Cilt: 3, Sayı: 1.
  • Fuchs, C. (2008). Internet and Society-Social Theory in the Information Age. Routledge: New York.
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H. ve Valenzuela, S. (2010). “Weak Ties, and Civic Engagement The Mediating Path to a Stronger Citizenship: Online and Offline Networks”, Communication Research. XX (X), 1-25.
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H.; Veenstra, A. S.; Vraga, E. K.; Wang, M.; DeShano, C. L.; Perlmutter, D. D.; Shah, D. V. (2007). “Online and Offline Activism: Communication Mediation and Political Messaging Among Blog Readers”, The Annual Convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Bildiri Sunumu. Ağustos 9-12, 2007, Washington, DC.
  • Gramsci, A. (2011). Prison Notebooks Volume 1. Columbia University Press, ABD.
  • Gramsci, A. (2007). Hapishane Defterleri. Belge Yayınları: İstanbul.
  • Habermas, J. (1991). The Structural Transformation of The Public Sphere. MIT Press: Cambridge.
  • Hemminger, E. (2009). The Mergence of Spaces Experiences of Reality in Digital Role-Playing Games.Edition Sigma: Almanya.
  • Huizinga, G. (1980). Homo Ludens: A Study of The Play-Element in Culture. Büyük Britanya: Redwood Burn Ltd. Trowbridge&Esher.
  • Joyce, M. C. (2010). “Introduction: How To Think About Digital Activism?”, Digital Activism Decoded The New Mechanics of Change. Idebate Press: New York & Amsterdam.
  • Klimecki, R. ve Willmott, H. (2011). “Hegemony”, Key Concepts in Critical Management Studies. (içinde) Der. M. Tadajewski, P. Maclaran, E. Parsons, SAGE Publications, 130-134.
  • Küklich,, J. (2007). Online-Rollenspiele als Soziale Experimentierräume”, Computerspiele und Politik. (içinde), Ed. Tobias Bevc, Band 5, 7-23.
  • Laclau, E. ve Mouffe, C. (2008). Hegemonya ve Sosyalist Strateji: Radikal Demokratik Bir Politikaya Doğru. İletişim Yayınları: İstanbul.
  • Mouffe, C. (2000). “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?” Social Research. 66(3): 746-758. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • Papacharissi, Z. (2009). “The Citizen is The Message - Alternative Modes of Civic Engagement”, Journalism and Citizenship New Agendas in Communication. (içinde) Ed. Zizi Papacharissi, 29-42, New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Rushkoff, D. (2003). “Open Source Democracy: How Çevrimiçi Communication Is Changing Offline Politics”, Demos. http://www.demos.co.uk/files/OpenSourceDemocracy.pdf
  • Schindler, F. (1999). “Spielen und Reflektieren Search & Play Plus-eine Datenbank für Computerspiele”, Medien+Merziehung. Nr. 2, Nisan, 85-88.
  • Schudson, M. (1998). The Good Citizen – A History of American Civic Life. Martin Kessler Books, The Free Press: Londra.
  • Shah, D. V.; Cho, J.; Nah, S.; Gotlieb, M. R.; Hwang, H.; Lee, N.; Scholl, R. M. ve McLeod, D. M. (2007). “Campaign Ads, Online Messaging, and Participation: Extending The Communication Mediation Model”, Journal of Communication. 57, 676–703.
  • Smith, A. (2011). “The Internet and Campaign 2010”, Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/oldmedia/Files/Reports/2011/Internet%2 0and%20Campaign%202010.pdf
  • Steinkuhler, C. A. (2004). “Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games”, 6. International Conference on Learning Sciences International Society of Learning Sciences, 1-38, Santa Monica, Kaliforniya.
  • Storey, J. (2009). Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction. Pearson: İngiltere.
  • Utz, S. (2000). “Social Information Processing in MUDs: The Development of Friendships in Virtual Worlds”, Journal of Online Behavior. 1(1).
  • Van Looy, J.; Courtois, C. ve De Vocht, M. (2010). “Player Identification in Online Games: Validation of a Scale for Measuring Identification in MMORPGs”, Fun and Games. Eylül 20115-17, 126-134.
  • Yee, N. (2006). “The Demographics, Motivations and Derived Experiences of Users of Massively-Multiuser Online Graphical Environments”, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.15, 309-329.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Social
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Tülin SEPETCİ This is me (Primary Author)
BOLU ABANT İZZET BAYSAL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0003-2584-4333
Türkiye

Publication Date June 29, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021, Volume , Issue 34

Cite

APA Sepetci, T. (2021). Potansiyel Bir Karşı-Hegemonya Alanı Oluşturma Aracı Olarak Devasa Çok Oyunculu Çevrimiçi Oyunlar . Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi , (34) , 65-89 . DOI: 10.16878/gsuilet.957432

Creative Commons Lisansı