ExploringGamingPreferencesinDifferentCultures
Abstract
Inthispaper,Ireportonastudythatexploredtherelationshipsamonggamingpreferencesandcultural
differences.Iconductedinterviewswithsevengamersfromfivecountriestounderstandtheirgaming
preferences;additionally,IusedHofstede’sValueSurveyModuletoevaluatetheirculturalvalues.
Throughaninductiveanalysis,Iidentifiedseveralthemesinparticipants’gamingpreferencesthat
demonstratedaclearcueofinfluencefromtheirculturalvalues:(1)socialinteractionwasassociated
withplayer’svalueofuncertaintyavoidance,individualism/collectivismandpowerdistance;(2)tension
andhumoringamewasassociatedwithhighuncertaintyacceptance;and(3)opennessandfreedom
wasrelatedtoindividualism.Amongthesegamingaspects,socialinteractionandtensionwerethe
mostlyfavoredonesamongtheparticipants.
1.Introduction
Inthisexploratorystudy,Iconductedinterviewswithsevengamersfromfivenations,aimingat
exploringrelationshipsamongculturaldifferencesandpreferencesofgametypesandgamingaspects.
Inparticular,Iwasinterestedinunderstanding:(1)towhatdegreecouldindividualgamingpreferences
beattributedtohis/herculturalvalues;and(2)howthegamingpreferencesandculturalvaluesare
related.
Manyresearchershavefoundthatgamingexperiencesandperceptionsvaryacrosscultureswhenthe
samegameisplayed(Chuahetal.,2007;Hofstede&Murff,2011;Meijeretal.,2006).Playersusually
bringculturallysaturatedassumptions,knowledge,andinformationaboutinteractionsintogames
(Consalvo,2009;Hofstede,2007).Hofstedeetal.(2010)definedcultureas“therulesofthesocialgame.”
Assuch,people’sculturalvaluespervasivelyinfluencestheirday-to-daylife,andbyextensioninfluences
gameplayandgamedesignactivities.
Researchershavearguedthatgamedesignersshouldpayspecialattentionwhendesigningagamefora
differentcultureorinacross-culturalcontext(Hofstede,2007;Khaledetal.,2009;Meershoeketal.,
2012).Manyhavealsoexploredgamedesignmethodsthatfacilitateconsiderationofcultural
differences(Khaledetal.,2009;Meershoeketal.,2012).However,methodsusedinpreviousresearch
werebasedonsubjectiveanalysisofculturaldifferencesandnon-empiricalmappingbetweencultural
conflictsandgamedesigncomponents.Inotherwords,thereislittleknowledgeastotherelationships
amongculturalvaluedifferencesandgameplaypreferencesbeyonddeductivepredictions.Inthisstudy,
Iaimatbridgingthisgapandfocusonaninductiveinquiryastohowpeople’sgamingpreferencesmight
beinfluencedbytheirculturalvalues.Ibelievebyexploringthisaspectofgaming,wewillbeableto
proceedtoastrongerpositiontoinformculturallysensitivegamedesign.
Inthenextsubsections,Iprovidebackgroundforthestudy:insection1.1,IdescribetheHofstede’s
culturaldimensions,whichisthetheoreticalframeworkthatguidedthisinvestigation;insection1.2,I
1
describeCaillois’sgameclassificationscheme,whichisusedtoframediscussionaboutgaming
preferencesinthisstudy;andinsection1.3,Idiscussworksthatarecloselyrelatedtothisstudy.
1.1CulturalDimensions
ThisstudyisframedaroundtheculturaldimensionmodelproposedbyHofstede.Aimingat
distinguishingkeycharacteristicsofnationalcultures,Hofestedeetal.’smodeliscomprisedofsix
culturalvaluedimensions:(1)powerdistance(PDI),whichmeasurestheextenttowhichtheless
powerfulmembersexpectandacceptthatpowerisdistributedunequally;(2)levelofindividualism(IDV),
whichmeasuresthedegreetowhichindividualsareindependentfromeachother(asopposedto
collectivism,whichdepictsthedegreetowhichindividualsareintegratedtogroups);(3)levelof
masculinity(MAS),whichmeasuresthedistinctionofemotionalrolesbetweengenders(asopposedto
femininity,whichdepictstheoverlapofemotionalgenderroles);(4)uncertaintyavoidance(UAI),which
measurestheextenttowhichthemembersofaculturefeeluncomfortablewithambiguityorunknown;
(5)long-termorientation(LTO),whichmeasuresthedegreetowhichmembersofacultureattach
importancetofuturerewards(asopposedtoshort-termorientation,whichisrelatedtoimmediate
situationsorrewards);and(6)indulgenceversusrestraint(IVR),whichmeasuresthetendencyof
yieldingtohumandesires(Hofstedeetal.,2010).
Hofstedepredictedpossibledifferencesofgamepreferenceandgamingbehaviorwithrespecttoeach
culturaldimension(Hofstede,2007);thesummaryforthefirstfourdimensionsisshowninTable1.In
thisstudy,Ifocusedonexploringtherelationshipamongthesefourdimensionsandgamingpreferences.
Table1Hofstede’spredictionofrelationshipsamonggamingbehaviorsandculturaldimensions
CulturalDimension
Collectivism
Identity
Hierarchy
Gender
Individualism
Highpowerdistance
Lowpowerdistance
Masculinity
Femininity
Stronguncertaintyavoidance
Fearofthe
unknown
Weekuncertaintyavoidance
GamingBehavior
• Gaminggroupisstableandhardlychanged.
• Teamingwithstrangermaybehard.
• Gaminggroupisvoluntary.
• Easytoteamwithstrangers.
• Usuallybringreal-worldhierarchyintogame.
• Notendencytobringreal-worldhierarchyintogame.
• Winningisamajorissue.
• Expectgametobecompetitive.
• Moreintoleranttotransgressions/cheatingsandinsults.
• Winningisnotthegoal.
• Expectgametobecorporative.
• Moretoleranttotransgressions/cheatingsandinsults.
• Preferrule-basedgaming;dislikegamesthatinclude
ambiguity.
• Wanttobewellprepared;anxiousaboutmakingfools
aboutthemselves.
• Curiousaboutdifferentpossibilitiesingames.
• Likesurprisesingames.
1.2GameClassification
RogerCailloisprovidedausefulclassificationofgameplay(Caillois,2001).Heclassifiedgameplayinto
fourfundamentalcategories:(1)competitiveplay(agon),whereplayersorplayingteamsarein
opposition;(2)chance-basedplay(alea),whereplayisbasedonadecisionindependentoftheplayers;
2
(3)simulationplay(mimicry),whereplaypresupposesatemporaryacceptance(e.g.animaginary
universe);and(4)vertigoplay(ilinx),whereplayconsistsofanattempttomomentarilydestroythe
stabilityofperception(Caillois,2001).Hethenplacedeachcategoryintoaspectrumfrom“paidia,”
whichisimprovisationalandspontaneousactivitiesto“ludus,”inwhichplayisstructuredandfollows
strictrules.Cailloisarguedthatthisclassificationframework“reflect(s)themoralandintellectualvalues
ofaculture”and“contributestotheirrefinementanddevelopment.”Inthisstudy,IusedCaillois’s
classificationschemetoframediscussionsaboutpreferencesofgametypesandgamingaspects.
1.3RelatedResearch
Manyresearchershavefoundthatgamingexperienceandperceptionsvaryacrosscultureswhenthe
samegameisplayed(Chuahetal.,2007;Hofstede&Murff,2011;Meijeretal.,2006).Forexample,
Hofstede&Murff(2011)reportedasurprisingphenomenonfromstudentsinherMBAclasses.
TaiwanesestudentsdisplayedatotallydifferentgamedynamicfromU.S.studentswhenplaying‘SO
LONGSUCKER,’aclassicbargaining/economicstrategygamedesignedbyAmericans.Thegameis
designedfora20-minuteplaysession(i.e.,thatisusuallyhowlongittookforU.S.participants)andthe
goalistoeliminateotherplayersandbethelastundefeatedplayer.However,whenplayedby
Taiwaneseparticipants,“collaborativeratherthanantagonisticbehaviorsoccurred,”andthegamecould
lastforhourswithoutkickinganybodyout(Hofstede&Murff,2011).Theauthorsattributedthis
phenomenontotheculturaldifferencesbetweentheTaiwaneseandAmericanplayers;theauthors
arguedthatthedifferenceshighlightedtheroleofunwrittenrulesingameplay.
Similarly,Chuahetal.(2007)reportedonastudythatexamineddifferencesinhowMalaysianChinese
andUKstudentsplayedUltimatumwithopponentsoftheirowncultureaswellasoftheotherculture.
Ultimatumisahighlyinteractiveeconomicexperimentalgameinwhichtwoplayersdecidehowto
divideasumofmoneythatisgiventothem,withthefirstplayer(theproposer)proposinghowtodivide
thesumandthesecondplayer(theresponder)eitheracceptingorrejectingthisproposal.Intheirstudy,
Chuahetal.found:(1)Malaysianproposerstendtomakesignificantlyhigherofferstotheircompatriots
thantoUKresponders,and(2)MalaysianrespondersrejectedsignificantlymoreoffersthantheirUK
partnersincross-nationalgames(Chuahetal.,2007).Whilethisstudywaslimitedtoaneconomic
simulationgame,itdemonstratedthatwiththesamewrittenrulesgamingexperienceandoutcome
couldbedramaticallydifferentwhenplayedwithpeoplefromdifferentcultures;i.e.differentunwritten
rulesappliedineachculture.
Researchershavearguedthatgamedesignersshouldpayspecialattentionwhendesigningagamethat
wouldbeplayedbyadifferentcultureorinacross-culturalcontext(Hofstede,2007;Khaledetal.,2009;
Meershoeketal.,2012).Manyhaveexploredgamedesignmethodsthatfacilitateconsiderationof
culturaldifferences(Khaledetal.,2009;Meershoeketal.,2012).Forexample,Khaledetal.(2009)
redesignedandevaluatedaseriousgameaimedatsmokingcessation.Thegamewasoriginally
designedforNewZealandEuropeanplayerswhoareconsideredindividualistic;theredesignedgame
wasforMaoriplayerswhoareconsideredcollectivists.Afterevaluatingthegamewithparticipantsfrom
bothcultures,theyfoundthattheculturallymatchedconditionsyieldedgreaterpersuasion;i.e.the
playerswhoplayedtheversionthatisdesignedfortheirculturewouldhaveagreaterpositivechangein
intentiontoquitsmokingthanplayingtheotherversion(Khaledetal.,2009).
3
Inanotherexampleofconsideringcultureingamedesign,Meershoeketal.(2012)proposed‘Culture
DrivenGameDesignMethod.’Hisdesignmethodfocusedonadjustingagametothecultureofits
players.Themethodincludesthreeiterativesteps:(1)assessingtheculturaldifferenceofplay-testers
andtargetplayers;(2)translatingculturaldimensionsintogameelements;and(3)evaluating
applicability(Meershoeketal.,2012).Thefirststep,assessment,usesHofstede’sframework.Forthe
secondstep,theauthorscreateda‘CrossDimensionalMatrix’wherepotentialconflictsbetween
culturaldimensionsaremappedagainstasetofgamedimensions.Theauthorsevaluatedthemethod
againstthetraditionalplay-testingmethodintwocasestudiesandfoundthattheirmethodresultedin
similarsuggesteddesignmodificationswiththetraditionalplay-testingmethodthatinvolvedparticipant
fromdifferentcultures.Onelimitationofthismethodisthatthemappingsbetweenculturaldimension
andgamedimensionarebasedonpredictedevaluations.Inaddition,thegamedimensionmodelthey
usedmainlyfocusesonsimulationgames;itmissedsomeaspects(e.g.randomness)thatarecrucialfor
othergamegenres.Inthisproposedstudy,Iwilladdressthesegaps.
2.Methods
Inthissection,Idescribethesevenparticipants,thedatacollectioninstruments(i.e.theinterview
protocolandtheHofstede’sValueSurveyModule),andthedataanalysisprocedure.
2.1Participants
Sevenparticipantswererecruitedfrommypersonalfriends,acquaintances,andinternationalstudents
whoattendDePaulUniversity.Allparticipantsspentmorethanthreehoursperweekplayinggames.
ThenationalitiesoftheparticipantsareshowninTable2.
Table2Nationalityofparticipants
ParticipantID
Nationality
P1
Turkey
P2
Belgium
P3
Belgium
P4
China
P5
China
P6
Poland
P7
U.S
AllparticipantswerelivingintheUnitedStatesandfluentinEnglish.AllbuttheU.S.participantwere
internationalgraduatestudentswhostudiedinanU.S.universityforbetweenthreemonthstotwo
years.TheU.S.participantwasayoungprofessionalwhohadbeenworkingfortwoyears.Allbutone
Chineseparticipant(P4)weremaleandallparticipantsagedbetween25and29yearsold.
2.2Instruments
Thisstudywasbasedontwodatacollectioninstruments:(1)semi-structuredinterviewswere
conductedtounderstandparticipants’gamingpreferencesand(2)theHofstede’sValueSurveyModule
wasusedtoevaluatetheparticipants’reflectionontheirculturalvalues.
2.2.1Interviewprotocol
Iconductedone-on-oneinterviewsinOctoberof2012atDePaulUniversityandparticipants’homes;
eachinterviewtookbetween30to45minutes.InterviewswiththeChineseparticipantswere
conductedinChinese,whileotherswereconductedinEnglish.Allinterviewswererecordedandlater
transcribed.Participantswereaskedtotalkabout:(1)whatgamestheywererecentlyplaying;(2)how
theyusuallychoosethegames;(3)todescribethefirstgametheyplayedandgotexcited;(4)todescribe
4
theirall-timefavoriteandleastfavoritegamesandreasons;(5)totellastoryabouttheirbestandworst
gamingexperience;and(6)whatfeaturesorelementstheywouldincludeiftheycoulddesigngamesfor
themselves.
2.2.2ValueSurveyModule2008
Attheendofeachinterview,participantswereaskedtofillouttheEnglishversionoftheValueSurvey
Module2008(Hofstedeetal.,2008).Thesurveycontains28questionsthatarestructuredalong
Hofstede’ssixculturedimensions.Inthisstudy,thesurveywasusedtoevaluatetheculturevaluesfrom
theparticipants’perspectives.
2.3Dataanalysis
Aftertheinterviewsweretranscribed,Ianalyzedthedatainductivelytofindthemesofgaming
preferences.Icodedforthegametypesandgamingaspectstheparticipantsmentionedandcodedfor
thethemesintheirbestandworstgamingexperiences.TheValueSurveyresultswerecalculatedbased
ontheformulasprovidedbyHofstedeetal.(2008).Asonecalculationstep,theresultswerenormalized
tomakeallscoresrangebetween0and100.
3.Results
Inthissection,IsummarizetheculturalvaluesoftheparticipantsbasedonHofestede’sdimensionsand
thethemesontheirgamingpreferences.
3.1Culturalvalues
Theparticipants’reflectionsontheirculturalvaluesinpowerdistance(PDI),individualism(IDV),
masculinity(MAS),anduncertaintyavoidance(UAI)areshowninFigure1.ThePDI,IDV,andUAI
measuresoftheparticipantswerenicelydiversifiedalongthedimensions.TheMASmeasuretendedto
behigh;thatmayduetothatthesamplewasbiasedtowardsthemalegender.
100
CalturalValueScore
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
PDI
43
15
83
33
43
28
5
IDV
27
73
85
62
50
3
62
MAS
95
78
60
8
60
60
60
UAI
80
10
37
80
37
87
0
Figure1Culturalvalueofparticipants
5
3.2Gamingpreferences
Iidentifiedfourthemesinparticipants’gamingpreferencesthatdemonstratedaclearcueofinfluence
fromtheirculturalvalues:(1)socialinteraction(i.e.cooperativeand/orcompetitiveplay),(2)tensionin
game,(3)opennessandfreedom,and(4)humor.Table3summarizedthegamingpreferencesofeach
participant.
Table3Gamingpreferences
Gamingaspects
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
Socialinteraction
X
X
X
Tension
X
X
X
Openness/freedom
X
X
Humor
X
X
*Xindicatesthattheparticipantmentionedthataspect.
3.2.1Socialinteraction
Whileallparticipantsmentionedthattheyplayedgameswithotherpeople,threeparticipants(P3,P5,
andP7),alltendtobeuncertaintyacceptant,explicitlyexpressedtheirpreferenceinsocialinteractionin
thegames.However,theytendedtopreferdifferenttypesofsocialplay.Specifically,P5mentionedthat
helikedcompetitiveplay(i.e.toplayagainstco-players)andtalkedaboutplayingwithhispersonal
friends(e.g.collegeclassmates);P7expressedpreferenceincooperativeplay(i.e.toworkwithcoplayersagainstthegame)andmentionedplayingwithhisfamily(i.e.parentsandwife);andP3likedto
playwithhisonlinefriendsandtalkedaboutbothcompetitiveandcooperativeaspects(i.e.toworkwith
co-playersagainstotherplayers).
Tofurtherunderstandparticipant’spreferencesofsocialinteractioningames,Ianalyzedtheirsocial
gamingfrequencyinthesethreetypesofsocialplay;i.e.(1)playingonline,(2)playingwithfriends,and
(3)playingwithfamilies.Inascalefromonetofive(withonebeingverylowandfivebeingveryhigh),I
codedfortheirgamingfrequencyofthesethreetypes.Ithencodedtheoverallpreferenceofsocial
gamingbasedonthesumofthesethreescores.Table4summarizedtheresults.
Table4Preferenceinsocialgaming
ParticipantID
Playingonline
Playingwith
friends
Playingwith
families
Overallpreference
insocialgaming
P1
Low(2)
VeryLow(1)
VeryLow(1)
Low
P2
VeryLow(1)
Low(2)
Medium(3)
Medium
P3
VeryHigh(5)
Medium(3)
VeryLow(1)
High
P4
VeryLow(1)
Low(2)
Low(2)
Low
P5
Medium(3)
VeryHigh(5)
VeryLow(1)
High
P6
VeryLow(1)
Low(2)
VeryLow(1)
Low
P7
VeryLow(1)
Low(2)
Medium(3)
Medium
6
Inalignmentwiththeirself-reportedpreference,Iidentifiedtwoparticipants(P3andP5)ashavinghigh
preferenceinsocialgaming;forexample,P3mentionedthathealmostexclusivelyplaysonlinegamesor
playsgameswithfriends:
“It’salwaysexcellentwhenIplaywithfourpeopleorfivepeopleandweknowwhattodoand
weknowwhateachothersaresupposedtodoandcovereachother.Playingtogether,we
alwayshaveagoodtime.WhenIwasplayingaloneIusuallydon'tplaytoolong,becauseIget
frustratedsinceIdon'thaveanyonetoplaywith.”
AlthoughP3andP5bothhadhighinpreferenceinsocialinteraction,theylikeddifferenttypesofsocial
gaming.Thisdifferenceinpreferencetendstobeassociatedwiththeirindividualism/collectivismvalues.
P3,whoisveryindividualistic(seeFigure1),emphasizedhispreferenceinonlinegamingofFirstPlayer
Shooter(FPS)gamesandtalkedabouthowhemetfriendsallovertheworldinthatgame;P5,whois
consideredmorecollectivistic,mainlytalkedaboutplayingwithhispersonalfriends(e.g.college
classmates).
Inaddition,threeparticipants(P2,P4,andP7)mentionedthattheyplayedwiththeirfamiliesonregular
basisorinspecialoccasionsasatradition(e.g.holidays);alltendtohaveaverylowlevelofpower
distance(seeFigure1).Forexample,P2discussedtheroleofgameasacommoncontexttogatherthe
familytogether:
“Soifwe(thefamily)playtogether,mostofthetimewetrytopicksomethingverysimple,so
thatwecanhavefun,youknow.Youdon'thavetomaketoomucheffort.Youcantalkandlaugh
andthendrinkorsomething.It'slikeanenvironmenttojustputpeopletogether.”
3.2.2Tension
WhileHofestededidnotexplicitlydiscusshowtensionwasrelatedtoculturaldimension,uncertainty
avoidance(UAI)isassociatedwithtoleranceofambiguity.Threeparticipants(P2,P3,andP5)whoall
scoredlowerinUAI(thusambiguitytolerant)discussedpreferenceinthetensionbroughtbythegames.
Theyexpressedpreferenceinfast-pacedgamingorgamesthatrequirefastactions/reactions.For
example,P3said:
“IliketheFPS(firstpersonshooter)themostbecauseitrequiresalotofactionsandyoucan
reallyimmerseyourself…”
Whentalkingaboutthegamethatheiscurrentlyplaying,P2alsohitthisaspect:
“IfyoutaketheSuperMeatBoy,it'sverysimplebutyoufeelyouareincontrol.Youfeelyour
characterrespondperfectlytowhatyouaredoingwithyourcontroller.It’saveryfastandvery
intensivegamethatmakesyounervous.”
3.2.3Opennessandfreedom
Twoparticipants(P4andP7),bothwereconsideredveryindividualistic,mentionedtheirpreferencein
theopennessandfreedomprovidedinthegames.Theyvaluedthecreativeaspectofgamesand
7
attachedimportancetothefeelingofnovelty.Forexample,P4mentionedthatshelikedtoplaylife
simulationgames(thegamesinwhichtheplayerfreelycontrolsoneormorevirtuallifeforms):
“Ireallyliked‘theSims.’It’skindofalifesimulationgame.Imean,youcanactuallydoanything
youwant–thingsyoucanorcannotdoinreallife.Youcancreatealotofthings.Ilikedthe
creativityinit.”
P7alsotalkedabouthispreferenceinsandboxgames.Thosearethegameswhereminimalconstrains
areimposedandtheplayercouldroamandmodifytheworldfreelyanddecidehowtheyplay.Hesaid:
“[PlayingFallout3(asandboxgame),]itisjustlikeyougoaroundandthenyoucandowhatever
youwanttodointhegame.…Youkindofmakeofyourownstoryinthisgame.SoImean
there'stheimaginationthatIreallylike.”
3.2.4Humor
Twoparticipants(P2andP7),bothhadaveryhighlevelofuncertaintyacceptance,mentionedthatthey
likedthehumoringames.Forexample,whenP2talkingaboutagamecalled‘TimeSplitter,’hesaid:
“Tothemostcritiques,it'sveryrealistic;tomeit'snotimportanttobethatrealistic.Andthe
graphicisnotgoodbutIthinkit'snotaproblem.Butthereisaformofhumorinthegame.The
universeiscrazy,thecharactersarecrazy.Sothatmadeitveryfun.”
4.Discussion
Ifoundpatternsindicatingthatweakuncertaintyavoidancewasassociatedwithpreferencein
socialization,tension,andhumoringames.Therewasalsoatrendthathighindividualismrelatesto
preferenceinopen-worldgamesandhighfrequencyofonlinegaming.Ifoundthatmostparticipants
hadmultiplepreferredgamingaspectsandtheparticipantswhohaddifferentculturalvaluesshared
somegamingpreferences.
4.1Relationshipsamonggamingpreferencesandculturalvalues
Whiletheresultsmaynothaveahighexternalvalidityduetothesmallsamplesize,thepatternsonthe
relationshipsamongparticipants’gamingpreferencesandtheirculturalvaluesemerged.Weak
uncertaintyavoidance(i.e.lowUAI)tendedtobeassociatedwithhighpreferenceinsocializationinmy
sample.Ispeculatethatthisrelationshipmightbebecausethatsocialgaming(especiallyonlinegaming)
involvesagreatdealofuncertaintyoriginatedfromtheco-players.Inaddition,othercultural
dimensionssuchasIDVandPDIcaninfluencepeople’spreferenceondifferenttypesofsocialgaming.
Forexample,peoplefromlowIDVsocietiestendedtoplaymorewithpeoplefromtheirin-groupsand
preferstablegamegroups.
Inaddition,weakuncertaintyavoidance(UAI)alsoseemedtoassociatewithpreferencesintensionand
humorinthegames.ThissupportsHofstede’sclaimsthatpeoplefromweakuncertaintyavoidance
culturesarecomfortablewithunfamiliarrisksandappealtohumorinadvertisings(Hofstedeet.al.
2010).Ontheotherhand,preferencesinopennessandfreedomwerenotassociatedwithlowUAI,
whichwascontrarytoHofestede’sprediction.Instead,theywereassociatedwithhighindividualism.An
8
interpretationofthisisthatwhileintroducingambiguousandunknown,open-worldgamesalsoprovide
playersmorecontroltodealwithuncertainty;peoplefromindividualisticcultureswouldtendtofavor
thiscontrol.
4.2Multiplegamingpreferenceandcross-culturalgamingpreference
Fouroutofthesevenparticipantslikedmorethanoneaspectofthegames.Forexample,P7mentioned
thathelikedthesocialinteraction,theopennessandfreedomprovidedingames,andhumoringames.I
alsofoundthatparticipantswhocamefromdifferentculturessometimessharesomecommongaming
preferences.Specifically,themostlyfavoredgamingaspectsamongtheparticipantsweresocial
interaction(N=3)andtensioningames(N=3).Thesefindingsindicatedthatgamingpreferenceisa
complexphenomenon,whichmightbeinfluencedbymultiplefactors;i.e.culturaldifferencesareonly
onefactoramongothersthatcouldinfluencegamingpreferences.Iwouldarguethatthiswouldbeone
ofthereasonswhysomegames(e.g.SuperMarioBros)weresuccessfulglobally.
5.Limitationandfuturework
Sincethisstudyonlyinvolvedsevenparticipants,theresultsmaynotbegeneralizable.Moreover,I
speculatedthatonlyalimitedportionoftherelationshipsamonggamingpreferencesandcultural
valueswerediscoveredduetothesmallsamplesize.Thusinthefuture,Iwouldliketoexplorethis
studymoreextensively;thiswouldincludeinterviewingalargersampleofgamersfrommorediverse
culturalbackgrounds.Afterknowingmorequalitativerelationshipsamonggamingpreferencesand
culturalvalues,Iwouldalsoliketoconductsurveystudiestoincludemoreparticipantsandallow
quantitativeexaminationofthecorrelation.
References
Caillois,R.(2001).Man,playandgames.Chicago,Illinois,USA:UniversityofIllinoisPress.
Chuah,S.-H.,Hoffmann,R.,Jones,M.,&Williams,G.(2007).Doculturesclash?Evidencefromcrossnationalultimatumgameexperiments.JournalofEconomicBehavior&Organization,64(1),35–48.
Consalvo,M.(2009).ThereisNoMagicCircle.GamesandCulture,4(4),408–417.
Hofstede,G.,Hofstede,G.J.,&Minkov,M.(2010).CulturesandOrganizations:SoftwareoftheMind
(3rded.).McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede,G.,Hofstede,G.J.,Minkov,M.,&Vinken,H.(2008).ValueSurveyModule2008Manual.
RetrievedSeptember27,2012,fromhttp://www.geerthofstede.nl/vsm-08
Hofstede,G.J.(2007).Onegamedoesnotfitallcultures.InI.Mayer&H.Mastik(Eds.),Organizingand
LeaningthroughGamingandSimulation.ProceedingsofISAGA(pp.103–110).Delft:Eburon.
Hofstede,G.J.,&Murff,E.J.T.(2011).RepurposinganOldGameforanInternationalWorld.Simulation
&Gaming,43(1),34–50.
9
Khaled,R.,Barr,P.,Biddle,R.,Fischer,R.,&Noble,J.(2009).Gamedesignstrategiesforcollectivist
persuasion.Proceedingsofthe2009ACMSIGGRAPHSymposiumonVideoGames-Sandbox’09
(pp.31–38).NewYork,NY,USA:ACMPress.
Meershoek,C.,Kortmann,R.,Meijer,S.,Subrahmanian,E.,&Verbraeck,A.(2012).TheCultureDriven
GameDesignMethod :Adaptingseriousgamestotheplayers’culture.IntegratingCultures:Formal
ModelsandAgent-BasedSimulation.
Meijer,S.,Hofstede,G.J.,Beers,G.,&Omta,S.W.F.(2006).TrustandTracinggame:learningabout
transactionsandembeddednessinatradenetwork.ProductionPlanning&Control,17(6),569–
583.
10