Comment: Game operators face social responsibilities in their online Utopias
Anyone who has ever played an online game will probably be familiar with the extent to which language which might elsewhere be perceived as homophobic has become acceptable, if not de rigeur, among many players. You would be hard pressed to spend an evening playing an online RPG or first-person shooter without being informed by someone who's just been killed that his lamentable situation is "so gay" or telling a player who annoys him that he's a "fag" - and while most players can simply ignore such juvenile comments, there's no doubt that a minority of players are distressed by them, while a majority, perhaps, would prefer if they weren't there.
Which is why it's surprising that when a player in Blizzard's World of Warcraft decided to create and advertise a guild - an in-game group - which was "LGBT Friendly" and would be a haven from homophobic comments or abuse, the firm decided to crack down on her actions and forbade her from advertising the group in the game.
An isolated over-reaction? Not in the slightest. Online games may be an escape for their players, but they still have many problems which mirror those found in the real world, as well as a host of their own unique issues, which are becoming increasingly pressing for the operators of these virtual worlds. Just because people are playing fantasy characters doesn't mean that real-world problems of racism, sexism, homophobia or religious or political intolerance just go away - and World of Warcraft, with its massive worldwide subscriber base, is demonstrating the kind of social issues which will become major problems as this medium evolves.
The issue is a simple one. People may start out playing a game, but after weeks or months of time spent in a fantasy world, they have come to know other players in the game well, and can form firm friendships and rivalries - much as they would in real life. Players who met in videogames have become married in real life, have become firm friends - and have been involved in fist-fights (not necessarily all at the same time). Many players who have long since tired of an MMOG will continue to log in for years just to keep up with acquaintances they have made in the game. Under these circumstances, it's no wonder that topics more delicate than killing orcs and mining for gold will come up.
According to Blizzard, its response to the LGBT-friendly guild is in line with a blanket policy which prohibits mention of "sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game" - and the developer lists religious and political preferences, as well as sexual preferences, as topics which are a no-no for its players to openly discuss in the game. To anyone who plays online, such a comment is tantamount to the company burying its head in the sand and hoping that the problem goes away - which, of course, it won't.
It's not just homophobia in games which is a problem, either. Sexism is rampant in many online games, and racism is a common problem - with a recent example, again in World of Warcraft, being the racist treatment of ethnic Chinese players playing on western servers. In that instance, a factor unique to the game is responsible - namely the large number of Chinese "gold farmers" who spoil the game by selling items and in-game currency for real money - but regardless of the root cause, a situation where people are afraid to discuss their ethnicity because of how others will react is not a positive one for any society.
And, ultimately, that's what World of Warcraft is - a huge, sprawling, society. With 5.5 million players, the game has a higher population than many nations, and a wider racial mix than most nations have to cope with. Using the most widely accepted statistics, it also probably has around a quarter of a million homosexual players, a large number of players under the age of majority, and of course, political and religious beliefs from across a wide spectrum will be represented. It's not just a videogame; it's the world's biggest chat and socialising network, and it's a melting pot of cultures, beliefs and lifestyles.
In other words, it's a headache - and the evidence suggests that it might not be a headache Blizzard has any decent remedy for at the moment. Officials commenting on behalf of the company in this latest instance have made astonishing comments like "many people are insulted just at the word 'homosexual' or any other word referring to sexual orientation", which certainly isn't the point most people in developed societies believed we were at. The firm wants to ban people from broadcasting opinions on sensitive subjects, but who decides what constitutes a sensitive subject? Who decides what constitutes a private discussion, and what is a public broadcast? Where do you draw the line, and how do you enforce it?
By creating an unquestionably brilliant game and taking revenue from a player-base of 5.5 million people each month, Blizzard has built a global phenomenon and helped to turn around the fortunes of its parent company, Vivendi Universal Games. What the firm must now also be coming to realise - and what any other firm who would like to follow its success in the online gaming market must learn from - is that it has also taken on significant responsibilities to those millions of paying customers. If you want to profit from creating an online society, then you must be prepared to do the difficult and delicate work of policing and regulating that society evenly, fairly and in line with the needs of its players. Simply burying your head in the sand and telling everyone to shut up is not the approach that your players - your customers - deserve.