Outlawing Play

On Tuesday, the US government took an uninformed step toward discriminating against our favorite race of games: massively multiplayer online ones. In an article titled Online-Gambling Shares Plunge on Passage of U.S. Crackdown Law, Eric Pfanner reported for the New York Times that "Congress passed legislation over the weekend that would make it a crime to use credit cards or online payment systems for Internet betting." While the bill has no direct effect on MMOs, the implications for the future are striking. Every researcher in this subsection of games, from Taylor to Koster to Steinkheuler, and especially Castranova, notes how games are becoming more and more integrated with players lives to the extent that the games deeply affect how players assess value and spend money. What is the difference between betting on a horse race and spending very real "play money" on items in a virtual worlds which can be won or lost (or damaged) through skill and chance? If there is a distinction, it might not be considered in a vote that, for instance, has Congressman focused on security:

The legislation, championed by Representative Jim Leach, Republican of Iowa, was added to an unrelated bill on port security and passed in the rush to complete business before a Congressional recess in advance of the Nov. 7 elections.

"There is nothing in Internet gambling that adds to the G.D.P. or makes America more competitive in the world," Mr. Leach said. "Everyone loses if this industry continues its remarkable growth trends" (Pfanner).

So, the concern, it seems, is about the growth of a frivolous industry, leaving America poorer and less competitive. If utility is now a cornerstone of legality, congressmen may need to brush up on their psychology. Entertainment is useful in many ways -- for driving creativity and innovation, for building community, for motivating education, and for maintaining the cultural imperialism the US has enjoyed for at least 60 years. If the argument against these frivolous industries is security- or competition-driven, undermining a core cultural export would be a poor strategic move.

However, the integrity of the argument to support the bill just passed is unfortunately irrelevant. While Jim Leach might or might not vote against the MMO industry, impartial judges may interpret the ramifications of this current bill and apply them to the latest World of Warcraft. The results would be sobering. Again from the article, "On a Black Monday for the online-gambling industry, companies that operate Internet betting sites and payment systems lost billions of dollars in market value after the United States government moved to criminalize the processing of online wagers." How easy it is to substitute "MMO" for "online-gambling" in that sentence.

My contention is that MMOs are currently protected because politicians think of them primarily or solely as play spaces (if at all), whereas gambling sites involve "real money."

PartyGaming, which generates 78 percent of its revenue in the United States, said it would suspend all 'real money' transactions with United States-based customers if President Bush signs the bill into law, as is expected within the next two weeks (Pfanner).

However, when someone blows the whistle on how these play spaces involve "real money," our immunity as game developers may evaporate. This is especially true when it becomes clear that game designers are creating experiences that deliberately resemble gambling. As Castranova articulates, "The risk system should reward rational oddsmaking and betting" (179). He's right. Oddsmaking and betting make good gameplay. But when they involve "play money" which can be bought with and sold for "real money," they may also make legally vulnerable gameplay.

Real money trades (RMT) have been anathema to many game designers for years. Only lately have developers been coming around to the idea of new business models and payment systems that allow trading and purchasing of virtual assets. However, unskilled government intervention could "force" developers to restrict such trade. Again, from the Pfanner article:

Online operators said details of how the new legislation would be enforced remained unclear; the bill would require the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve System to put in place procedures to bar transactions with online gambling sites within 270 days. Many American banks, credit card issuers and online payment systems, under pressure from the government, already block such transactions.

Here, the banks represent game developers, which would experience similar pressures. But how can such trades be blocked? Do we have the follow-through to make this a national priority? If terror cells plan operations or move capital in virtual spaces, maybe so.

What can game developers do to prevent the application of this and future laws to our online worlds? We need to figure out as an industry how to handle real money trades. I believe they're here to stay and can't be stopped, and that MMO operators should follow Sony's example with Station Exchange and try to restrict these trades to designated servers that players can choose or not choose. In addition to improving play, this will present the image that game developers have control over their worlds, potentially reducing the likelihood of legislative intervention. In the future, we will need more effective lobbying in Washington. Everyone who votes on legislation needs to know what MMOs are and why they're important. However, with lobbying comes the risk of increasing focus on MMOs, which could always lead to legislation. It may be useful to wait until even more, and more diverse, people play MMOs, to combat the potential perception that it would be a political slamdunk to criticize and regulate them. To that end, academics studying MMOs should continue to focus on and publicize any findings about these worlds becoming increasingly mainstream and the positive impacts they can have. Also, we need more MMOs for educational purposes (we're starting to have some), to make it even harder to say they're all violence and frivolity. We need these studies educational games and the press they attract to build a positive image. Those of us who've fallen in love with MMOs know they're worth defending, so let's go defend them.

Further Reading

Tide's Horizon
Raph Koster
GamingPublic
PlayNoEvil

Works Cited

Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic Worlds, The Business and Culture of Online Games, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

Pfanner, Eric. "Online-Gambling Shares Plunge on Passage of U.S. Crackdown Law." New York Times 3 October 2006. 4 October 2006. <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/03/technology/03gamble.html>.


I've also published this article at OGX.com.