Geolocation game development paradoxes: A corporate perspective
https://doi.org/10.22394/2658-3895-2023-6-1-108-126
Abstract
The current article is a description of development processes of a geolocation game in a big Russian financial corporation. As intended, the game should encourage corporate clients to pay via QR codes provided by partner companies and branches of the bank. Basically, the corporation invests into promoting a new technology — QR payments — very popular in Asian countries but still relatively unknown to the Russian public. The main focus of the research is comprehension of the factors that define what the final version of the game app will look like.
The research is based on participant observation data gathered in September–December 2019 during collaborative work on the app’s game mechanics, as well as on seven semi-structured interviews with developers.
Developers are required to make the game “interesting”, that is, to immerse the users into the game mechanics of the app to the largest extent possible, while encouraging them to follow the intended financial pattern — to make QR payments. This leads to impossible choices also known as paradoxes, and we highlight three of those: 1) lack of understanding who are the target audience of the app, 2) necessity to camouflage the core gaming mechanic of the game — making QR payments, 3) necessity to protect clients’ data. All the three paradoxes have no unambiguously correct answer, therefore the developers need to overcome them by making controversial decisions with high degree of uncertainty. All in all, we intend to demonstrate that a significant technological transition that introducing of QR payments in Russia depends not only on the decisions made by the developers but also on a multi-level context within which the development process takes place, on resistance of already existing payment practices and on how competition on QR payments market will unfold.
About the Author
Konstantin P. Glazkov
Higher School of Economics, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Konstantin P. Glazkov,
Moscow.
References
1. Abramov, R. (2012). The Transformation of the Organizational and Professional Context of the Public Opinion Survey Industry in Russia: Macro- and Microanalysis. Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research, 2012(1), 45–75. (In Russian).
2. Kachaynova, N., Popova, N. (2016). Industrial sociology: Its origins and perspectives. Bulletin of Tyumen State University. Social, Economic and Legal Studies, 2(3), 29–38. (In Russian).
3. Pinchuk, O. (2018). “Non-standard” women’s working conditions on the factory floor: An instance of participant observation. Interaction. Interview. Interpretation, 10(15), 24–40. (In Russian).
4. Ahlqvist, O., Schlieder, C. (2018). Geogames and geoplay: Game-based approaches to the analysis of geo-information. New York: Springer International Publishing.
5. Aneesh, A. (2006). Virtual migration: The programming of globalization. Durham: Duke University Press.
6. Bell, G. (2006). No more SME from Jesus: Ubicomp, religion and techno-spiritual practices. In P. Dourish, A. Friday (Eds.). Ubicomp Conference Proceedings, 141–158. Berlin: SpringerVerlag.
7. Berkhout, F., Smith, A., Stirling, A. (2004). Socio-technological regimes and transition contexts. System Innovation and the Transition to Sustainability: Theory, evidence and policy, 44(106), 48–75.
8. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., Pinch, T. J. (Eds.). (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Blomberg, J. (2005). The coming of age of hybrids: Notes on ethnographic praxis. Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings, 2005(1), 67–74.
10. Blomberg, J. (2009). Insider trading: engaging and valuing corporate ethnography. In M. Cefkin (Ed.). Ethnography and the corporate encounter: Reflections on research in and of corporations, 213–226. New York: Berghahn Books.
11. Casey, C. (1995). Work, self, and society: After industrialism. London/New York: Routledge.
12. Cefkin, M. (2009). Introduction: Business, anthropology, and the growth of corporate ethnography. In M. Cefkin (Ed.). Ethnography and the corporate encounter: Reflections on research in and of corporations, 1–37. New York: Berghahn Books.
13. English-Lueck, J. A. (2002). Cultures@SiliconValley. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
14. Flynn, D. K. (2009). My customers are different. In M. Cefkin (Ed.). Ethnography and the corporate encounter: Reflections on research in and of corporations, 41–58. New York: Berghahn Books.
15. Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31(8–9), 1257–1274.
16. Geels, F. W., Kemp, R. (2007). Dynamics in socio-technical systems: Typology of change processes and contrasting case studies. Technology in Society, 29(4), 441–455.
17. Hjorth, L. (2007). The game of being mobile: One media history of gaming and mobile technologies in Asia-Pacific. Convergence, 13(4), 369–381.
18. Licoppe, C., Inada, Y. (2007). Supporting the emergence of specific forms of encounters through location awareness: the case of the Mogi players. In Proceedings of shared encounters workshop, CHI2007, USA.
19. Maranhäo, T. (1990). The interpretation of dialogue. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20. McCracken, G. D. (2005). Culture and consumption II: Markets, meaning, and brand management. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
21. Nafus, D., Anderson, K. (2006). The real problem: Rhetorics of knowing in corporate ethnographic research. In T. Lovejoy, K. Anderson (Eds.). Ethnographic praxis in industry conference proceedings, 244–258. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
22. Nelson, R., Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: a development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263.
24. Shove, E., Pantzar, M., Watson, M. (2012). The dynamics of social practice: Everyday life and how it changes. London: Sage.
25. Tedlock, D., Mannheim, B. (1995). The dialogic emergence of culture. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
26. Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), 131–153.
27. Wyatt, S. M., Oudshoorn, N., Pinch, T. (2003). Non-users also matter: The construction of users and non-users of the Internet. In N. Oudshoorn, T. Pinch (Eds.). How users matter: The co-construction of users and technology, 67–79. Camdridge, MA: MIT Press.
Review
For citations:
Glazkov K.P. Geolocation game development paradoxes: A corporate perspective. Urban Folklore and Anthropology. 2023;5(1):108-126. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/2658-3895-2023-6-1-108-126
Views:
88
Email this article 