Bryan Young
Spring 2001
Folklore

An Explanation and Examination and of Community, and Flow in Multi-Player First-Person Shooter Gaming

	The genre of computer gaming known as the First-Person Shooter (FPS) is still in its infancy.  Although preceded by other games, multi-player FPS gaming was popularized by the id software games Doom and Quake.  While multi-player gaming is typically not a formalized event, the event is becoming more formalized as it is becomes more established.  There is a strong community aspect amongst gamers, but the community is not formed in the way that one may think.  Additionally, the gameplay event represents a formalized structured time where flow of the gameplay takes a large role in the level of enjoyment the participants derive from the game.
	Before beginning with an examination of community and elements of flow that is present within FPS multi-player gaming, it is probably best to first describe what exactly FPS multi-player gaming is.  The name FPS, or First-Person Shooter, is fairly self-explanatory. The FPS is a type of computer game that is played from the first-person perspective. The player sees the game world through the characterÕs eyes.  In a typical FPS, the player sees an arm jutting up from the bottom of the screen that is most often carrying a some sort of gun, hence the use of the word shooter (see figure 1).  The intent is to make the player feel as if they are in the game.
	Gameplay of the FPS can be split into two general types: single player and multi-player.  Although there are exceptions on both ends of the spectrum, most FPS shipped today come with both types of gameplay.  While most games come with both types, typically the two types are not similar in style of gameplay.  Single player gaming in the FPS most often consists of running through a series of corridors, shooting anything that moves and looking for a way out. In a single player game, the person is only playing against the computer.
In some ways, this game type can be compared to going through a haunted house (however it should be noted that the main intent of the game is not always scaring the player as it is with a haunted house).  Various monsters jump out at the player and the player tries to kill them before the monster kills them. Although programmers are constantly developing more and more sophisticated monsters and bots, they are still programs and it is fairly easy for most gamers to detect and exploit any patterns or weaknesses of the program fairly easily. 

Bryan:	Is it funner to play by yourself or to be in a room [playing against] other people?

Jeff:	Being in a room with other people.  By yourself, as good as the AI is, it still gets predictable.  You still figure out where theyÕre going to go, what theyÕre going to do. Like for instance, Unreal Tournament, the very end, with whoever it is [the botÕs name].  ItÕs very very predictable.  HeÕll spawn, and go up to the top to the rocket launcher and then go back down, get the shield.  The AI is not autonomous. It cannot think for itself.  It still follows some sort of script.  That script can change based on external stimuli, for instance your position, where youÕre coming from and if youÕre shooting at him or not shooting at him.  If that item isnÕt there, at that point he will just freak out and either start camping or run around.  ItÕs predicable.

In multi-player, the player is playing against other people.  Multi-player gaming has several variations but they can be usually broken down into what is known as co-op, deathmatch, or team play.  Co-op, short for cooperative, is the least popular of the gameplay styles and is a playing style that is often left out of the game.  In co-op, players play cooperatively against the computer controlled monsters.  As co-op play is relatively unpopular and none of the participants in this project play co-op very often.
	In the purest forms of deathmatch, and team play, the players are playing against other human beings.  In deathmatch the game is played Òevery man for himself.Ó  Everyone is fair game and players shoot everything that moves.  This is different from single player in that it is not generally (although it may for a change of pace be) played in the more maze-like playing fields (otherwise known as maps) that the single player game is typically played on.  Additionally, there is a different feel to the game when playing against humans rather than machines.  Logically, team play is played with teams.  There are different types of teamplay.  The most popular styles being simple, paintball style, Òmy team kills your teamÓ and capture the flag, which is based upon the childrenÕs game.
	Beyond this, there are two basic methods of connecting with other people in order to play a multi-player game: internet-based and LAN based. With Internet multi-player, the player is not in the same room with the people he is playing against and is generally playing against strangers via an Internet connection.  With LAN play, people who know each other bring their computers over to someone's house and they are actually in the same as the people they play against.  These types of gathering are known as LAN parties.
	As anyone who has had to wait for a web page to load can attest, there are, at time, serious bottlenecks on the Internet.  These bottlenecks, this lag, does not just affect web pages, it can also have a negative affect on net-based FPS gaming.  It is not at all uncommon for a playerÕs internet connection to Òlag out,Ó halting the game while the computer waits to receive more information to be transmitted across the internet, only to find that while the player was ÒfrozeÓ someone had taken an Òeasy killÓ and shot him.  Therefore it is not surprising that most of the people that participated in the project play almost exclusively at LAN parties. Broadband connections do a great deal to help eliminate this lag, but they also give them a decisive advantage over those who have traditional dial-up connections.
	On the Internet, there is much talk of the gaming community.  When a person pictures a gaming community they are most likely to picture a group of gamers playing their games together.  However, for gamers, this is not the primary site of community building.  The pace of most FPSÕs is so fast that if someone were to take time out to type a message or to treat it like a chat room and try to start a conversation, they would get shot.  Since the keyboard and mouse are the devices used to control the game, it is very to type and play the game at the same time.  It is generally an either/or situation.  When people play FPS via the Internet they typically use a program such as Gamespy to find a server that will give them the lowest lag.  Most players, especially ones with dial up connections as well as the people I talked to, do not try to play against their friends in this sort of situation and none of them have ever made any friends through Internet based play.  The gameplay is just too fast to allow for any sort of meaningful interaction and when they get tired of playing, they just log off and do not even have the opportunity to discuss the plays of the game as traditional athletes do after they have finished playing a game.  In this way it is different than a chat room or instant messenger system where people actually can make friendships with people they have never met.
	With Internet based play, it does not typically matter who you are playing against, it is only your net connection and skill that matters (not necessarily in that order).  As explained above, for an experienced player to beating the computer is not difficult.  Playing against strangers is more fun than playing against the computer.  While it is true that people do have Òhandles,Ó or names, that the most avid players can get to remember, and there certainly are types of game play that are more conducive to making friends, most multi-player gaming remains a place where people come a strangers and leave as strangers.  It is not unimaginable that someday when the computer is sophisticated enough, Internet based FPS multi-player gaming will become extinct.
	One would think, then, that the LAN party would be a place that would permit the creation of community and while that is correct, it is not for the reasons that initially spring to mind.  Although I have never been to a LAN party and was unable to set one up for this paper, from the information that the subjects interviewed told me, most LAN parties consist of people who are already friends before they arrive at the LAN party.  Even if there is a stranger present, there is at least the typical, ÒHey, this is Billy.  Billy, this is TerryÓ Ðtype of introduction, so the players are not total strangers.  
	As in Internet based play, during the actual game play there is no time to hold a deep reasoned conversation.  However, because people are in the same room as each other, Òtrash-talkingÓ happens in much the same way as it does in traditional sports.
Bryan:	when a new person comes along is there any sort of hazing or initiating that goes on?

Clint:	Oh, no. They either have to understand that we are going to haze each other all the time so thatÕs Ð Having these LAN parties and stuff, we just make fun of each other and go at each other trying to show that weÕre better.  A new person can just sit in and play the games as long as they understand that arguing and hazing is going to go on, theyÕll be fine.

While this trading of friendly insults is certainly a form of bonding, a form of communitas, and it can be the beginnings or the foundation for a friendship, it really is not the formation of a bond any deeper than that of being a fellow competitor.  Deeper and broader types of bonding occur when the games are turned off.  That is when the players can sit around and Òshoot the breeze,Ó and get to know each other on a more personal and intimate level.  The bonding that occurs during the actual game play should not be discounted, however.
	As Victor Turner tells us, ÒThe languages through which a group communicates itself to itself are not, of course, confined to talking codes: they include gestures, music, dancing, graphic representation, painting, sculpture and the fashioning of symbolic objectsÓ (33).  I would include multi-player gaming on this list.  Games that are popular in a culture speak something about the culture.  Becoming a good gamer is not an instantaneous process.  It takes time, and since most of these FPS are best played with the keyboard and mouse, it can take time to figure out what keys do what and what mouse buttons to use and so forth.  When a person becomes good at these games, it is a skill just as is painting or dancing.  The difference is, of course, that this is a mediated and virtual skill and there are typically no spectators, only participants.  ÒEssentially, public reflexivity takes the form of a performanceÓ (ibid. 33) (emphasis TurnerÕs).  Gaming is a performance.
	Many gamers make distinctions between gamers and people who play games.  In an email Jeff told me what he thinks makes a person a gamer and not just a person who plays games:
A gamer actually gets into the game, attempts to customize it, add mods, tweak its performance.  You might equate it to a car, there are people who just hop in their car and rive it, never check the fluids, tire pressure, or anything like that.  Then you have people who care for their car, wash it, wax it, keep the interior and engine area clean, stuff like that.  Once you know what to look for, the line is very easily drawn. (Cerullo)

Just as car people gather to compare their cars, so too do gamers compare computers to see who has the fastest computer and best looking case.  Amongst some gamers, there is an almost fetishized need to make the rig better and better.  During the same email, Jeff explained how this competitiveness works amongst gamers:
>How important is it to have a home built or customized (just more ram or videocard->wise, not painted or anything) to be a "real" gamer?  

I know I mentioned the whole 'respect' issue with you, this definitely applies.  People who are intelligent enough to build their own system will take an opportunity to "brag" (for lack of a better word) about it.  You can parallel it to really anyone who is "good" at what they do.  
Professional athletes, game programmers (for a perfect example research Linus Torvalds,
his ego is REALLY big, although he does have a bigger OS to back it up...) like to tell about their achievements because not many others can accomplish them.  Same goes with home- builders.  Now, if you are talking about someone who bought a e-machine (present company excluded from all forthcoming comments :) ) and upgraded from 64 to 128 MB of RAM, the fact remains that they still have a e-machine.  Retail box = lowered respect.  I am a little biased from my experiences selling computers to the masses, but I have to admit, when I see someone on my floor trying to play Q3A on a piece of shit HP, I feel bad for them.  Then you have the rich kids.  Perfect example, there was a freshman on my floor who just bought a 1.4GHz P4 Gateway (another point of reference, do NOT get caught using RDRAM at a LAN party with techies or anyone who reads Slashdot regularly.  Chances are, you will be asked to leave :) ) and bragging on how his system is better.  As soon as I got my GHz Athlon in the mail, we ran Unreal Tournament together.  My system ended up being faster.  I never let him forget it.  I'm sure you 
have seen it before, rich parents overspend on the kid, buy them a $3000 machine, and they talk shit.  That is the beauty of building your own box, you have full control over your components, you can do whatever you want with them. Even tweak them to come dangerously close to a 1.4P4 :) (Cerullo)

	During a prior interview, Jeff discussed some of the motivations and reasoning that gamers have for constantly trying to improve their computers (or rigs, as they are sometimes known).
Bryan:	Why do you like Unreal Tournament better than Q3A [Quake 3: Arena, both are kinds of FPS]?

Jeff:  	Graphics.  

Bryan: 	Graphics?

Jeff: 	I mean itÕs basically from the standpoint of the gamer, and IÕm sure youÕve done this.  That you have a sizable income source.  The first thing you keep on doing is buying new stuff for your rig.  You just keep on having it be, not that you have unlimited income or close to the bleeding edge but close to the cutting edge that you can get with your current income stream. For instance with my previous job, in my year and a half away from BG I was making a lot of money and that money almost entirely went into my system. So with the graphic card and my set-up I have, I can play basically any game I want and have really good graphics. Unreal tournament happens to have for whatever reason a lot better graphics than Q3A.

In an interview with another person, I was told how the car show aspect of gaming plays out in LAN parties.  These parties serve as a place where people can put their rigs on display and compare them with others.
Bryan:	So is there a rivalry to see who has a better computer or anything?

Clint:	Oh yeah.  Always.  To see who has better processors, better video cards, who can run this game better. I know for a while I only had my 233mhz Pentium processor that would only run at 200 because my motherboard wouldnÕt go any faster, so I used that thing for files and thatÕs it.  The last party I was at I used that thing just for an MP3 Shoutcast server. Now that I have a new computer I can do more with it.

Bryan: ThatÕs cool.  We upgraded my dadÕs to a 200.  Another thing I was thinking about was does anyone decorate their cases or anything?

Clint:	Yeah.  We want to decorate our cases.  I know one person doesnÕt really need to because he has this cool server case that has a door on the front and its black and everything.  I want to decorate my case.  I just havenÕt had the time to yet.  I want to paint a symbol on there and different little pictures and stuff.  I want to get a sticker on the front.  My own little sticker.  Got to have that.

	In this way, the computer is another way, besides the actual gameplay itself, for people to compete against others as well as to build community.  If a person comes to a LAN party with a factory built case, they may be looked down upon and quite possibly would not be considered a ÒtrueÓ gamer.  Because FPS's are typically very fast passed, skill at them depends on hand-eye coordination and the ability to think quickly.  Modifying (modding) a computer is something that takes both planing as well as patience. In this way a whole different set of skills come to the forefront for the gaming community.  If a person is not the best at the game, then it is possible for them to at least have the fastest, or best looking computer.
	Computer gaming takes place in a virtual and nonphysical world.  The events that go on there are largely unrecorded and once they occur they are gone.  Therefore, there is little if any physical, actual, or real way for gamers to have status symbols of their abilities.  Professional basketball players have game films, and their highlights appear on TV.  Because of this those who were not present can see what they did and become aware of their achievements.  This gives them a reputation.  This gives them prestige.  In this day and age, even the most well known gamer, such as Thresh, is unknown to virtually all Americans and of that (comparatively) small number who know who Thresh is, very few of them know what he looks like.  Thus it can be seen, that for the local, totally unknown gamer, there are few ways to make themselves stick out or to make their ÒL34+Ó skills known.  One of the few visual signifiers gamers have is their computer. Additionally, one of the few ways the gamer is able draw attention to themselves in a non-mediated way is through the device, which facilitates the mediation, namely, their computer.  Because the games create a level of homogeneity and anonymity, to eliminate this, someone can draw attention and eliminate the homogenizing efforts by taking their beige computer and either make it run better than anyone elseÕs, or by making it look different than anyone elseÕs.   
	This car show atmosphere, while drawing attention to one person, also has the affect of creating community as the gamers can talk about their components and have a friendly competition over who has the fastest, or best looking computers.  The act of modding a computer shows skills and those skill can help create camaraderie between the gamers.  Common interests create bonds.
	The community that is built around the game, not through the game.  The actual physical computer has become a site for bonding amongst the gamers.  Since the game is mediated and non-corporeal, it seems logical that there would develop some physical manifestation of gamer status.  When people gather together to play the games, there is a bonding that occurs before the games are even played.  The computers must be set up and connected via the network.  This is a social atmosphere where friendships are made and people talk to each other.
Clint:	One of the biggest things is just getting together beforehand, like before you start playing the games and hooking up everything.  You have to hook that stuff up so you can play it.  ItÕs just a lot of fun cause, you know, we sit there and yell at each other, ÒNo youÕre doing that wrong, letÕs fix it.Ó Or trying to get Internet connection sharing working so that everyone can use the Internet. ItÕs like, ÒNo thatÕs wrong.Ó

Bryan:	IÕve never been to a LAN party.  Tell me what goes on in one.

Jeff:	Basically, after the bitching for an hour and a half about who canÕt get their networkÕs to run.

Bryan:	ThatÕs what IÕm interested in.  Tell about me how that works.

Jeff:	ThereÕs always someone who doesnÕt know how to administer their box.  Always at least one or two people.  

	Victor Turner credits Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi with defining flow as Òa state in which action follows action according to an inner logic which seems to need no conscious intervention on our part; we experience it as a unified flowing from one moment to the next, in which we feel in control of our actions, and in which there is little distinction between self and environment, between stimulus and response, or between past, present, and futureÓ (47).  In my interviews, one of the questions I continually came back to was, ÒWhat do you get out of computer gaming?Ó  It seems that enjoyment of computer games derives from the flow experience.  ÒThe flow experienceÉÉ is the crucial component of enjoymentÓ (Csikszentmihalyi 11).
Csikszentmihalyi, in his work Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, sets out a framework for defining, analyzing and studying flow within autotelic activities. Csikszentmihalyi initially interviewed Òabout sixty respondentsÓ who partake in such activities as hockey, soccer, spelunkers, mountain climbing, handball, and swimming (10). If Merriam-WebsterÕs Online Dictionary defining of autotelic as, Òhaving a purpose in and not apart from itselfÓ is correct, then it is obvious that computer games, in general, can be said to be autotelic (ÒautotelicÓ).  The FPS, like most other games, be they computer based or otherwise, do not have a useful purpose.  They are for fun and while it can be said that they are part of a larger project to reproduce societal norms, most people, players included, consider them a form of recreation. 
	Through his research, Csikszentmihalyi was able to identify six defining characteristics of flow.  First Person Shooters are games and Ògames are obvious flow activities and play is the flow activity par excellenceÓ (emphasis his) (Csikszentmihalyi 37).  Turner summarizes the first aspect of flow as, Òaction and awareness are experienced as oneÓ (47).  This is a necessity in the majority of FPSÕs as the action is so fast that he who hesitates loses.  All strategy must either be worked out ahead of time or on the fly.  Avid players take time to get to know each map before they play against other people.  Additionally, while a person plays, a revelation may occur so that someone may get an extra kill in on someone.  There is no time, however, to sit back and analyze the situation.  When something happens, you have to act on it or get blown away.
	The second element of flow is the centering of attention Òon a limited stimulus fieldÓ (Turner 47).  This is certainly true for FPS gaming since the game occurs on the screen and through the speakers.  ÒRules motivations, rewards, the will to participate are seen as framing devices, necessary limitations for the centering of attentionÓ (Ibid. 47). The game is all; when people play the game and get, Òinto the zone,Ó the game is all that matters.  They do not bother to question, Òwhy are these characters trying to kill each other?Ó or Òwho built this gigantic castle we are playing in?Õ  They are centered on the gameplay itself to such a degree that all that matters is the gameplay.  The playÕs the thing as the saying goes.
This element of flow is also tied into the first element.  Since action and awareness are experienced as one, the awareness of outside stimuli is lessened and a player who is very into the game will not notice other things going on outside of the game.  Amy, one of the gamers I interviewed, likes to take advantage of this fact in order to playfully distract others at the LAN party.
Amy:	ItÕs kind of like ÒDonÕt talk to them when theyÕre playing.Ó  Because its like IÕll goof around, like go around the room randomly and hit buttons, and itÕs like ÒOh my god how could you do that.Ó  Because theyÕll accidentally die and theyÕll be like, ÒOh my god I had all these weapons and now I have to start all over.Ó

So here it can be seen that if they do not even see someone sneaking up behind them and reaching around their shoulder, it is because they are so into the game that their attention is centered on such a narrow and limited stimulus field.
	Csikszentmihalyi states that Òin games, rules define the relevant stimuli and exclude everything else as irrelevantÓ (41).  Rules, however, are not enough to engage the player and create flow.  Certainly a FPS with only rules and no pay-off would be boring.  Something else must be added into the mix to induce flow.  ÒPerhaps the simplest of these inducements is competition.  The addition of a competitive element to a game usually ensures the undivided attention of a player who would not be motivated otherwiseÓ (Csikszentmihalyi 41).  
	When Jeff told me, ÒBy yourself, as good as the AI is, it still gets predictable.Ó  He was unknowingly talking about this aspect of flow.  There must be an element of competition to the game or it is not interesting.  It gets boring (which is one of the reasons why Csikszentmihalyi named his book, Beyond Boredom and Anxiety).  It must be noted, however, that competition does not necessarily mean winning.  All of the people I interviewed repeatedly told me that they were not very good.  
Clint:	I really think there is more competition on the Internet rather than in a friend group.  The competition in friends is just a friendly competition.  ItÕs no big deal.  I can be as bad as I am in games like Quake and Unreal Tournament.  IÕm not very good at these games and no one cares.  

Now certainly this could be taken as mere modesty, and it may have been considered just that had only one person told me this.  However, every person said this, so it is probably safe to assume that at least one person was not being modest and he or she really is not that good.  This is important as it proves that winning is not everything.  Of course it feels good to win, but winning is not necessarily the point.  The flow is the point.  There is of course the necessary requirement of being competitive.  This aspect shall be touched upon later.
The other side of competition is cooperation.  In team based play, if the members of a team are not working together, or even if the members of the other team are not working together, then it is not as much fun.  It is not as much fun because the gaming session does not have a good flow. 
Bryan:	Does it matter who you are playing against then [when you are online] or is it just someone to play against?   

Jeff:	Not really. Not really.  I mean, it always pisses me off if you have either a) unbalanced teams, b) one guy who is just so much better than anybody else, he just wipes everybody clean.  I mean he ends up with like 110 frags [kills] and you have like 30 or 40 or whatever.  I mean itÕs always nice to have either two people like that on either team or teams that are balanced.  IÕve played matches that IÕve gone like two or three hours because the teams were so good and everybody interacted so well and them places IÕve gone like ten minutes and I just got pissed off and left...  but if people are cool about it then IÕll play for hours.
Clearly then, cooperation is as important if not more important than competition in FPSÕs. 
	The third attribute of flow is the Òloss of ego: the ÔselfÕ which is ordinarily the broker between one personÕs actions and another simply becomes irrelevant.  The actor immersed in the flow, accepts the framing rules as binding which also bind the other actors Ð no self is need to bargain about what should or should not be done or to negotiateÕ about the meaning to be assigned to actionsÓ (Turner 47).  In deathmatch, everyone is out for himself or herself, so there is no real question about which role a person should play.  They should shoot anything that moves.  
	However, all of the subjects interviewed prefer team-based play.  In team based play, ideally there are definitive roles for the players.  Perhaps they prefer team-based play over deathmatch because there is more structure for the player, more of a defined role.  ÒAs long as the rules are respected, a flow situation is a social system with no devianceÓ (Csikszentmihalyi and Bennett cited in Csikszentmihalyi 43).  There are times when the players communicate to each other about what should be done, but then again there are times when everyone knows what should be done and they work as a team without anyone issuing direct orders.
Jeff:	Sometimes you actually know what everyone else wants you to do.  Like if there are people going for the flag you can kind of figure it out.  OK everyoneÕs going off now just sit there and pick people off or go for the flag or whatever.  Just stuff like that.
Clint:	A good team is also one that recognizes the qualities.  If someoneÕs a better defender.  If someoneÕs a better, you know, runner, someone can back up another person very well. It's recognizing those qualities and being able to use them.  ThatÕs a good team.

Of course many of the details dealing most directly with the concept of loss of ego are internal and difficult to express.  It would be helpful if further research focused on this aspect of flow more fully.
	ÒStill another characteristic of a person in flow is that he is in control of his actions and or the environment.  He has no active awareness of control but is simply not worried by the possibility of lack of controlÓ (Csikszentmihalyi 44).  This is generally true of people who play first person shooters.  They believe in the game and they know unambiguously whether or not the action that they have taken is the correct one.  There are no shades of gray in the world of FPSÕs.  Either you hit the person or you did not.  Either you are alive or you are not.  That was a good shot or a bad shot.  
	One thing that can disturb this control is cheating.  In a mediated environment such as computer gaming cheating is very hard to prove and is harder to prevent.  When playing on the Internet against strangers, it is almost impossible to tell if a person is cheating or not.  People who get accused of cheating of course deny that they are and unless you see their character do something that is known to be impossible, then it is impossible to know if they are cheating or not.  Even when someone is at a LAN party, generally they are still using their own computer and have the opportunity to install a cheat and hide it so that it is hard to detect.  
	Because it is so hard to determine whether or not someone is cheating, whenever someone gets too many more frags than all of the other players, they are accused of cheating.  To achieve flow, Òyou have to be a believerÓ (Turner 48).  If you do not believe the players are playing fair, then you will not be able to enter a state of flow and you will leave the game.  This is what is happening to the most popular of the multi-player FPSÕs, Counter-Strike.  Rumors of cheating in this game are rampant and while the creators are trying to prevent and detect the cheats, it seems inevitable that there will always be some new way to cheat and this is driving players away from the game.  A search for Òcounter strike cheatingÓ on Google turned up over ten thousand hits for sites discussing this problem.  
	Another aspect that can remove the amount of control a player has over the gaming environment that is lag.  As previously described, lag is when the game has to wait for information from the Internet and very often in FPSÕs when someone gets lagged out by the time the game catches up, the player will be dead.  There is very little that the player can do about this problem and so lag takes the ability to control the environment away from the players.  If the flow is the point, and lag breaks or disrupts flow, then seems entirely possible that lag is one of the reasons that all of the people interviewed for this project preferred LAN parties over internet based play.  Lag reduces the amount of control one has over his or her actions and environment.  This causes reduced flow, which leads to reduced fun.  Therefore lag reduces the amount of fun a person has while playing these games.  Now this fact is obvious to nearly anyone who has played these games, but the emphasis on flow is unique and, as stated, helps explain one of the reasons that LAN parties are considered by many to be more fun than internet play.
	A third way in which lack of control over actions and environment can disrupt flow is detailed by Steven Poole in his book, Trigger Happy.  In it, Poole lists three instances of what he calls, ÒincoherenceÓ which are responsible for ruining a gameplaying experience.  Although he is talking about videogames in general rather than FPSÕs, his categorization still applies.  
	The first instance of ÒincoherenceÓ he describes is that of causality (Poole 51).  Incoherence of causality occurs in a FPS when, for example a rocket launcher can blow a person into bits (or gibs), but cannot destroy a door.  Now there are certainly sound reasons for this incongruity; it is really hard to make everything deformable and the ability to blow up walls and doors would change the gameplay.  However, it can be very frustrating for a player if they try to do something like that and it cannot happen.  Within the construct of the game world, there is no logical reason why a rocket launcher can only hurt people and not the surroundings.  That is just the way it is, and it can be a source of frustration that disrupts flow.
	The second type of incoherence is that of function and Poole considers this type to be Òmore seriousÓ as it pertains to what he calls ÒÕsingle-useÕ objectsÓ (51).  ÔSingle-useÕ objects are items within the game world that can only be used for one purpose and one purpose only.  Some types of games are very guilty of this; such as in a fantasy role-playing game where a character needs a specific gem or spell to complete a task and then are useless once the task is complete.  As FPS games are typically fairly simple, they are usually fairly good about making items Ômulti-use.Õ An example of this would be the grappling hook.  
	In many styles of capture the flag, the character has a grappling hook which can be used, and was originally intended to, help the players to access high and out of the way locations.  Players, however, have applied the grappling hook to areas that they are not intended to be used in.  For example, players can swing, Tarzan style from area to area with the hook, they can shoot their hook at other players and injure them, or they can even shoot the hook at a low angle so that it catches into, say, a wall on the opposite side of the room, and when the player retracts it, they are pulled to the other side of the room faster than they could run.
	ÒThe third type of incoherence is that of spatial managementÓ (Poole 52).  Because characters are computer generated, every movement they are capable of making is preprogrammed into them.  Players cannot come up with new movements, only new combinations of movements. Because of this, the architecture within the game world must be built to certain specific dimensions or the characters will either get ÒstuckÓ in certain places, or will not be able to get into certain places at all.  Because the combinations of movements the players can put the characters through is nearly infinite, it is practically (in the strictest sense of the word) impossible for the designers to test a map to make sure that every single area is accessible and that characters will not get stuck.  Every gamer has at one point or another had the experience of their character getting stuck on something that looks like it should not be an obstacle.  This incoherence of spatial management disrupts flow.  It distracts from the reality of the game and draws attention to the artificial-ness of the game, ruining the fun of the game. 
	ÒA final characteristic of the flow experience is its ÔautotelicÕ nature.  In other words, it appears to need no goals or rewards external to itselfÓ (Csikszentmihalyi 47).  It may appear that winning is the goal of gaming.  It may seem like LAN parties are only about competition, but they are not.  As Jeff said,Ó I mean, it always pisses me off if you have either a) unbalanced teams, b) one guy who is just so much better than anybody else, he just wipes everybody clean.  I mean he ends up with like 110 frags [kills] and you have like 30 or 40 or whatever.Ó  Clearly, then it is no fun, the game does not flow, if one player or one team dominates the other players or team.  The people I have talked to have said that if the game is going well, if it is flowing well, then they will play for hours, but if the game isnÕt flowing well, then they will quickly loose interest.  They did not, however, mention that one of the requirements of having fun is that they must be winning. The flow is its own rewards.  
	However, there are two ways in which it may be hard for the flow may not be its own reward: frustration and boredom.  When the opponents are either too good or too bad, then there exists a situation where either frustration or boredom will overcome the flow state.  
Bryan:	Do you really get into it?  As much as they do?

Amy:	Not as much as they do. I just kind of sit there and like this is fun for a Ð I get bored after like a half an hour or an hour and I have to go do something else.  They can sit there playing for hours and hours and hours and they just never get bored with it.  

Bryan:	Why do you think that is?

Amy: 	I think its because they are a lot better at it than I am.  Like I get so frustrated when because IÕm trying to actually play and I canÕt figure out how the controllers move and all kinds of things because it just changes so much and there are so many different weapons.  They all study it so much they know what every single weapon is and what it does and how to make it work best.  They are just so into it that its like I get bored because I canÕt figure it out.

Although both bored and frustrated are used, it would seem that her discontentment with the games stems from the fact that her skills are not as great as those of her peers.  It is conceivable that if all the players had equal skill levels, she would enjoy the experience more and for longer than thirty minutes at a time.
	Boredom and frustration are two of the enemies of flow.  Amy gets frustrated and she does not want to play any more.  There are, however, ways to deal with both boredom and frustration to create a situation where the game does become fun again.  For someone who is frustrated with the difficulty of the game, one of the options is to devote more time to the game and become better at it.  
	Amy does not take this route. She takes the route that is viable for both those who are bored as well as those who are frustrated.  Csikszentmihalyi states that, ÒConversely, if one is bored one can return to flow either by finding a means to increase environmental challenges or by handicapping oneself and reducing the level of skillsÓ (53).  It is possible to broaden this statement so that it includes both the boredom as well as the frustration state.  I propose that flow can be regained not only by simply increasing the environmental challenges, but more generally, by changing the environmental challenges.  To get back into the flow, to get back into the fun, she changes her goals.  Once she becomes frustrated with the game, she changes her attentions makes up her own game.  This game is not centered on the computer, but around the people playing the computer.  
Amy:	ItÕs kind of like ÒDonÕt talk to them when theyÕre playing.Ó  Because its like IÕll goof around, like go around the room randomly and hit buttons, and itÕs like ÒOh my god how could you do that.Ó  Because theyÕll accidentally die and theyÕll be like, ÒOh my god I had all these weapons and now I have to start all over.Ó

	What Amy has done here is to create here own game.  This game has the dual effect of creating her own flow, one that is not related to the first-person shooter, as well as disrupting the flow of the other players.  In this way she is making her own rules and her own game.  Additionally, by disruption the flow of other people she is making the game more competitive and less frustrating for her.
Flow is seen as one of the necessary ingredients for success in athletics.  Athletes are told that they must Òget into the zoneÓ and they must, Òjust let it flow.Ó  Flow exists in sport, dance, writing and in traditional games.  Computer gamers in general and people who play first-person shooters are often stereotyped as being lonely, anti-social losers.  Flow and community exist here as well.  Flow is a necessity for enjoyment of a first-person shooter.  Even more than this, my research has shown that gamers are, in fact, not anti-social, but very social.  They prefer to play their games together and in person rather than via the Internet.  This communitas increases the flow of the game. 
The community of gamers is one that is built around the computer, but not through the computer.  People who play the games use their computers as a site for bonding and as a way of building community.  The do not cause the bonding however.  Most writing about multi-player gaming tends to see this type of community as being similar to the community that is made by people who talk in internet chat rooms or participate in media Fandom simply be cause in both instances they are dealing with mediated communities.  However, my studies have shown that this does not appear to be true.  The elements of flow and competition that were exhibited by the subjects I interviewed suggest that gamers should not be lumped in with people who frequent chat rooms.  Multi-player first-person shooters have much in common with athletics and sports.  In fact my research indicates that they have more in common with athletics than they do with Internet chat rooms or Fandom.  Flow and competition are integral parts of the multi-player first-person shooter experience.

Figure 1

WORKS CITED

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly.  Beyond Boredom and Anxiety.  San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1975.

Poole, Steven.  Trigger Happy.  New York: Arcade Publishing, 2000.

Turner, Victor.  ÒFrame, Flow and Reflection: Ritual and Drama as Public Liminality.Ó  Performance in Postmodern Culture.  Eds.  Benamou, Michel and Charles Caramello.  Madison:  Coda Press, 1977. 33-55.