Patch 5.4 patch notes
Virtual Realms feature revealed
The Proving Grounds are coming
The latest patch 5.4 newsSociologists using Warcraft to predict the future of human civilization; sell books
by Fox Van Allen 
Mar 25th 2010 at 7:00PM
When I was younger, I was in a perpetual war with my parents over video gaming. I suppose I still am in a way -- they still ask me when I'm going to "grow" out of them.
Because of this, I'm always on the lookout for ways to justify spending so much of my free time on my electronic hobby. Back in the days of the Super Nintendo, I insisted that I was building hand-eye coordination. Thankfully, I now have new ammunition: I am a participant in a "virtual prototype of tomorrow, of a real human future in which tribe-like groups will engage in combat over declining natural resources." One that scientists are actively studying and using to learn about our real-world society.
Those are the words of MIT Press, the publisher of a new book by sociologist Williams Sims Bainbridge, The Warcraft Civilization. The book is a product of over 2300 hours worth of game play by the author. New Scientist's Culture Lab has a fascinating interview with Bainbridge, giving insight into Warcraft and religion, Warcraft as the next afterlife, and Warcraft as a predictor of the future of Western civilization.
Because of this, I'm always on the lookout for ways to justify spending so much of my free time on my electronic hobby. Back in the days of the Super Nintendo, I insisted that I was building hand-eye coordination. Thankfully, I now have new ammunition: I am a participant in a "virtual prototype of tomorrow, of a real human future in which tribe-like groups will engage in combat over declining natural resources." One that scientists are actively studying and using to learn about our real-world society.
Those are the words of MIT Press, the publisher of a new book by sociologist Williams Sims Bainbridge, The Warcraft Civilization. The book is a product of over 2300 hours worth of game play by the author. New Scientist's Culture Lab has a fascinating interview with Bainbridge, giving insight into Warcraft and religion, Warcraft as the next afterlife, and Warcraft as a predictor of the future of Western civilization.
Bainbridge poses some pretty interesting questions about society, using the World of Warcraft as a medium to answer them. He notes the role of religion as a part of Warcraft -- players write it off as fantasy, but understand it being necessary to appreciate the game:
The horrendous question that always troubles me is, what if religion is factually false but necessary for human well-being? What does science do then?...Maybe we will move to a time when we no longer make a distinction between belief and the suspension of disbelief. The difference between faith and fantasy might not have been very distinct in ancient times, and it's possible that we will move towards a time when instead of religion, people's hopes can be expressed in something that's acknowledged to be a fantasy but also, on some level, sort of real. WoW might exemplify that kind of post-religious future.
For those of us who invest a little too much time in Warcraft, we can at least take solace in the fact that we're taking part of a culture that is, in its own special way, indistinguishable from the real world. One that needs to be preserved:I feel we need to create some kind of public digital library of the culturally or historically most interesting virtual worlds, many of these game-like, as they go out of business. There are at least three already out of business that need to be preserved, such as The Matrix Online. You can hear an authentic performance of Claudio Monteverdi's L'Orfeo opera from 1607, but you can't go to The Matrix Online. It's gone.
There's plenty more in the article, including a description of the world's first scientific conference where participants drowned and were mauled by hyenas. Or, as I like to call it, the most awesome scientific conference ever.
For those interested, The Warcraft Civilization was released on March 20 in the U.K. and is scheduled for release on March 31 here in the U.S.
For those interested, The Warcraft Civilization was released on March 20 in the U.K. and is scheduled for release on March 31 here in the U.S.
Filed under: News items
Reader Comments (Page 3 of 3)
MusedMoose Mar 25th 2010 9:15PM
Same here - I found that part, that quote, to be very, very interesting. I have really varied ideas about religion, partly due to personal reasons and partly due to not wanting to believe in things that can't be proven, and I really like the idea he's putting forth there. I want to be able to say, "Yes, I know it's not actually possible, but it's what I believe." Interesting way to go about it.
Mugutu Mar 29th 2010 2:54PM
@Mused
"I know that I can't fly, but I'd like to believe that I can." That's basically what you just said.
Let's see how far that gets you when you try to jump off a building :\
Sisqo Mar 25th 2010 9:21PM
Don't study WoW for this, look at Africa...
WoW and games like it that depict these sorts of reduced resources and small tribes combating over it are merely reflections of the trends that are currently occuring in our world.
Tezz Mar 25th 2010 11:35PM
i hope he took into account that players dont believe in the religion of wow because wow in itself is a game, maybe i misinterpreted what he was saying but i wouldnt base much on the wow universe, because the players know its fake, we as humans do not look on our world and think its fake, thus his hypothesis about religion isnt quite as strong.
The only time i have ever heard of a valid use of an mmo for scientific research is when they tested a virus' capability to spread throughout a community.
HumanPaladin Mar 26th 2010 2:21AM
WoW is not really a religion because while we might worship it, we know it was created by real people at Blizzard. But inside we play our toons as Avatars, and some classes like Priests and Paladins draw upon religion for their powers.
WoW is a way of life that is neither religion nor fact, but as mentioned, is fantasy. Studies have shown on average that people who believe in religion are happier than those who don't believe. So I think these fantasies are an important human tool for happiness, given as I suspect, that the more we learn about science the more people are lost to traditional religions.
Arkhell Mar 26th 2010 4:40AM
I'm an Atiest and i'm pretty much happy with it :) but indeed WoW isn't real enough to compare it to the nut cases that run around in the name of "what ever god" we are seeing latly.
Is god real? I believe not but hey opinion's vary on that topic.
Do people find conford in believing he is? I believe masses do that yes.
Do you have to believe in a god to be happy? No it's all up to yourself to feel happy, it's just how you look at the world.
shadowcaster Mar 26th 2010 10:20AM
So you're saying you don't believe in WoW religions because they were made up by people at Blizzard, but you believe in science? Science is made up by people. I'm a scientist. We look at the world and come up with theories for how things work. Atheists then come alone, some of which are scientists, then try to use the theories as their religion claiming people who believe otherwise are fools. In my experience, folks that think science and religion are mutually exclusive either don't understand science, religion, or both.
HumanPaladin Mar 26th 2010 3:45PM
Shadowcaster, if you were a little kid and someone told you Santa wasn't real, and showed you men in fat suits; or showed you video footage of mum not the tooth fairy putting money under your pillow; or showing parents putting easter eggs around the place, not the Easter bunny, would you tend to disbelieve supernatural phenomenon? I'm not saying you can't still believe in Santa etc, I'm just saying less people believe when scientific data is in front of them.
Copernicus proving the Earth revolved around the Sun and not the Sun around the Earth as early Christianity claimed is another example of science putting doubts into the religious.
Scientific theories are made up by people but can be repeatedly proven to give the same result by independent testers.
Trust in your senses or the supernatural (beyond the explanation of science). It's up to you and I'm not making any judgments on what you decide.
Killik Mar 26th 2010 5:46AM
It seems a bit odd to use the Warcraft world to predict human responses when resources are scarce. The WoW environment was *designed* the way it is to promote conflict among players and between factions.
Yeshe Mar 26th 2010 12:24PM
Some great stuff out on http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/ in terms of scientific study and MMOs.
shadowcaster Mar 26th 2010 5:57PM
You're basically making my point for me. Copernicus was a Christian. There was no religious implication to the relationship between the Sun and the Earth. Sure the Church latched on to certain aspects of an Earth-centric system, but changing it had no effect on the religion. There was scientific evidence suggesting heliocentrism and the religion adopted it. (There's always people for which change is hard, but for the most part it was a nonevent. I've never heard of a mass exodus from religion due to heliocentrism. That's a pretty lol reason to change religion.) This is a proper relationship between the religion and science. Religion tells us about ourselves and our relationship to God. Science tells us about ourselves and our relationship to God's creation. Studying the creation doesn't tell us anything about God except indirectly. (Sorry about using the G-word. I'm sure you find it offensive.)
Some scientific theories can be repeated and proven. Are those really the ones you're talking about here? I doubt it. It is exactly the type of talking-down in your first paragraph that led to my first response. If your going to put your trust in theories by scientists, that's your prerogative, but don't fool yourself into thinking they've experimentally tested origins and that it repeatable and proven. I trust my senses, and your theories look, taste, and smell bad.
SamLowry Mar 26th 2010 9:18PM
Shadowcaster, you might want to do a little reading on Galileo. He very narrowly avoided being burned at the stake by the Inquisition, but Giordano Bruno was not so lucky. Bruno not only stated that the Earth revolved around the Sun, but he also "identif[ied] the sun as just one of an infinite number of independently moving heavenly bodies" and was "the first man to have conceptualized the universe as a continuum where the stars we see at night are identical in nature to the Sun". If you think "there was no religious implication to the relationship between the Sun and the Earth", then why did the Inquisition whip out the hot pokers every time someone suggested anything contrary to the Bible?
SamLowry Mar 26th 2010 9:29PM
...and if you think Catholicism finally realized the error of its ways, just ten years ago, "on the 400th anniversary of Bruno's death, Cardinal Angelo Sodano declared Bruno's death to be a 'sad episode'. Despite his regret, he defended Bruno's persecutors, maintaining that the Inquisitors 'had the desire to preserve freedom and promote the common good and did everything possible to save his life' by trying to make him recant".
What a guy.
HumanPaladin Mar 27th 2010 8:43AM
I'm not sure what you're getting so worked up about Shadowchaser. Science is such a broad field. Take for example Modern Medicine Vs Alternative Medicine. Or the Laws of Physics vs The Laws of your God. Modern Medicine may not cure people 100% of the time but there is a certain success rate. Alternative Medicine often show no improvement over a placebo from peer reviewed studies. The Laws of Physics can be shown to work near 100% of the time. The Laws of your God or whatever you believe can't be proved through human senses.