Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication Studies (KSJCS)
[ Article ]
Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 67, No. 6, pp.42-86
ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2023
Received 13 Oct 2023 Accepted 22 Nov 2023 Revised 25 Nov 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2023.67.6.002

이기지 않아도 재미있다 : 부모-자녀 게임 플레이의 사회성과 행위성, 그리고 분투형 플레이

강신규*
*한국방송광고진흥공사 연구위원 playborer@gmail.com
It’s Not About Winning : Sociality and Behavioral Patterns of Parent-Child Co-Play and a Competitive Game
Shin-kyu Kang*
*Research Fellow, Korea Broadcasting Advertising Corp. playborer@gmail.com

초록

이 글은 부모-자녀가 함께 플레이하는 행위가 다른 사회집단 구성원(들)과 함께 하는 행위와는 다르게 이뤄진다는 데 주목하고, 그것이 왜 시작되고, 어떤 양상을 띠며, 부모-자녀에게 어떻게 받아들여지는지 밝히고자 한다. 이를 위해 먼저 기존 논의들이 부모-자녀 게임 플레이 자체를 분석하기에 적절하지 않거나 제한적임을 지적하고, 새로운 분석틀(사회적 플레이, 행위성)을 차용한다. 그리고 5쌍의 부모-자녀 플레이어를 대상으로 인터뷰를 실시한다. 인터뷰를 주된 연구방법으로 사용하면서도 콘텍스트적 연구를 지향함으로써, 수용에 중점을 두되 부모-자녀 게임 플레이의 안과 밖을 함께 살피려 한다. 연구결과 논의에 있어서는 사회적 플레이와 행위성 개념을 동원하되, 보다 입체적인 분석을 위해 여러 학자들에 의해 고안된 개념들, 그리고 다른 자료들을 통해 제시된 관련논의도 함께 활용한다. 이를 통해 부모-자녀의 게임 플레이가 보이는 여러 양상들을 드러내고, 부모-자녀가 어쩌다 게임세계로 함께 진입하게 되는지, 플레이 과정이 부모-자녀에게 어떤 영향을 미치는지, 혼자 하거나 다른 사회집단 구성원(들)과 함께 하는 플레이와는 무엇이 다른지, 플레이어로서 부모-자녀는 서로를 어떻게 이해하고 받아들이는지 짚어본다. 그리고 마지막으로, 앞선 과정들을 토대로 부모-자녀 게임 플레이가 갖는 의미를 종합적으로 논의한다.

Abstract

This article emphasizes that the co-playing of parents-children is distinct from that of other social group members, and strives to clarify why it begins, what structure it takes, and how it is accepted by parents-children. In order to achieve this objective, this study points out that current discourses are inadequate or restricted when it comes to examining the dynamics of parent-child game play. Therefore, a novel analytical framework that focuses on social play and agency was proposed. Additionally, interviews with five sets of parent-child players were conducted. Employing interviews as the primary study methodology and striving for contextual investigation, this study endeavors to examine both the internal and external aspects of parent-child game play simultaneously. The study incorporates concepts developed by different scholars and explore similar issues offered in other sources to conduct a more comprehensive analysis. This study explores different facets of parent-child gameplay, investigating the ways in which parents and children engage in the game world together, how the act of playing influences their relationship, how it differs from playing alone or with other members of social groups, and how parents and children perceive and embrace each other as players. Finally, based on the previous processes, the meaning of parent-child game play is comprehensively discussed. The primary discoveries are as follows. First, parents and children, who share a deep bond outside of the game, temporarily detach from their current connection while engaging in the game together and establish a fresh relationship. As various forms of communication take place intricately during the process, the two entities establish a relationship characterized by fluid movement between the inside and external boundaries of the magic circle. The game play occurs within a social framework that assigns new meanings to acts, and this framework alters the significance of actions within the game. Second, plays that focus on accomplishments are frequently enacted by parents and their children. However, the appearance of the element may vary depending on whether the competition is structured as a system or between individuals. In the case of parent-child players, rivalry or cooperation with other players serves as a mechanism to achieve victory in the system. The family community structure plays a role in intervening in play to some extent. In the latter scenario, achieving victory over an adversary is a fundamental objective, thereby significantly reducing the effectiveness or potentially rendering ineffective the family community system. Cooperative play is more commonly observed in parent-child interactions than achievement-oriented play. The parent-child play enables participants to establish their own objectives independently of competing with one another, obligatory objectives, and introduces adaptability to the existing gameplay. By engaging in cooperative play, parents and children assume increasingly prominent roles. Most importantly, parent-child play fosters an environment that facilitates the occurrence of ambitious play. In scenarios involving numerous parents and children, the primary objective of play is the act of playing itself. The goals and outcomes designated by the system lose their significance, and the emphasis shifts towards goals that may have been trivial initially.

Keywords:

Co-playing of Parents-children, Social Play, Metagame, Agency, Striving Play

키워드:

부모-자녀 게임 플레이, 사회적 플레이, 메타게임, 행위성, 분투형 플레이

References

  • Bae, J. A., & Cho, Y. H. (2010). Digital media and mother-child communication. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 27(1), 53-91.
    배진아·조연하 (2010). 디지털 미디어와 가족 커뮤니케이션: 모자간 소통을 중심으로. <사이버커뮤니케이션학보>, 27권 1호, 53-91.
  • Benedetto, L., & Ingrassia, M. (2021). Digital parenting: Raising and protecting children in media world [On-Line]. In L. Benedetto & M. Ingrassia (Eds.), Parenting: Studies by an ecocultural and transactional perspective. Intechopen. Retrieved 9/23/23 from https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/72249 [https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.92579]
  • Chandler, D. (2002). Semiotics for beginners. Aberystwyth: University of Wales. 강인규 (역) (2006). <미디어 기호학>. 서울: 소명출판.
  • Cho, C. H., & Cheon, H. J. (2005). Children’s exposure to negative internet content: Effects of family context. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(4), 488-509. [https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4904_8]
  • Crawford, C. (1982). The art of computer game design. Berkeley, CA: Osborne/McGraw-Hill.
  • De Koven, B. (1976). Creating the play community. In A. Fluegelman & S. Tembeck (Eds.), The new games book (pp. 41-42). New York: Doubleday.
  • De Koven, B. (2013). The well-played game: A player’s philosophy. MA: MIT Press. [https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9722.001.0001]
  • Despain, W. (2012). 100 Principles of game design. Berkeley, CA: New Riders Publishing. 김정태·오석희·윤형섭·한동숭·한호성 (역) (2014). <게임 디자인 원리: 반드시 알아야 하는 게임 디자인 비법 100가지>. 의왕: 에이콘.
  • Druga, S., Ball, T., & Ko, A. (2022, June). How families design and program games: A qualitative analysis of a 4-week online in-home study. Paper presented at the 21st Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference, Braga. [https://doi.org/10.1145/3501712.3529724]
  • Eiji, Ō. (2016). The emotional society. Tokyo: Ohtabooks. 선정우 (역) (2020). <감정화하는 사회>. 고양: 리시올.
  • Garfield, R. (2000). Metagames. In J. Dietz (Ed.), Horsemen of the apocalypse: Essays on roleplaying (pp.16-22). Jolly Rogers Games.
  • Gee, E., Siyahhan, S., & Cirell, A. M. (2016). Video gaming as digital media, play, and family routine: Implications for understanding video gaming and learning in family contexts. Media and Technology, 42(4), 468-482. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1205600]
  • Goldstein, K. (1971). Strategies in counting out: An ethnographic folklore field study. In E. Avedon & B. Sutton-Smith (Eds.), The study of games (pp. 167-178). New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • Gray, J., & Lotz, A. (2011). Television studies. Cambridge: Polity Press. 윤태진·유경한 (역) (2017). <텔레비전 연구>. 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.
  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Society, 78(6), 1360-1380. [https://doi.org/10.1086/225469]
  • Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201-233. [https://doi.org/10.2307/202051]
  • Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Boston: Beacon Press. 김윤수 (역) (1993). <호모 루덴스>. 서울: 까치.
  • Juul, J. (2005). Half-real: Video games between real rules and fictional worlds. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 장성진 (역) (2014). <하프 리얼: 가상 세계와 실제 규칙 사이에 존재하는 비디오게임>. 서울: 비즈앤비즈.
  • Juul, J. (2010). A casual revolution: Reinventing video games and their players. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 이정엽 (역) (2012). <캐주얼 게임: 비디오게임과 플레이어의 재창조>. 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.
  • Kang, S. K. (2013). Televisionphobia & gamephobia. In Kang, S. K. et al. (Eds.), Gamephopia (pp. 34-66). Seoul: Communicationbooks.
    강신규 (2013). 텔레비전포비아와 게임포비아. 강신규 등, <게임포비아> (34-66쪽). 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.
  • Kang, S. K. (2019). A study on the gamification of television broadcasting. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 63(3), pp.145~195.
    강신규 (2019). 게임화하는 방송: 생산자적 텍스트에서 플레이어적 텍스트로. <한국언론학보>, 63권 3호, 145-195. [ https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2019.63.3.005 ]
  • Kang, S. K., Won, Y. J., & Chae, D. H. (2019). ‘Game viewing’ as a meta/game: From viewing arcade game to viewing internet game broadcasting. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 33(1), 5-43.
    강신규·원용진·채다희 (2019). 메타/게임(meta/game)으로서의 ‘게임 보기’: 전자오락 구경부터 인터넷 게임방송 시청까지. <한국방송학보>, 33권 1호, 5-43.
  • Kim, J. Y., & Do, Y. I. (2012). Parents’ divergent views on the game shutdown system and sociocultural intervention strategies for children’s healthy game use. Korean Journal of Youth Studies, 19(3), 55-84.
    김지연·도영임 (2012). 게임 셧다운제에 대한 부모들의 다양한 인식과 자녀들의 올바른 게임 이용을 위한 사회문화적 개입 전략. <청소년학연구>, 19권 3호, 55-84.
  • Kim, J. Y., & Do, Y. I. (2014). Generation gap between adolescents group and parents group in the perceptions on online games. Korean Psychological Journal of Culture and Social Issues, 20(3), 263-280.
    김지연·도영임 (2014). 부모 세대와 청소년 세대의 온라인 게임에 대한 인식 차이: 온라인 게임의 유해성/유익성, 영향과 가치, 부모-자녀 관계, 규제에 대한 인식을 중심으로. <한국심리학회지>, 20권 3호, 263-280.
  • Kim, J. Y., & Do, Y. I. (2015). The impact of parental style, parent-adolescent communication on parent’s perception types of online game. Journal of Korea Game Society, 15(6), 65-76.
    김지연·도영임 (2015). 부모의 양육태도, 부모-자녀 간 의사소통 방식이 온라인 게임에 대한 부모의 인식에 미치는 영향. <한국게임학회 논문지>, 15권 6호, 65-76. [ https://doi.org/10.7583/JKGS.2015.15.6.65 ]
  • Kim, J. Y., & Do, Y. I. (2016). Personalized intervention strategies for improving parents’ perception of online games: Focusing on characteristics of perception types of online games. Journal of the Korean Society for Computer Game, 29(2), 107-115.
    김지연·도영임 (2016). 부모들의 온라인 게임 인식 개선을 위한 개입 전략: 온라인 게임 인식 유형별 특성을 중심으로. <한국컴퓨터게임학회논문지>, 29권 2호, 107-115. [ https://doi.org/10.21493/kscg.2016.29.2.107 ]
  • Kim, S. D., & Lee, J. H. (2007). A Study on cultural transformation of home between parent and children caused by game. Journal of the Korean Society for Computer Game, 11, 47-54.
    김성동·이지훈 (2007). 게임 이용에 따른 부모와 자녀들간의 가정문화 관계에 관한 연구. <한국컴퓨터게임학회논문지>, 11호, 47-54.
  • Korea Creative Content Agency (2022). Survey of game users in 2022.
    한국콘텐츠진흥원 (2022). <2022 게임이용자 실태조사>.
  • Kutner, L. A., Olson, C. K., Warner, D. E., & Hertzog, S. M. (2008). Parents’ and sons’ perspectives on video game play: A qualitative study. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23(1), 76-96. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558407310721]
  • Kwon, T. H. (2023). Why should games be art? Game Generation, 12. Retrieved 9/22/23 from https://www.gamegeneration.or.kr/article/9b2e2a12-1d0b-4c87-ac03-cbd6eee0bc7d
    권태현 (2023). 게임이 대체 왜 예술이 되어야 할까?『게임: 행위성의 예술』을 둘러싼 이야기들. <GG>, 12호.
  • Lee, D. H. (2023). About difficulties. SeMA Coral. Retrieved 9/22/23 from http://semacoral.org/features/donghwi-lee-on-difficulty-game-agency-art-striving
    이동휘 (2023). 어려움에 대하여. <SeMA Coral>.
  • Lee, I. H., & Han, H. W. (2016). A game dictionary. Seoul: Hainaim.
    이인화·한혜원 (2016). <게임사전: 게임에 대해 알고 싶었던 모든 것>. 서울: 해냄.
  • Lee, J. Y., & Kang, S. K. (2022). A study on heavy payment game play. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 36(1), 42-78.
    이정엽·강신규 (2022). ‘현질’은 어떻게 플레이가 되는가: 핵납금 게임 플레이어 심층인터뷰를 중심으로. <한국방송학보>, 36권 1호, 42-78.
  • Lee, K. H. (2016). Game, another window into the world. Goyang: Logopolis.
    이경혁 (2016). <게임, 세상을 보는 또 하나의 창>. 고양: 로고폴리스.
  • Lee, S. H. (2013). The hierarchy of game discourse and the fear that is circulating. In Kang, S. K., et al. (Eds.), Gamephopia (pp. 126-162). Seoul: Communicationbooks.
    이설희 (2013). 게임 담론의 위계화와 떠도는 공포. 강신규 등, <게임포비아> (126-162쪽). 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.
  • Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., Helsper, E. J., Lupiáñez-Villanueva, F., Veltri, G. A., & Folkvord, F. (2017). Maximizing opportunities and minimizing risks for children online: The role of digital skills in emerging strategies of parental mediation. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 82-105. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12277]
  • Markey, P. M., & Ferguson, C. J. (2017). Moral combat: Why the war on violent video games is wrong. Dallas: BenBella Books. 나보라 (역) (2021). <모럴 컴뱃: 게임의 폭력성을 둘러싼 잘못된 전쟁>. 수원: 스타비즈.
  • Musick, G., Freeman, G., & McNeese, N. J. (2021, May). Gaming as family time: Digital game co-play in modern parent-child relationships. Paper presented at the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, CHI PLAY. [https://doi.org/10.1145/3474678]
  • Nguyen, C. T. (2020). Art is a game: Why the struggle (with art) is real. Forum for philosophy. Retrieved 9/22/23 from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/theforum/art-is-a-game/, 이동휘 (역) (2021). 예술은 게임이다: 왜 중요한 건 (예술과의) 고투인가. <경제적-글쓰기: 빠른 일기>.
  • Nguyen, C. T. (2020). Games: Agency as art. New York: Oxford University Press. 이동휘 (역) (2022). <게임: 행위성의 예술>. 서울: 워크룸 프레스. [https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190052089.001.0001]
  • Nikken, P., & Jansz, J. (2006). Parental mediation of children’s video game playing: A comparison of the reports by parents and children. Learning, Media and Technology, 31(2), 181-202. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880600756803]
  • Nikken, P., Jansz, J., & Schouwstra, S. (2007). Parents’ interest in videogame ratings and content descriptors in relation to game mediation. European Journal of Communication, 22(3), 315-336. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323107079684]
  • Park, G. S. (2009). Playing game. Seoul: Communicationbooks.
    박근서 (2009). <게임하기>. 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.
  • Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. 윤형섭·권용만 (역) (2010). <게임 디자인 원론 2>. 서울: 지코사이언스.
  • Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. 윤형섭·이대웅 (역) (2011). <게임 디자인 원론 2>. 서울: 지코사이언스.
  • Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. 윤형섭 (역) (2013). <게임 디자인 원론 3>. 서울: 지코사이언스.
  • Small, M. L., & Calarco, J. M. (2022). Qualitative literacy: A guide to evaluating ethnographic and interview research. Oakland: University of California Press. 이지원·정택진 (역) (2023). <더 단단한 질적 연구를 위한 안내서>. 서울: 컬처룩. [https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520390676]
  • Ulicsak, M., & Cranmer, S. (2010). Gaming in families [On-Line]. Futurelab. Retrieved 9/23/23 from https://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/FUTL28/FUTL28.pdf
  • Upton, B. (2015). The aesthetic of play. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. 김동훈 (역) (2019). <플레이의 미학>. 서울: 에이콘. [https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9251.001.0001]
  • Waern, A. (2012, June). Framing games. Paper presented at the 2012 International DiGRA Nordic Conference. Tampere.
  • Wood, R. T. A. (2008). Problems with the concept of video game addiction: Some case study examples. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 6(2), 169-178. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-007-9118-0]
  • Yoo, H. S. (2008a). A study on game mediation types and relevant variables focused on preschoolers, elementary school students and their mothers. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 22(1), 86-120.
    유홍식 (2008a). 게임중재유형 및 관련변인에 관한 연구: 미취학아동·초등학교 저학년 학부모를 중심으로. <한국방송학보>, 22권 1호, 86-120.
  • Yoo, H. S. (2008b). A study on differences between parents and children in evaluating effects of electronic games, and relevant predictors of conflict around children’s game use. Broadcasting & Arts Research Institute, 3, 65-94.
    유홍식 (2008b). 부모-자녀 간 게임에 대한 인식차이 및 게임갈등에 영향을 미치는 관련변인들에 대한 연구. <미디어와 공연예술 연구>, 3권, 65-94.
  • Yoon, T. J. (2015). A study on digital game culture. Seoul: Communicationbooks.
    윤태진 (2015). <디지털 게임문화연구>. 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.