Skip navigation

Both Terranova and Dyer-Witherford reveal how objects supposedly outside of the purview of capitalism–whether they be the high-tech gift economy or World of Warcraft–are still firmly situated within capitalism and racialized forms of exploitation. In World of Warcraft, the exploitation of Chinese workers for the benefit of the American players comes with similar exploitation and racism. “Chinese” gold farmers ruining “our” (American’s) game appears very similar to complaints about China “stealing” American jobs or producing shoddy parts. Terranova, from a different perspective, examines how free labor is essential to the late capitalist cultural economy, rather than a fundamental challenge to capitalism. For both, the dichotomy between what is play and labor, what is capitalist and what is freely given, are not rigidly separated but fully intertwined. Dyer-Witherford’s examination of gold farming and the strive towards a perfect game that is outside of the market economy is antithetical to the intensely capitalist nature of World of Warcraft – gold, consumption, and material goods are essential to the game structure; seen from this light it appears nearly impossible to separate the game market from the real one, even if Blizzard was able to block bots. Terranova concludes by saying that her analysis is not intended to be a strategy for social action, but rather a recognition of how capitalism “mutates”, rather than simply takes actions and is responded to. In what can different forms of play and labor–perhaps not world of warcraft but games that make fun of capitalist entities, perhaps labor that builds community rather than potentially useful products–mutate far enough to be considered resistance?