ABSTRACT
Virtual commodities in games are now commonplace, and there is a fairly common introduction to articles such as this one, establishing their prevalence and use. Here is an example:
In recent years . . . it has become increasingly common for virtual goods circulated in consumption games to be exchangeable for real money. Using a credit card or mobile phone, players are now able to purchase virtual items, clothes and characters like any commodities in an online store, except that the goods are never delivered to the physical doorstep. This “virtual item trade” or “real-money trade of virtual property,” as it is variously known, has forced a re-evaluation of the status of fantastical consumption play. Economists (e.g. Castronova 2006; Huhh 2008) have observed that what were previously considered fi ction can actually be analysed as goods in the economic sense. Legal scholars (e.g. Fairfi eld 2005; Lastowka and Hunter 2004) have put forward questions regarding the ownership and legal status of virtual assets. (Lehdonvirta, Wilska, and Johnson, 2009: 1060)
Yet despite this commonness, there remains uncertainty regarding the proper referents of the buying and selling of virtual commodities. For instance, do these activities more closely reference and resemble the activities of a marketplace-or a game? The quote above locates virtual commodities within a potentially uneasy amalgamation of market forces and playful intent: “consumption games” and “fantastical consumption play.” Of what ingredients and in what measure is this combination of fantasy and consumption composed?
