As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Should video games be listed as an addiction?

24

Posts

  • ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    Talleyrand wrote: »
    Isn't one of the things that makes MMO so much fun the social factor? So we're sending people away so they can stop hanging out with other people like them from all over their country? I'm guessin some of the older folk don't really understand gamers.

    Socializing online isn't the same thing as socializing face to face.

    ege02 on
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    ege02 wrote: »
    Talleyrand wrote: »
    Isn't one of the things that makes MMO so much fun the social factor? So we're sending people away so they can stop hanging out with other people like them from all over their country? I'm guessin some of the older folk don't really understand gamers.

    Socializing online isn't the same thing as socializing face to face.

    Here comes ege to tell us all about wasting our time by not doing work. Or not reading. I forget what it is. Anyway the point it whatever you're doing now is probably the wrong thing to be doing.

    electricitylikesme on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    ege02 wrote: »
    Talleyrand wrote: »
    Isn't one of the things that makes MMO so much fun the social factor? So we're sending people away so they can stop hanging out with other people like them from all over their country? I'm guessin some of the older folk don't really understand gamers.

    Socializing online isn't the same thing as socializing face to face.

    Here comes ege to tell us all about wasting our time by not doing work. Or not reading. I forget what it is. Anyway the point it whatever you're doing now is probably the wrong thing to be doing.

    Unless what you're doing right now is trying to get legislation limiting the number of hours people are allowed to play videogames passed.

    ViolentChemistry on
  • BingoBingo Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    As the OP says, there are always groups of people out there trying to push the "Video Games are Evil" idea, be it for violence, sex, drug-references or a fantastic combination of all 3; and more recently "Addiction". But to expand on earlier points, its not that video games are addictive per-se (many are fun, for sure!), but that people not knowing when to draw the line... my wife has a shopping addiction. A colleague has to see EVERY episode of Boston Legal without fail. If I don't have a soda whilst programming, I'll end up drinking beer...

    It's all repition in our heads, imho...

    Bingo on
  • Low KeyLow Key Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    ege02 wrote: »
    Talleyrand wrote: »
    Isn't one of the things that makes MMO so much fun the social factor? So we're sending people away so they can stop hanging out with other people like them from all over their country? I'm guessin some of the older folk don't really understand gamers.

    Socializing online isn't the same thing as socializing face to face.

    Here comes ege to tell us all about wasting our time by not doing work. Or not reading. I forget what it is. Anyway the point it whatever you're doing now is probably the wrong thing to be doing.

    He's right though. It's a fairly empty comment, but if we weren't all too drunk and lazy at this time of the day, it'd probably be worth talking about.

    Low Key on
  • ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    It's not empty as your guy's useless sarcasm, that's for sure. :roll:

    ege02 on
  • Low KeyLow Key Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    He's right again

    Low Key on
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Low Key wrote: »
    ege02 wrote: »
    Talleyrand wrote: »
    Isn't one of the things that makes MMO so much fun the social factor? So we're sending people away so they can stop hanging out with other people like them from all over their country? I'm guessin some of the older folk don't really understand gamers.

    Socializing online isn't the same thing as socializing face to face.

    Here comes ege to tell us all about wasting our time by not doing work. Or not reading. I forget what it is. Anyway the point it whatever you're doing now is probably the wrong thing to be doing.

    He's right though. It's a fairly empty comment, but if we weren't all too drunk and lazy at this time of the day, it'd probably be worth talking about.

    Mm except no one would really argue that. But MMOs are about the community - you usually end up staying or leaving based on that. Much like everywhere else really. I was just pre-emptively telling him to fuck off with his usual "holier then thou" talk on how everything he does is completely normal and thus justifies him to pass judgement on the lifestyle or socializing choices of others.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Low KeyLow Key Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I have no idea really, so I'm not in a great place to comment. I've never played an MMO and this place is really the only internet socialising I do. But I imagine the social aspect isn't really related to the aspects of MMO's that lead to addictive behaviour. I'd say it's more to do with a system of variable and fixed ratio reinforcements that light up brighter than a slot machine with a day glo granny at the helm.

    Low Key on
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Low Key wrote: »
    I have no idea really, so I'm not in a great place to comment. I've never played an MMO and this place is really the only internet socialising I do. But I imagine the social aspect isn't really related to the aspects of MMO's that lead to addictive behaviour. I'd say it's more to do with a system of variable and fixed ratio reinforcements that light up brighter than a slot machine with a day glo granny at the helm.
    By and large yes, that would be the addictive element when people get addicted. But many don't. In EVE we have people quit the game but still hang around in the forums/threads/etc. so there's definitely an important social aspect.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Low KeyLow Key Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Low Key wrote: »
    I have no idea really, so I'm not in a great place to comment. I've never played an MMO and this place is really the only internet socialising I do. But I imagine the social aspect isn't really related to the aspects of MMO's that lead to addictive behaviour. I'd say it's more to do with a system of variable and fixed ratio reinforcements that light up brighter than a slot machine with a day glo granny at the helm.
    By and large yes, that would be the addictive element when people get addicted. But many don't. In EVE we have people quit the game but still hang around in the forums/threads/etc. so there's definitely an important social aspect.

    Yeah, right, so the whole social aspect seems to have nothing to do with a thread about addiction. Good thing we are too lazy/drunk to discuss it!

    Low Key on
  • ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    Low Key wrote: »
    I have no idea really, so I'm not in a great place to comment. I've never played an MMO and this place is really the only internet socialising I do. But I imagine the social aspect isn't really related to the aspects of MMO's that lead to addictive behaviour. I'd say it's more to do with a system of variable and fixed ratio reinforcements that light up brighter than a slot machine with a day glo granny at the helm.

    You're right, the game mechanics part is the main addictive aspect of the game. But, like ELM hinted at, there is also the social aspect. However, I would argue that the social aspect is not stand-alone, but rather reinforces the addictiveness of the game mechanics and, in the case of WoW, is a requirement to take full advantage of the most addictive parts. You can't kill that big dragon without 24 other people, and when you do, everyone pats each other on the back and people who get to have the loot are congratulated by their fellows. In this sense it strokes one's sense of being approved and liked by others, their sense of accomplishment.

    You can see how this sort of thing appeals to people who cannot get the same feeling of being approved/feeling useful/being liked by others in real-life.

    And that is part of the problem; if the person works at a shitty job that they are unenthusiastic about, or lives in the middle of nowhere, or works night-shift and doesn't get to hang out with many people (I'm just listing some common reasons), or they are simply anti-social freaks, they are going to turn to games like WoW as escape mechanisms, rather than trying to seek actual solutions to their problems.

    My argument in the original discussion we had before was that providing these escape mechanisms means the game companies hold at least part of the responsibility; the same way crack dealers do for providing drug addicts with an addictive substance. But that is neither here nor there.

    ege02 on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    ege02 wrote: »
    My argument in the original discussion we had before was that providing these escape mechanisms means the game companies hold at least part of the responsibility; the same way crack dealers do for providing drug addicts with an addictive substance. But that is neither here nor there.

    Comparing WoW to crack is a pretty ridiculous stretch. Gambling I could see as being pretty analagous, but crack just isn't.

    ViolentChemistry on
  • Romantic UndeadRomantic Undead Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    Games (especially MMOs) are most certainly created with the intent to keep their players entertained for a long, long time, which can most certainly be construed as a way to keep people "addicted" but to fault them for their ability to create opportunities to connect to other human beings is just silly.

    It's like calling Alexander Graham Bell a nefarious drug pusher because he invented something that would allow people to interact without having to be physically in front of each other.

    How dare he?

    Romantic Undead on
    3DS FC: 1547-5210-6531
  • sanstodosanstodo Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    Games (especially MMOs) are most certainly created with the intent to keep their players entertained for a long, long time, which can most certainly be construed as a way to keep people "addicted" but to fault them for their ability to create opportunities to connect to other human beings is just silly.

    It's like calling Alexander Graham Bell a nefarious drug pusher because he invented something that would allow people to interact without having to be physically in front of each other.

    How dare he?

    I'm sorry to break it to you, but the social interactions in WoW are nothing like social interactions in the real world. They're nowhere near normal. As someone who has been part of active guilds, they're male dominated, juvenile, and pretty pathetic, generally. The fact that a large % of the people involved are 13-18 year old boys dictates this.

    I don't see many meaningful relationships emerging from that kind of gaming. There are exceptions but, by and large, they are not a substitute for engaging other people in real life.

    sanstodo on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    Games (especially MMOs) are most certainly created with the intent to keep their players entertained for a long, long time, which can most certainly be construed as a way to keep people "addicted" but to fault them for their ability to create opportunities to connect to other human beings is just silly.

    It's like calling Alexander Graham Bell a nefarious drug pusher because he invented something that would allow people to interact without having to be physically in front of each other.

    How dare he?

    Yes, because Blizzard is the one being faulted here and everyone who plays WoW is being called an addict. Not an extreme minority of individuals who are developing real life problems due to their online addictions.

    moniker on
  • Aqua DarkAqua Dark Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Comparing WoW to crack is a pretty ridiculous stretch. Gambling I could see as being pretty analagous, but crack just isn't.

    It is not as far as you would think, WoW destroys lives as does crack. I believe some one earlier asked us if we had seen a WoW player away from his computer for a day, and i have. They are hopeless when they are not playing the damn game, they are talking about it. They are always looking forward to their next FIX of WoW, just like a Crack head is always looking for their next FIX of Crack. Both can cause you to Flunk school or lose jobs.
    It doesnt matter if you destroy your sleep schedule with Crack or WoW, it has the same effect. It doesnt matter if you lose intrest in every other aspect of life becuase of WoW or Crack, the effect is the same. While you can not get AIDs from playing video games, you can from sharring drug needles, and that is about the only thing that seperates them in my mind. You pay for both of them and you can spend just as much on WoW as Crack. (Someone posted earlier on the guy who built a new comp and bought gold for it, and that is very common.) Both destroy lives, end of story.

    Aqua Dark on
    There are such things as stupid questions, and you know what they are: so do not ask them!

    World of Warcraft IS a drug, if you are playing it seek rehab immediately.
  • Romantic UndeadRomantic Undead Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    sanstodo wrote: »
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    Games (especially MMOs) are most certainly created with the intent to keep their players entertained for a long, long time, which can most certainly be construed as a way to keep people "addicted" but to fault them for their ability to create opportunities to connect to other human beings is just silly.

    It's like calling Alexander Graham Bell a nefarious drug pusher because he invented something that would allow people to interact without having to be physically in front of each other.

    How dare he?

    I'm sorry to break it to you, but the social interactions in WoW are nothing like social interactions in the real world. They're nowhere near normal. As someone who has been part of active guilds, they're male dominated, juvenile, and pretty pathetic, generally. The fact that a large % of the people involved are 13-18 year old boys dictates this.

    I don't see many meaningful relationships emerging from that kind of gaming. There are exceptions but, by and large, they are not a substitute for engaging other people in real life.


    I completely agree, but it's still social interaction, as pureile as it might be.

    My point was, there are plenty of places to attack MMOs, but the fact that they encourage social interaction of any kind (even if the interaction pales in comparison to a real-life interaction) in what would otherwise be someone who is incapable of such interaction, is not, IMO, a point of contention.

    Is Blizzard the devil because they let immature kids talk to each other? Please...

    Romantic Undead on
    3DS FC: 1547-5210-6531
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Is Blizzard the devil because they let immature kids talk to each other? Please...

    Mind quoting where that was suggested?

    moniker on
  • sanstodosanstodo Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I completely agree, but it's still social interaction, as pureile as it might be.

    My point was, there are plenty of places to attack MMOs, but the fact that they encourage social interaction of any kind (even if the interaction pales in comparison to a real-life interaction) in what would otherwise be someone who is incapable of such interaction, is not, IMO, a point of contention.

    Is Blizzard the devil because they let immature kids talk to each other? Please...

    Obviously not. The issue is that the games are designed to maximized time spent in-game. The entire lvling structure is built around it, in addition to the rep/gear grind at higher lvls. They WANT you to play the game for months, years, and for it to be an important part of your life.

    They're just like every other entertainment company, basically. There's nothing wrong with it but at the same time, I think it's important for people to aware that yes, you can be addicted to video games just like you can be addicted to gambling.

    sanstodo on
  • Aqua DarkAqua Dark Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    moniker wrote: »
    Yes, because Blizzard is the one being faulted here and everyone who plays WoW is being called an addict. Not an extreme minority of individuals who are developing real life problems due to their online addictions.

    I love Blizzard, I love their games. From a buisness stand point i would do exactly what blizzard did with WoW, make shit tons of money. Not all WoW players are addicts, some people never make it past the free trial, they just dont get into the game.

    Aqua Dark on
    There are such things as stupid questions, and you know what they are: so do not ask them!

    World of Warcraft IS a drug, if you are playing it seek rehab immediately.
  • Romantic UndeadRomantic Undead Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    moniker wrote: »
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    Games (especially MMOs) are most certainly created with the intent to keep their players entertained for a long, long time, which can most certainly be construed as a way to keep people "addicted" but to fault them for their ability to create opportunities to connect to other human beings is just silly.

    It's like calling Alexander Graham Bell a nefarious drug pusher because he invented something that would allow people to interact without having to be physically in front of each other.

    How dare he?

    Yes, because Blizzard is the one being faulted here and everyone who plays WoW is being called an addict. Not an extreme minority of individuals who are developing real life problems due to their online addictions.


    um:
    ege02 wrote: »
    My argument in the original discussion we had before was that providing these escape mechanisms means the game companies hold at least part of the responsibility; the same way crack dealers do for providing drug addicts with an addictive substance. But that is neither here nor there.

    Maybe I should have quoted that in my original post.

    Romantic Undead on
    3DS FC: 1547-5210-6531
  • kaliyamakaliyama Left to find less-moderated fora Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    Games (especially MMOs) are most certainly created with the intent to keep their players entertained for a long, long time, which can most certainly be construed as a way to keep people "addicted" but to fault them for their ability to create opportunities to connect to other human beings is just silly.

    It's like calling Alexander Graham Bell a nefarious drug pusher because he invented something that would allow people to interact without having to be physically in front of each other.

    How dare he?

    What if you stopped having real sex and stuck with phone sex instead? What if instead of going to parties you just hung out on party lines? Or spent hours a day doing role playing sessions over the phone? Or talked to strangers over the phone for hours at an end?


    The phone is used as a tool primarily for commerce - like e-mail for business communications. It is also used as a way of keeping in touch with existant social relationships, as are letter-writing, e-mailing, MeetUps and facebooking. There's a big divide between people that use technology to augment and extent real-world based social relationships and those who use it to supplant those same relationships.

    There's no need to be "social elite", whatever that means (maybe the popular kids in high school? In any event, the impact those kids have on others is way overstated generally.) The problem is that stuff like WoW is junk food for social relationships. It is easier for the populations you describe to interact socially over WoW. The problem is that those relationships are stunted and limited compared to what one does in real life. The limited range of interaction, the inability for these things to translate to human needs (i.e. touch, comraderie, the facial/physical cues that people derive satisfaction from due to evolutionary history) mean they are problematic. That the interactions occur with a limited set of people (an overwhelmingly 13-25 y/o male demographic) is undesirable because it leaves people ill-equipped to pursue more meaningful relationships in real life. It serves as a permanent social crutch – rather than forcing people to find ways to interact with others and to find people they can be real friends with, they can avoid the real world.

    This is alarming for a few reasons:

    1) It promotes alienation from society – you have an entire underclass of asocial dispirited wage slaves not paying attention to politics, society or other people’s needs. This is as corrosive to civil society as the 20th century Russian experience.

    2) It channels energy away from things that have real, lasting impact. It would be better for the world, and would more richly reward people, if 24 people dedicated their time + effort to working for habitat for humanity or a soup kitchen than doing some instanced raid. All of that crap is meaningless – it is carried out upon sterile electronic worlds that won’t be around in 100 years and if they are, nobody will care. Helping somebody own a house that will be in their family for generations, or helping someone become literate aren’t going to make you any more remembered in 100 years, but at least you will have left a lasting positive legacy on the world.

    3) It keeps people from socializing. I had a pretty horrendous middle school experience. I played netmech and lots of stuff on Kali. My social life and personality improved not because this was some sort of ‘starter’ social interaction, but because I changed my real life context and participated in more activities (i.e. model united nations) that let me practice being social and interacting with people (albeit nerdy ones).

    4) It keeps people from fixing their problems in real life. This is probably the closest analogy to a drug or alcohol. Low-skilled laborers and others with high stress/low job-satisfaction positions, like lawyers or servicemen, have the worst substance abuse problems. Their alcoholism is a pre-video game form of escapism that allows them to deal with their awful jobs. 40 y/o illiterate migrant farm workers may not have much of a shot at bettering their lot in life, so perhaps this might be a choice we are morally OK with for them. I have my doubts about this, too, because there are more positive alternatives (i.e. church, literature) that are less destructive physically and mentally. But anybody on Penny Arcade has a much better shot in life than the people I just described – if someone doesn’t’ like their job, they need to fix what’s wrong rather than spend all their spare time engaging a fantasy world that won’t solve any of their problems.

    kaliyama on
    fwKS7.png?1
  • Romantic UndeadRomantic Undead Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Instead of quoting your post, Kali, I would just like to re-iterate the fact that I'm not trying to defend MMOs as a genre.

    I absolutely believe that video games, and especially MMOs, are addictive and your points concerning how one could better spend their time elsewhere are all absolutely valid.

    My main point of contetion lies with the villification of video game creators for their role in this phenomenon. Comparing game creators to drug pushers, I feel, is hyperbole and uncalled for. For a game company to create a game that people want to buy and play is a good business model, not immoral pandering to weak-willed individuals who cannot control their impulses.

    This, I believe, is a symptom of our society's propensity for shifting the blame. Video games, unlike drugs, do not create a chemical dependancy which is what drug pushers rely on to make a profit. The addictive properties of a game are found completely within the consciousness of the addict, and there are plenty of people out there who can enjoy such a hobby, spending a large amount of time on it, without it having an adverse effect on the rest of their lives, and sometimes, I believe, can even serve to enhance it.

    The larger point here is that video game addiction exists, but it is a symptom of a greater problem within the addict that is not the responsibility of the game creator. The addict has other issues they need to contend with and blaming the game for their addiction is displacing the blame and THAT, in my opinion, is the danger facing the notion that gaming should be listed as an addiction.

    Romantic Undead on
    3DS FC: 1547-5210-6531
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    kaliyama wrote: »
    This is alarming for a few reasons:

    1) It promotes alienation from society – you have an entire underclass of asocial dispirited wage slaves not paying attention to politics, society or other people’s needs. This is as corrosive to civil society as the 20th century Russian experience.

    2) It channels energy away from things that have real, lasting impact. It would be better for the world, and would more richly reward people, if 24 people dedicated their time + effort to working for habitat for humanity or a soup kitchen than doing some instanced raid. All of that crap is meaningless – it is carried out upon sterile electronic worlds that won’t be around in 100 years and if they are, nobody will care. Helping somebody own a house that will be in their family for generations, or helping someone become literate aren’t going to make you any more remembered in 100 years, but at least you will have left a lasting positive legacy on the world.

    3) It keeps people from socializing. I had a pretty horrendous middle school experience. I played netmech and lots of stuff on Kali. My social life and personality improved not because this was some sort of ‘starter’ social interaction, but because I changed my real life context and participated in more activities (i.e. model united nations) that let me practice being social and interacting with people (albeit nerdy ones).

    4) It keeps people from fixing their problems in real life. This is probably the closest analogy to a drug or alcohol. Low-skilled laborers and others with high stress/low job-satisfaction positions, like lawyers or servicemen, have the worst substance abuse problems. Their alcoholism is a pre-video game form of escapism that allows them to deal with their awful jobs. 40 y/o illiterate migrant farm workers may not have much of a shot at bettering their lot in life, so perhaps this might be a choice we are morally OK with for them. I have my doubts about this, too, because there are more positive alternatives (i.e. church, literature) that are less destructive physically and mentally. But anybody on Penny Arcade has a much better shot in life than the people I just described – if someone doesn’t’ like their job, they need to fix what’s wrong rather than spend all their spare time engaging a fantasy world that won’t solve any of their problems.

    1. This is different from people who spend their entire day watching TV and then talk about it at work how??

    2. "Lasting impact". Its entertainment. It is not DESIGNED or intended to have a lasting impact. And if you really believed any of that you'd be out doing it instead of here arguing.

    3. See 2.

    4. Then address THAT problem and not WoW. Also its amusing that sitting inside reading is considered "more positive" than....sitting inside at a computer screen.

    The big problem with all your points is you're seeing a problem and blaming it on WoW/gaming instead of the actual cause. You even allude to this when you mention alcoholism. Take away any form of gaming and the people who do it 24/7 would find some OTHER activity to waste time on. Take that activity away and they'd find something else.

    The problems are the addiction and the behavior, NOT what they happened to be addicted to.

    Phoenix-D on
  • kaliyamakaliyama Left to find less-moderated fora Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    kaliyama wrote: »
    This is alarming for a few reasons:

    1) It promotes alienation from society – you have an entire underclass of asocial dispirited wage slaves not paying attention to politics, society or other people’s needs. This is as corrosive to civil society as the 20th century Russian experience.

    2) It channels energy away from things that have real, lasting impact. It would be better for the world, and would more richly reward people, if 24 people dedicated their time + effort to working for habitat for humanity or a soup kitchen than doing some instanced raid. All of that crap is meaningless – it is carried out upon sterile electronic worlds that won’t be around in 100 years and if they are, nobody will care. Helping somebody own a house that will be in their family for generations, or helping someone become literate aren’t going to make you any more remembered in 100 years, but at least you will have left a lasting positive legacy on the world.

    3) It keeps people from socializing. I had a pretty horrendous middle school experience. I played netmech and lots of stuff on Kali. My social life and personality improved not because this was some sort of ‘starter’ social interaction, but because I changed my real life context and participated in more activities (i.e. model united nations) that let me practice being social and interacting with people (albeit nerdy ones).

    4) It keeps people from fixing their problems in real life. This is probably the closest analogy to a drug or alcohol. Low-skilled laborers and others with high stress/low job-satisfaction positions, like lawyers or servicemen, have the worst substance abuse problems. Their alcoholism is a pre-video game form of escapism that allows them to deal with their awful jobs. 40 y/o illiterate migrant farm workers may not have much of a shot at bettering their lot in life, so perhaps this might be a choice we are morally OK with for them. I have my doubts about this, too, because there are more positive alternatives (i.e. church, literature) that are less destructive physically and mentally. But anybody on Penny Arcade has a much better shot in life than the people I just described – if someone doesn’t’ like their job, they need to fix what’s wrong rather than spend all their spare time engaging a fantasy world that won’t solve any of their problems.

    1. This is different from people who spend their entire day watching TV and then talk about it at work how??

    2. "Lasting impact". Its entertainment. It is not DESIGNED or intended to have a lasting impact. And if you really believed any of that you'd be out doing it instead of here arguing.

    3. See 2.

    4. Then address THAT problem and not WoW. Also its amusing that sitting inside reading is considered "more positive" than....sitting inside at a computer screen.

    The big problem with all your points is you're seeing a problem and blaming it on WoW/gaming instead of the actual cause. You even allude to this when you mention alcoholism. Take away any form of gaming and the people who do it 24/7 would find some OTHER activity to waste time on. Take that activity away and they'd find something else.

    The problems are the addiction and the behavior, NOT what they happened to be addicted to.


    1. TV watching definately isn't good - I offer some reasons below to suggest why playing video games is even worse, though.

    4. Sitting inside reading connects you to culture and history and lets you know more about the actual world you inhabit. It's like the difference between being a gym rat and buffing your character in WoW - one of them actually improves you, one of them gives you the illusion of accomplishment with no lasting benefits.

    2,3,your last point about alcoholism: These are good points. I work in a fairly socially beneficial organization and volunteer with an organization I believe in- i have downtime at work today so i'm killing it by being on here. I screw around more than I like regardless.

    There are a few problems though that make MMORPGs worse than TV watching, etc. The first is that games probably are more addictive; it gives you a sense of accomplishment and social interaction that you don't get from television. This makes it more likely that you won't seek out other more rewarding activities than someone who watches TV. At least the person who watches TV constantly has to come to grips with their lack of societal engagement; the WoW player has a much easier time deluding themselves about the legitimacy of what they do. This isn't a productivity-for-productivity's sake argument; it's likelier that people will be happier if they engage in real activity, even if their dependencies/depression/inadequacies/lack of experience prevent them from realizing this.

    The most addictive behaviors for human beings are ones that have fairly random rewards for activities - rather than an every-30-min. pay off for watching a TV show, you get rewarded for putting in more time, but in random intervals (i.e. one more item drop will give me what I want, one more mob for the XP) etc. that makes it more likely that people will play longer than they would watch TV for.

    I think this is why we're seeing the phenomenon of Koreans dying while playing Starcraft or going psychotic playing Everquest. It doesn't happen a lot in such an extreme fashion - those are playing on already addictive personalities, but the point is that the structure and design of MMORPGs more effectively and thoroughly nurture addictive tendencies in every user. If people are more stable to begin with, the symptoms are less severe, but still present - see unemployment/obsession with WoW that stops short at the point of hallucinatory psychosis but is still life-disrupting. Given that these people often had more effective lives in a world with television but without WoW, that's as close as you can get outside of laboratory conditions to evidence that suggests that MMORPGs are worse than TV-watching.

    kaliyama on
    fwKS7.png?1
  • MuragoMurago Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Well, can't you really say that anything that effects you're mind so that it can't focus on anything besides that thing is addictive?

    So if i'm addicted to playing guitar and all i do is play guitar all day, and talk about guitars, and guitar players, and strings, and modes and scales and chord progressions. Lets say i call in to work to play more guitar. Lets say i don't talk to anyone about anything besides guitars, and usually i'm not social because i'm focusing on guitar. Lets say i waste money on buying more guitars and getting them tricked out with better strings and newer pickups!

    I dunno, it kinda seems ANYTHING that doesn't really change you chemicals in your body (ie drugs) could be classifed as a drug in these terms.

    Murago on
    Check out www.myspace.com/scarborough -- tell me what you think!
  • Aqua DarkAqua Dark Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Murago wrote: »
    Well, can't you really say that anything that effects you're mind so that it can't focus on anything besides that thing is addictive?

    So if i'm addicted to playing guitar and all i do is play guitar all day, and talk about guitars, and guitar players, and strings, and modes and scales and chord progressions. Lets say i call in to work to play more guitar. Lets say i don't talk to anyone about anything besides guitars, and usually i'm not social because i'm focusing on guitar. Lets say i waste money on buying more guitars and getting them tricked out with better strings and newer pickups!

    I dunno, it kinda seems ANYTHING that doesn't really change you chemicals in your body (ie drugs) could be classifed as a drug in these terms.

    This thread is not about labeling MMO's as drugs, we are talking about addictions to gaming. If you let the guitar occupy you like you stated then you would have a problem and would need some help.

    Aqua Dark on
    There are such things as stupid questions, and you know what they are: so do not ask them!

    World of Warcraft IS a drug, if you are playing it seek rehab immediately.
  • kaliyamakaliyama Left to find less-moderated fora Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Instead of quoting your post, Kali, I would just like to re-iterate the fact that I'm not trying to defend MMOs as a genre.

    I absolutely believe that video games, and especially MMOs, are addictive and your points concerning how one could better spend their time elsewhere are all absolutely valid.

    My main point of contetion lies with the villification of video game creators for their role in this phenomenon. Comparing game creators to drug pushers, I feel, is hyperbole and uncalled for. For a game company to create a game that people want to buy and play is a good business model, not immoral pandering to weak-willed individuals who cannot control their impulses.

    This, I believe, is a symptom of our society's propensity for shifting the blame. Video games, unlike drugs, do not create a chemical dependancy which is what drug pushers rely on to make a profit. The addictive properties of a game are found completely within the consciousness of the addict, and there are plenty of people out there who can enjoy such a hobby, spending a large amount of time on it, without it having an adverse effect on the rest of their lives, and sometimes, I believe, can even serve to enhance it.

    The larger point here is that video game addiction exists, but it is a symptom of a greater problem within the addict that is not the responsibility of the game creator. The addict has other issues they need to contend with and blaming the game for their addiction is displacing the blame and THAT, in my opinion, is the danger facing the notion that gaming should be listed as an addiction.

    Thanks for responding. You raise good points and articulate intelligent positions - I spend the rest of my post quibbling with you so I don't want to seem like I don't think your positions have any merit. I think you're 100% correct that video games at large are a much different phenomenon than MMORPGs. Smash Brothers or Halo sessions with a bunch of friends around a TV, or a LAN party, are functionally equivalent to quite socially benign acitivites like card games or bridge or scrabble or Cataan - they involve face time and real human interaction. I mostly am concerned about MMORPGs - this stuff is on the forefront of regulatory issues and bears lots of discussion. Potential legal liablity for game developers that make games that are too good is a frightening thought - i.e. people suing the inventor of spider solitaire for taking up all of their time. I discuss what I like to think is a middle ground policy solution at the end of my post that other regulated industries have adopted.

    Think an inconsistency in your post is that you acknowledge that games can be addictive and can cultivate addictive personalities, but deny a chemical basis for this phenomenon and just ascribe it to the 'weakness' of those who are hooked. We are carbon-based creatures with physical brains - any addiction is going to be played out in that space and is going to correspond to chemical activity in our brain and nervous system. Games trigger a response - pleasure, contentment, whatever - in a way that is more addictive (the random payout stuff I discussed above) that get people hooked. Similarly, people can get addicted to running because of the chemical payoffs it provides. I don't know if it's more or less easy to kick as a habit that seems more 'externally imposed' like smoking, but they both involve addictive chemicals. It is likely to be a question of degree and not of kind.

    The same argument you offer about offering a product people want is a "good business model" canc justify lots of otherwise icky things - it's not that it's untrue but that what can be profitable can also be socially disastrous, like tobacco or alcohol or whatever. People on these threads seem defensive and are keen to heap moral blame on the people who suffer for addiction rather than distributors. I think this is partially to defend their own habits (which may or may not be unhealthy) but also out of a fear recognition of these problems are going to lead to overregulation of the video game industry. I think there are lots of factors that differentiate people who can play MMORPGs without having their lives ruined from those who do suffer mightily for their hobby. But it's not that some people are "weak-willed" and some aren't in a way that provides moral distinctions. That depends on the structure + function of your brain, behavioral experiences during development, your present and past environments, your socioeconomic status, language and culture. Some people can drink responsibly, and some people wind up winos, some people can quit smoking, and some get lung cancer. Trying to peg this on being 'weak willed' is a mistake and not the way to protect your hobby from politicians and medical experts.

    The sooner people openly acknowledge the problems, the better we can treat those who have a variety of factors that make game playing a losing proposition. Acknowledging the problem and offering treatment options for addiction sufferers is a much more effective social policy than blaming the victim.

    I would say that if anything, video game manufacturers are going to become more morally culpable as the physical, mental and social health implications of MMORPGs become more clear. I think it's plausible to say pre-WoW's success that companies like Blizzard didn't know their game would be screwing over people. Now, though, they know some proportion of their customers are problem players. What casinos do is prevent people who are classified as gambling addicts from entering, and allow people to voluntarily enter themselves into a blacklist. Other industries who have a percentage of problem players can take steps to deal with the problem without shutting down.

    Would that solve these people's problems? No. A personality more succeptible to addiction is going to find other outlets for their issue. Hopefully directing these people to treatment for their addiction rather then denying it will allow them to cope with their addictive personality. Currently, videogames are an outlet for their behavior that isn't viewed as an addiction, and therefore reduces the odds that they or someone else will diagnose their behavior as problematic and is going to prolong their suffering.

    kaliyama on
    fwKS7.png?1
  • Aqua DarkAqua Dark Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    It would be funny if, one day soon, we started seeing the Surgeon General's warning on all video game boxes.

    Aqua Dark on
    There are such things as stupid questions, and you know what they are: so do not ask them!

    World of Warcraft IS a drug, if you are playing it seek rehab immediately.
  • GrombarGrombar Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Personal responsibility. That's what it comes down to.

    A person who decides not to face his life's responsibilities can always find a way to distract himself. WoW is just one distraction among thousands. And if he distracts himself too much, those responsibilities won't be met, and his life will suffer. At this point, some people are smart enough to roll up their sleeves and get back to work; others just decide to sit back with their distraction of choice and let things keep deteriorating, consequences be damned.

    Instead of coddling people like that, we need to let their consequences teach them lessons. They'll either learn eventually, or they'll ultimately drop out of the gene pool, taking their inability to learn with them. Shielding them from the natural consequences of their own actions doesn't teach them anything.

    Grombar on
  • ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    . . .

    So what you are saying is that they should keep being social outcasts instead of trying to become normal people?

    Running away from a problem (i.e. lack of social skills and courage) does not make it disappear. It only makes it worse. That is why escapism in huge amounts is dangerous.

    Besides, what about those people who are normal, then start playing, lose themselves, and eventually end up alienating their significant others, friends, and even family? They weren't social outcasts to begin with.

    ege02 on
  • Romantic UndeadRomantic Undead Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    kaliyama wrote: »
    I would say that if anything, video game manufacturers are going to become more morally culpable as the physical, mental and social health implications of MMORPGs become more clear. I think it's plausible to say pre-WoW's success that companies like Blizzard didn't know their game would be screwing over people. Now, though, they know some proportion of their customers are problem players. What casinos do is prevent people who are classified as gambling addicts from entering, and allow people to voluntarily enter themselves into a blacklist. Other industries who have a percentage of problem players can take steps to deal with the problem without shutting down.

    I just wanted to address this by letting you know that Blizzard has in fact has taken certain measures to encourage players not to spend all their time with their game. Aside from the disclaimer they put up which reads "Remember: Take all things in moderation, even World of Warcraft", they have instituted the "rest" bonus which accumulates xp on a character who isn't logged in, and they have cooperated with the government of China in setting up arbitrary cut off times for the players there (a plan which would NEVER fly here in the western world).

    The thing is, one has to keep in mind that by encouraging their players to play in moderation, MMO companies actually stand to profit since most MMO business models are based on a pay-per-month basis. Therefore, if, by playing in moderation, it takes you 3 months to accomplish what a hardcore addict can do in one, which client has made more money for the company? Heck, there have been a couple of months where I barely played at all yet stil paid my 15$ simply to avoid being cut off should I end up finding any spare time to play! As far as I'm concerned, the casual, non-addicted player (as I consider myself to be) is by far the more desired clientele.

    Heck, if anything, Blizzard has been forced to pander to the vocal addicts of their game on many an occasion, creating more timesinks so that they (the addicted) won't feel "cheated" out of their money. For an addict, there always needs to be another goal, no matter how lofty, so Blizzard created these ridiculous timesinks for "epic" loot.

    From a business standpoint, this made sense. Offer a relatively easy to implement carrot for the vocal hardcore (read: addicts) while still focusing on making the game accessible for the more casual gamers.

    If it gives you any indication of where I'm coming from, I should let you know that I play WoW with my girlfriend and a handful of other real life friends every odd weekday after work. It's a great way to blow off some steam and spend some meaningful time with people I care about. I'm defending game makers such as Blizzard mainly because I believe that if they are to be held responsible for game addiction, then my responsible enjoyment of the game may be adversly affected (say, perhaps, by an arbitrary time limit on how much I can play, as an example).

    I would be completely supportive of the establishement of an official support group for video game addicts or anything else for that matter, my issue lies with where the responsibility lies.

    I'm not "blaming the victim" as you put it, I'm saying there's no victimization taking place. I also believe that comparing an endorphin rush that you might get as a result of doing well in a video game to a chemically-induced high you get from cocaine is irresponsible.

    One consists of chemicals found naturally in the body which can be released into the bloodstream by any number of stimuli, while one is an external additive which creates an artificial high which subsequently de-regulates the natural chemical balance of the human brain, forcing that human to continue to seek this non-natural chemical or suffer very real physical problems ON TOP of all the other problems that addiction in general creates, making them far more destructive.

    I'm sorry if you take issue with the term "weak-willed" but I believe it is the proper nomenclature for someone who does not have the will to admit to or overcome any psychological problems they might have. We are not helpless before the weaknesses of our psyche. I've fallen into depression before. I could have simply submitted to it and let my depression destroy my life, or I could take charge of my problem and seek the help I needed. Some choose the former, I chose the latter, and it wasn't my family's fault for not understanding me, or the school's fault for being too stressful, it was the circumstances I found myself in and only I was responsible for changing those circumstances, including whatever chemical imbalance may have been occuring in my brain.
    Some people need support groups to help them, then great and my support goes to anyone who desires to help another, but I, for one, do not condone blaming a car company when an irresponsible person runs another person over, the fault lies with the individual.

    Romantic Undead on
    3DS FC: 1547-5210-6531
  • Romantic UndeadRomantic Undead Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    ege02 wrote: »
    So am I to believe that giving a social outcast a means to having somewhat meaningful social interactions is a bad thing? I think the mere fact that people who would otherwise be mercilessly teased and made to feel like shit about themselves have an opportunity to perhaps be treated like a normal person, even if it's from behind a computer screen, is far greater than leaving their fate to the social elite of the real world.

    . . .

    So what you are saying is that they should keep being social outcasts instead of trying to become normal people?

    Running away from a problem (i.e. lack of social skills and courage) does not make it disappear. It only makes it worse. That is why escapism in huge amounts is dangerous.

    Besides, what about those people who are normal, then start playing, lose themselves, and eventually end up alienating their significant others, friends, and even family? They weren't social outcasts to begin with.


    Please see the post I made at Forum time 6:40.

    Romantic Undead on
    3DS FC: 1547-5210-6531
  • ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    My main point of contetion lies with the villification of video game creators for their role in this phenomenon. Comparing game creators to drug pushers, I feel, is hyperbole and uncalled for. For a game company to create a game that people want to buy and play is a good business model, not immoral pandering to weak-willed individuals who cannot control their impulses.

    This, I believe, is a symptom of our society's propensity for shifting the blame. Video games, unlike drugs, do not create a chemical dependancy which is what drug pushers rely on to make a profit. The addictive properties of a game are found completely within the consciousness of the addict, and there are plenty of people out there who can enjoy such a hobby, spending a large amount of time on it, without it having an adverse effect on the rest of their lives, and sometimes, I believe, can even serve to enhance it.

    The larger point here is that video game addiction exists, but it is a symptom of a greater problem within the addict that is not the responsibility of the game creator. The addict has other issues they need to contend with and blaming the game for their addiction is displacing the blame and THAT, in my opinion, is the danger facing the notion that gaming should be listed as an addiction.

    First of all, I'm not vilifying video game makers. Perhaps you're right, my comparison was a hyperbole. But I made it to demonstrate that just like a crack dealer is responsible for introducing an addictive substance to his/her clients, video game companies are also responsible for the effects their products generate on their players. If blaming video game companies is society's propensity for shifting the blame, then so is blaming the player because "they have a personality vulnerable to addiction".

    Second of all, saying it is a good business model for video game companies to make addicting games is, well, meaningless really. There are other ways to make money, ways that do not rely on blatantly exploiting addictive personalities, which in my book is morally questionable.

    ege02 on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2007
    Aqua Dark wrote: »
    Comparing WoW to crack is a pretty ridiculous stretch. Gambling I could see as being pretty analagous, but crack just isn't.

    It is not as far as you would think, WoW destroys lives as does crack. I believe some one earlier asked us if we had seen a WoW player away from his computer for a day, and i have. They are hopeless when they are not playing the damn game, they are talking about it. They are always looking forward to their next FIX of WoW, just like a Crack head is always looking for their next FIX of Crack. Both can cause you to Flunk school or lose jobs.
    It doesnt matter if you destroy your sleep schedule with Crack or WoW, it has the same effect. It doesnt matter if you lose intrest in every other aspect of life becuase of WoW or Crack, the effect is the same. While you can not get AIDs from playing video games, you can from sharring drug needles, and that is about the only thing that seperates them in my mind. You pay for both of them and you can spend just as much on WoW as Crack. (Someone posted earlier on the guy who built a new comp and bought gold for it, and that is very common.) Both destroy lives, end of story.

    If you really are unaware of the differences in the mechanics of addiction between crack and WoW, and by that I mean the differences in the mechanics of a chemically addictive substance that you put into your body and your body then builds a physical dependence upon and a game that you have a hard time walking away from because you're rewarded for not walking away from it, you really have nothing to add.

    ViolentChemistry on
  • Low KeyLow Key Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    ege02 wrote: »
    Low Key wrote: »
    I have no idea really, so I'm not in a great place to comment. I've never played an MMO and this place is really the only internet socialising I do. But I imagine the social aspect isn't really related to the aspects of MMO's that lead to addictive behaviour. I'd say it's more to do with a system of variable and fixed ratio reinforcements that light up brighter than a slot machine with a day glo granny at the helm.

    You're right, the game mechanics part is the main addictive aspect of the game. But, like ELM hinted at, there is also the social aspect. However, I would argue that the social aspect is not stand-alone, but rather reinforces the addictiveness of the game mechanics and, in the case of WoW, is a requirement to take full advantage of the most addictive parts. You can't kill that big dragon without 24 other people, and when you do, everyone pats each other on the back and people who get to have the loot are congratulated by their fellows. In this sense it strokes one's sense of being approved and liked by others, their sense of accomplishment.

    You can see how this sort of thing appeals to people who cannot get the same feeling of being approved/feeling useful/being liked by others in real-life.

    And that is part of the problem; if the person works at a shitty job that they are unenthusiastic about, or lives in the middle of nowhere, or works night-shift and doesn't get to hang out with many people (I'm just listing some common reasons), or they are simply anti-social freaks, they are going to turn to games like WoW as escape mechanisms, rather than trying to seek actual solutions to their problems.

    My argument in the original discussion we had before was that providing these escape mechanisms means the game companies hold at least part of the responsibility; the same way crack dealers do for providing drug addicts with an addictive substance. But that is neither here nor there.

    The problem with your line here is that the things you are listing all positive. Whether or not you believe the achievements to be "real", the sense of approval and achievement are not bad things and certainly not indicative of dependency. I understand your position is that this kind of social interaction is retarding, and the positive aspects and negated by the fact that more substantial forms of interaction are ignored. I don't know if that's the case, but either way I don't see it having a great deal to do with addiction.

    Psychological addiction results in antisocial behaviour. Always. Even something like hypersexuality results in interactions that are essentially antisocial. Addiction to video games can be expected to follow the same patterns. Now it's possible that the blurriness of social interaction on the internet has created a whole new set of criteria, and I'm not gonna dismiss entirely that a new form of social reinforcement plays a part, but I'm not gonna leap at it either. An MMO is essentially a social environment, and people don't become addicted to environments, they become addicted to behaviour/stimulation routines.

    Calling MMOs an escape mechanism for lonely individuals doesn't really address the issue of addiction, whether or not it's true. Playing video games all day isn't a disease. Thinking about your guitar all day isn't a disease. Having no friends isn't a disease. When dependency on something becomes compulsive, and results in anxiety, depression, and the inability to function normally, then it's a disease. Or as Feral likes to call it, an ABDNICD. It's catchy.

    Low Key on
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    For a game company to create a game that people want to buy and play is a good business model, not immoral pandering to weak-willed individuals who cannot control their impulses.

    False dichotomy. Immoral pandering to weak-willed individuals is an effective business model.
    Video games, unlike drugs, do not create a chemical dependancy which is what drug pushers rely on to make a profit.

    People overestimate the power of chemical dependency. There are plenty of habit-forming chemicals that do not create physical dependency to any great degree (marijuana) and there are many more that do but not until there's an established cycle of habitual use (alcohol). There are also plenty of chemicals that create physical dependency yet are not prone to habitual abuse (antiseizure medications, for instance).

    Chemical dependency is neither necessary nor sufficient for addiction. Stop focusing on it.
    The addictive properties of a game are found completely within the consciousness of the addict,

    As I said previously in the thread, for addiction to occur, there has to be a preceding psychological vulnerability to addiction. If a product manages to take advantage of that vulnerability, it doesn't matter if that product is a drug or a game. The difference is only one of degree, not of principle.
    The larger point here is that video game addiction exists, but it is a symptom of a greater problem within the addict that is not the responsibility of the game creator. The addict has other issues they need to contend with and blaming the game for their addiction is displacing the blame and THAT, in my opinion, is the danger facing the notion that gaming should be listed as an addiction.

    Blame is not zero-sum. Blaming the game creator for creating a product that takes advantage of human vulnerability to addiction does not negate the blame of the game player for getting themselves addicted. It is perfectly reasonable to assign blame to both parties.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Romantic UndeadRomantic Undead Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    To Feral:

    Fine, then if I were to compromise in my argument and accept that Game companies must accept at least a part of the responsibility for the effect their product has on those pre-disposed to addiction, what would you reccomend is the "responsible" thing for them to do?

    Is the nature of video games not to be a fun, rewarding passtime? If you take out the addictive qualities of that passtime, what happens to it? Why would anyone bother?

    If I don't get a feeling of progress, or any type of reward for the effort I put into my passtime, what possible reason can there be for that passtime to exist?

    Heck, I have a co worker who I'm sure is completely addicted to BeJeweled. How should the makers of BeJeweled be held accountable for their apparently evil, insidious game that has tricked my co-worker into wasting her time? Should she sue them if she gets fired?

    But I get the feeling here that the crux of the argument here is that some of you are accusing MMOs of purposefully including types of gameplay that, in some sort of back-handed way, is taking advantage of people with addictive personalities. However, like I stated before, that would seem to me to be counter-productive to business, since, I would think that the companies would want to foster a gaming community of casual gamers who will stay subscribed to their game for a long time, in order to complete the content a bit at a time, rather than pander to addicts who will play hardcore for a couple of months, before eventually burning out on the game and moving on to their next addiction.

    This, to me, reeks of those lawsuits filed by fat people against whatever their favorite food chain is, suing them for being too delicious. Is it wrong for food chains to want to make food that tastes good? In the interest of protecting the health of their costumers, is it their responsibility to make sure that the food doesn't taste too good? If their clientele makes a request of them, should they ignore it for fear that it might lead to people becoming addicted to their product? It's a well known fact that many restaurants put things like flavoring, additives and sugar in their foods to make them taste better. Clearly this is an evil ploy by heartless corporations trying to trick easily influenced gluttons to destroy their lives.

    I suppose responsible business ethics should teach: "sell a product the people want, just make sure they don't want it too much."

    I'm sorry, I just don't buy it.

    Romantic Undead on
    3DS FC: 1547-5210-6531
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    WOW is vicious... it is clearly has some very addictive qualities, judging by all the people I saw drop out of college because of it last year. WOW is a bit more virulent then other video games in that it has broader appeal, and the reward system it sets up is perfect. It's just a giant multi-million dollar Skinner box... you ding, you get your treat.

    I don't necessarily think the game makers are to blame... I mean, they went further in trying to discourage addiction then a lot of other games did... I mean, that's almost the entire point of the rest system... but the game can ruin lives... I never saw someone drop out of college over Super Mario Brothers...

    Sentry on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Sign In or Register to comment.