The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
New Study: Video Games Not Very Engrossing
Rehab
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
BBFC: video games less engrossing than television
By Eugene Huang
According to a press release dated yesterday, a study detailing the lasting sociological and psychological effects of video games has been recently published by the British Board of Film Classification, a U.K.-based group that classifies and censors films and video games much like America's MPAA and ESRB.
"While there is research designed to show the short term physical reactions of video games players, there is very little information about why people play video games and what impact they think playing games has on them", the release stated.
Specifically, the study aimed to discover the answers to some of the less-emphasized aspects of the psychology of gamers, such as: "What is the attraction of video games?" "What do players think about the violence in some games?" and "How much of an impact does gaming actually have on them and their behavior?"
Below is a condensed list of the study's key findings:
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
BBFC director David Cooke had this to say about the findings:
The full report: Playing Video Games - BBFC Publishes Research
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Not your typical video game study here. This actually contains a decent balance of positive and negative points and offers a much deeper level of insight then what we are accustomed to. It might downplay the level of interactivity we have with certain games but at least it addresses the issue of video game violence in a more realistic manner. From this, it shows that parents actually don't see them as being too threatening as well. Thoughts?
By Eugene Huang
According to a press release dated yesterday, a study detailing the lasting sociological and psychological effects of video games has been recently published by the British Board of Film Classification, a U.K.-based group that classifies and censors films and video games much like America's MPAA and ESRB.
"While there is research designed to show the short term physical reactions of video games players, there is very little information about why people play video games and what impact they think playing games has on them", the release stated.
Specifically, the study aimed to discover the answers to some of the less-emphasized aspects of the psychology of gamers, such as: "What is the attraction of video games?" "What do players think about the violence in some games?" and "How much of an impact does gaming actually have on them and their behavior?"
Below is a condensed list of the study's key findings:
- Negative coverage for a game from mainstream news sources tends to increase the likelihood that a younger gamer will partake in a game. Peer pressure and word-of-mouth also play factors in the games that young gamers play.
- The allure of games mostly comes from the chance to escape from the pressures of the real world without the added sense of risk. The added benefit of being in a world that is under control of the gamer is also appealing.
- Games are inherently better at developing action than developing character, and as a result, gamers usually care more about progressing in the game than following the story.
- Gamers appear to forget they are playing games less readily than film goers forget they are watching a film because they have to participate in the game for it to proceed. They appear to non-games players to be engrossed in what they are doing, but, they are concentrating on making progress, and are unlikely to be emotionally involved."
- Gamers are generally aware of the issue that younger players may find some violence, particularly those in adult-rated games, upsetting. However, these concerns are muted, as they mostly consider the violence in television and films to be more realistic.
- Gamers are virtually unanimous in rejecting the suggestion that video games encourage people to be violent in real life or that they have become desensitized." The emphasis in gaming is usually placed more on achievement than in committing acts of violence on a screen.
- Although non-gaming parents are concerned that their gaming children may not be getting enough exercise, they are even more concerned about child predators on internet chat rooms. Parents usually believe that their children are well-balanced enough to not be influenced by violent video games.
- While parents agree that there should be regulation of games some are happy to give their children adult games because they are "only games."
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
BBFC director David Cooke had this to say about the findings:
David Cooke wrote:“The BBFC classified just under three hundred video games last year. Most games in the UK are classified under a pan-European voluntary system, but those with adult content are required to come to us. We take this part of our responsibilities under the Video Recordings Act very seriously. Our examiners actually play the games for up to five hours, assessing all levels of the games and considering all the key issues. Players and the parents of young players can be sure that all aspects of the game have been taken into account before reaching a classification. We require key issues to be flagged and aids such as cheat codes to be supplied to us. We take context into account, and examine works in a way which is as thorough and penetrating as anywhere in the world.
“The element of interactivity in games carries some weight when we are considering a video game. We were particularly interested to see that this research suggests that, far from having a potentially negative impact on the reaction of the player, the very fact that they have to interact with the game seems to keep them more firmly rooted in reality. People who do not play games raise concerns about their engrossing nature, assuming that players are also emotionally engrossed. This research suggests the opposite; a range of factors seems to make them less emotionally involving than film or television. The adversaries which players have to eliminate have no personality and so are not real and their destruction is therefore not real, regardless of how violent that destruction might be. This firm grasp on reality seems to extend to younger players, but this is no reason to allow them access to adult rated games, as they themselves often admit that they find the violence in games like Manhunt very upsetting. Parents should not treat video games in the same way they would board games. We will continue to examine very carefully those games which come to us, to flag any concerns we have and, if necessary, to use our statutory powers.
“There is no question that video games are an important form of entertainment for an ever increasing number of people. As the technology improves the games will become more and more realistic and it is important that games are properly rated to protect younger players from the games with adult content, which the BBFC does. This research provides some valuable insights into why people play video games and what effect they think playing has on themselves and friends. It has also highlighted parental attitudes to video games. We hope that it will provide some food for thought for the industry, and everyone who has an interest in the impact of games and we will be taking the research outcomes into account as we review our games classification policies over the coming months.â€
The full report: Playing Video Games - BBFC Publishes Research
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Not your typical video game study here. This actually contains a decent balance of positive and negative points and offers a much deeper level of insight then what we are accustomed to. It might downplay the level of interactivity we have with certain games but at least it addresses the issue of video game violence in a more realistic manner. From this, it shows that parents actually don't see them as being too threatening as well. Thoughts?
NNID: Rehab0
Rehab on
0
Posts
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I'm glad there's finally an accredited study pointing this out.
EDIT: Maybe I'm too quick to use the word "accredited"; still, I'd be making the same point with a more appropriate word.
By the by, I have some cool new games to play. They are hooked up to a TV in my van if anyone is interested.
This just in: A new study reveals that the sky is actually blue!
Also, I have thought sometimes when playing a game: Why? I seem to do that alot more often now, so maybe it's time to just focus on simiplier, wham, bam, thank you ma'am games. I forsee a DS in my future...
Edit:
I want a FPS or some game like that to have random henchman drop hilarious journals.
Steam: abunchofdaftpunk | PSN: noautomobilesgo | Lastfm: sjchszeppelin | Backloggery: colincummings | 3DS FC: 1392-6019-0219 |
Are you Chris Hanson?
Very few games have more than a handful of adversaries with an actual personality.
I'm pretty sure it's just a case of "there's no such thing as bad publicity."
2. gamer -> reader
3. game -> book
4. play -> read
5. gaming -> reading
Do you also have candy? If there's free candy then I'm in!
I wish they'd amend that one statement to say "most adversaries have no personality" though.
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
I think this is really the crux of this study's findings. Whether or not they're accepted by the research community at large, it's still the first time that somebody has disagreed with the lay consensus that "video games are more engrossing than movies or television, because the player is more intimately involved with the actions onscreen".
Here's a study saying the opposite: "video games are less engrossing than movies or television, because the action onscreen only progresses when the player takes actions to advance in the game".
It's hard to argue with either point, because they both seem so logical. What we're really getting at here, however, is the following question: are video games more or less desensitizing than movies/television? This study seems to imply that they are less desensitizing, because it uses the measurement of "more or less likely to forget that they are watching a movie/playing a game".
Why do you think people scream at horror flicks?
Be that as it may, he didn't mention any. He also didn't mention the heap of games which don't have any adversaries to eliminate at all. You know, those non-violent games?
I thought it was interesting that this is at least coming from a ratings board comparable to the ESRB. That means that they at least have a pretty good deal of experience with gaming and they mention Manhunt as well, probably in knowing there is a sequel on the way. But yeah, there are a few generalizations like the one you mentioned.
Sure! Why not kid.
Still, the petulant video gamer in me wants to be able to point a finger at CNN and Fox News and say, "nyah nyah nyah, more kids are playing GTA because you're constantly talking about how bad it is that kids are playing GTA".
I mean, everybody knew it was true, but now there's some big study that says it's true. Isn't that cool and totally vindicating. :P
Tetris games feature horrible violence against innocent blocks. Meteos involves genocide.
The majority of video games aren't some kind of fancy art like Shakespeare or something.
The elimination of enemies (when there are indeed enemies to be eliminated) is still a very jump-on-goomba situation.
No one gives a shit if the goomba has a family, we just wanna squish his brown midget ass.
Suspension of disbelief is a bit easier to achieve in movies than games is basically what it is saying. I think that is true overall. Most movies appear realistic visually and has a better chance of relating to the person watching. Interacting with games does help to draw you in, but the realization that you are holding a control and pushing buttons pulls you back out a bit.
I really like this sentence.
I heard from this one senator that I could be playing GTA and beating up hookers for points. I was sold right there.
These may be obvious things, but it;s a reputable, big, disinteretsed bunch of people seeing them; and also bodes well for the future of (lack of) game censorship in the UK.
How would I know? I'm not a psychologist, and I don't watch horror movies.
The few horror games I've played have produced no reaction whatsoever in me.
I mean, I don't see any methodology here, so it seems to be taking gamer's opinions about themselves at face value. And it's very common for us to delude ourselves when evaluating who we are.
I'm a freak
The research set out to gain insights into a number of issues including:
* the attractions of playing video games;
* what impact games players think playing has on them and their behaviour;
* whether the interactivity element of games alters the experience;
* what players think about the violence in some games;
* how they choose which games to play; and
* what parents think about video games.
This isn't meant to be a scientific study into videogame violence etc. It does exactly what it said it will do.
edit: I should probably put some context into this as I'm aware that much of the readership isn't from the UK. The BBFC whilst government sanctioned is actually independent and it's moral standards are actually pretty much based on public opinion. For example 30 years ago, racial slurs were pretty commonly accepted but nudity and sex wasn't, now it's more of the opposite and the BBFC changes the way it rates films to reflect this. That's why it carries out this kind of research, if gamers though games were sending kids to hell in a handbasket they'd tighten up their ratings and censorship on them etc.
That's your answer right there.
People forget they are watching horror movies.... thus shit scares them.
People do not forget they are playing horror games (due to constant need to input via button presses, etc)... thus shit doesn't scare them.
This is not taking into account cheap scares such as sudden loud noises or movements that don't necessarily frighten a person, but can certainly shock them.
Then, last night, I decided to re-install Doom 3 again. I had just watched the Doom movie the night before (it's not good, but it's also not bad), and felt an urge to kill demons.
I installed Classic Doom 3, and I found that I was getting "into" the game, even as I recognized familiar old levels that were re-visualized. I was getting freaked out by the imps and soldier and oh god Pinky demons scared the shit out of me. I don't know why... I think maybe it's because it was all familiar Doom I levels... but it looked all new and scary and dark and spooky. Very engrossing for me. I was jumping when they would jump out at me.
This leads me to believe that it's very much an individual reaction. Movies demand focus for you to get the most out of them. Watching a movie while doing something else never really leads to movie appreciation. Games tend to be approached differently, especially by people who game a lot. If you game all the time, you can't very well exclude all outside stimulus (well, I guess you can...). My point being that when I was playing Doom 3 (and Classic Doom 3) last night, I turned out the lights and really focused on the game. It was particularly engrossing because Doom has a special place in my heart, and because I gave it the opportunity to be engrossing.
Actually, regular Doom 3 felt less engrossing to me. I've never played through it all the way, but it feels like encounter... space... encounter... pda... closet... that's it. Doom 1 levels, even redone in Doom 3, seem a lot more continuously confrontational. More "actiony" than "horror," even though I was finding the Doom 1 levesl to be scarier. I think it's because the non-stop action in Doom 1 levels keeps you in the game. The SCARE-SHOTGUN-RELIEF repeating pattern of Doom 3 tends to pop me out of the game.
What does this mean? It means that some games just aren't as engrossing. But some movies aren't either. Do you watch Office Space and get "in the movie?" Uhm... I don't think so. You're watching a story from the outside. On the other hand, you might get into the movie a lot more with a drama or epic fantasy or something. My point being that there are lots of types of games and lots of types of movies. I am a wus when it comes to film dramas... they'll make me cry. Do games make me cry? FFX did at the end. So do others that have a serious story. Will Doom 3? It isn't trying to.
And what about games like Guitar Hero, which are quite engrossing in some ways, but obviously aren't going to have you crying for more plot or characterization?
Resident Evil 4 and Silent Hill put this to the test. People have watched me play and got scared. I'd say that can at least be as engrossing.
Edit:
No, you're not. I see no reason why both can't be excellent. God of War 2 being the most recent example.
Currently playing: Infamous, Resident Evil 5
Need to play: Shadow Complex, Uncharted 2, Ratchet and Clank: ACIT, MW2, Alpha Protocol