Slashdot Mirror


Study: Playing Computer Games Makes Kids Smarter

Nightspore writes: "The Sunday Times is running this article on the results of a study by the Economic and Social research Council (ESRC). The study found that, 'people who play games regularly seem to develop a mental state that we have seen before only in serious athletes or professionals such as astronauts, whose life depends on concentration and co-ordination ... Their minds and bodies work together much better than those of most other people ... They had more friends, were better adjusted and tended to read more.'" Hey it's just a study, but it's amusing.

201 comments

  1. Re:Let's not be hasty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I think there's some confusion about cause and effect here. It's probably much more likely that less sociable people are gravitated towards online gaming. I myself have never been very social and not the best communication skills, but that was well before quake. Of course, once I started college and met a bunch of Quake addicts in person, my social life skyrocketted.

  2. Re:Let's not be hasty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Maybe the fact that i've been been in a gifted program for education since third grade says something"

    Well LA DEE FRICKIN' DA mistar smartie pants! You think you're the only one? I bet if we took a poll on /., the minority group would be the ones that ARE NOT (or WERE NOT in most cases) in a gifted program!

    I think he meant he was in a "special" program.

  3. Re:quake? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yours may be the dorkiest comment I've ever read. Kudos!

  4. A thing about correlation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1


    There's a correlation between the sales of ice cream and violent crimes. Does this mean ice cream causes violent crimes? No. It just means when it's hot outside, there are more edgy people and more people buying ice cream.

    Just because people who play video games more tend to have more friends, are better adjusted and tend to read more, is no arguement for game playing increses studiousness and better socially fitted. In fact, it might quite possibly be the opposite. People can come up with all the hypotheses they want, but it's very hard to make a convincing argument.

  5. Re:Let's not be hasty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    please drink a large amount of vodka to wash down a bottle of sleeping pills. you aren't tooting your own horn by listing your accomplishments, you are an asshole who wants to let someone know that you percieve yourself as *greater* than they are. if you were really intelligent you would get a laugh from such lame posts and move on without taking the time to discredit someone else.
    "Me? Slightly drunk and with hardly a wink slept all night from the gaming the night before, I managed to walk away with a 1420 or so. eh? eh? " sound like another lame college kid subtly bragging about being a nerd who drinks... bah...

  6. An interesting article but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    "Bryce did her research by visiting computer gamers, often during regional or national competitions around Britain"

    So the majority of the surveys were taken at lan gaming competitions by competitive players. Of course "cyberathletes" like Thresh who compete at these events will have attributes in common with sportsmen, but most gamers aren't like that.

    Taking the data from such a limited population makes the results unrepresentative.

  7. Re:Let's not be hasty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    "certain situations, and also insinuates that i have poor verbal skills?"

    hmm...since when did "I" officially become lower-case?

    "Here are the reasons these things dont apply"

    'dont' what word is that again? Oh wait, that's right, it's a CONTRACTION! You're (yes, it IS the correct You Are you're) missing an apostrophe!

    "Its not about them "just not understanding""

    Hmmm you mean they don't understand how l33tx0r c0unt3rs7r1|3 is? Oh yeah, and if you DO play counterstrike you should be shot, then hung...and maybe quartered too!

    "Maybe the fact that i've been been in a gifted program for education since third grade says something"

    Well LA DEE FRICKIN' DA mistar smartie pants! You think you're the only one? I bet if we took a poll on /., the minority group would be the ones that ARE NOT (or WERE NOT in most cases) in a gifted program!

    "Or how about this: I've been given numerous state and county awards. "

    hahahahahaha not I'd be careful...not exactly a compliment considering how easy such awards are to get 'mano.

    "I have also taken the college SAT's and have scored higher than the average college bound senior (and im fourteen by the way)"

    ummm yeah, whoooeeee it seems like the average 'college bound senior' (gee, umm...I wonder where you got that quote from??) isn't so smart really...I mean, really! That could mean you got a score of 1005 or so (bah, close enough for government work!)...again, most people on /. score above as well...please back up your claims with numbers. Me? Slightly drunk and with hardly a wink slept all night from the gaming the night before, I managed to walk away with a 1420 or so. eh? eh? Oh yeah, being fourteen means SQUAT, everyone has had the chance to learn everything they needed to by then to ace those SAT's.

    "Poor verbal skills? hah. Games might not be the best way to learn english, but from my experience they dont really detract. Of course there are allways exceptions, after all i cant say that Doom really taught me anything except having a blast on the computer. Ive played untold hours of games, some for more than 3 days or more total (that happens when you try to completely beat certain Role Playing Games). But i can definitely speak to someone both precisely and eloquently."

    You know, grandiloquence is more than the just using big long words...as a good friend says, 'what's the use of responding with a paragraph when a sentence will do?' Using big words usually just makes you look stupid in most casual social situations...and no, pretending to be a shakespearian (hmmm close enough) character with the 'thou's and 'thee's and the nose thumbing and the 'wherefore's and all that jazz doesn't make you seem smart either.

    "Parents are allways telling kids to take responsibility for their actions, lately, all i have seen from parents is pointing blame, be it at the Media, at games at whatever. How about picking up a book and reading it with your kids, and i mean often too, not once a year. Talk to them, and maybe then they wont be "less than ready to live up to their full potential"."

    DUH TAKE RESPONSIBILITY...why are you blaming it on your parents?! Did I wish I had? hell yeah, even though I did a lot (and unlike you I will not toot my own horn by listing my accomplishments...!!) But after careful and copious thought, I have decided that the only one to blame for anything in my life is me. In fact, I have and always have taken a laissez-faire, c'est la vie attitude towards life, and only fairly recently realized that...in the wonderful words of Tom Lehrer (the mathematician/entertainer that EVERYONE should know!)..."Life is like a sewer, what you get out of it depends on what you put into it".

    As for myself? I will continue playing games, but along the way I will continue to do interesting stuff as well and if life takes a turn for the worse, I'll just roll with it and see if I can't find some silver linings in the clouds.

    PS

  8. Cause and effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5

    So perhaps gettings smarter makes people more violent.

    I certainly feel more inclined to kill people the more I learn about them.

    1. Re:Cause and effect? by Delphis · · Score: 1

      ... and Hitler, well, he happened to think only aryans were human.

      While amusingly he himself did not even 'measure up' to the aryan 'ideal'.

      --
      Delphis

      --
      Delphis
    2. Re:Cause and effect? by Cyno · · Score: 1

      Partially. I think it is the combination of commercialism and lack of attention from friends and more importantly family. Parents tend to leave their kids watching tv or playing computer games instead of playing with their kids or helping their kids do their homework. So I think when kids learn how messed up the world is, things most parents probably ignore or have never read about (not in popular media) it makes them feel powerless, frustrated, and perhaps hostile towards innocent, and probably ignornat, people around them. ( I've felt inclined to kill people, but it doesn't mean I'd act on it. Just stay away from malls if you fear for your life. :)

    3. Re:Cause and effect? by Ioldanach · · Score: 1
      Hitler, now there was a painter. He could paint an entire apartment in one afternoon... Two coats!

      (name the movie) :)

    4. Re:Cause and effect? by GroovBird · · Score: 1

      He painted ceilings and walls! And not like Michelangelo either..

    5. Re:Cause and effect? by Jazu · · Score: 2

      It's a different sort of violence. You have bullying violence, commited primarily by brutes who feel stupid and take their anger out on other people. Then you have criminal mastermind violence, commited by people who are smart enough to know what they're doing, and have some reason for doing it. The columbine shooters killed for vengeance, serial killers kill because of insanity, and Hitler, well, he happened to think only aryans were human.

      --
      My joke got modded as Insightful and my insight got modded as Funny.
    6. Re:Cause and effect? by Schwarzchild · · Score: 3

      Don't forget that Hitler was also artistic and was a painter. I remember hearing something that if his paintings were better accepted he would never have become a dictator but perhaps stayed a simple painter.

      --

      "sweet dreams are made of this..."

    7. Re:Cause and effect? by DaHat · · Score: 1

      I whole heatedly agree... I go from coming up with brilliant battle plans in RA2 or evil tactics in Counter-Strike. All that time gives me this blood lust ... now this study proves that when I go and kill someone in a creative way I'm just acting out the games.

      *stuffing body away*

    8. Re:Cause and effect? by vivamexico · · Score: 1

      This is not entirely true. Hitler applied for an elite german Architecture school, but he was rejected because his portfolio wasn't varied enough(did not include enough drawings of people and such).

    9. Re:Cause and effect? by No+Tears+In+The+End · · Score: 2

      Hitler, well, he happened to think only aryans were human.

      I don't believe that Hitler's psychosis was quite so cut and dry. Being that he was most likely half jewish, he knew that he couldn't be one of the Aryans that he thought and spoke so highly of.

      Hitler's hate of Jews was very similar to Charles Manson's hatred of blacks. Manson believed himself to be half black as well.

      --

      -You can cry, but you'll still die. There'll be no tears in the end.
    10. Re:Cause and effect? by No+Tears+In+The+End · · Score: 3

      There seems to be this fallacy that only dumb brutes are violent. If you look at the recent examples of the Columbine killers, or if you go back just a decade or so you have Colin Ferguson and Ted Bundy, both of whom were very intelligent, yet they were still murderers. The ultimate example of this is Hitler, I don't think that anyone will dispute his intelligence, but being smart didn't make him any less of a monster.

      --

      -You can cry, but you'll still die. There'll be no tears in the end.
  9. Re:Let's not be hasty by Don+Negro · · Score: 2
    Two words: Mario Kart.

    Note to Nintendo - I will purchase a Game Cube as soon as Mario Kart is released for it, and not a moment sooner. Please make it kick ass.

    Thanks,

    Don Negro

    --

    Don Negro
    Perl 6 will give you the big knob. -- Larry Wall

  10. Re:it does make people smarter by MoOsEb0y · · Score: 1

    all I have to say to that is.... "HEAD SHOT" and... "M-M-M-M-M-M-Monster KILLL"

  11. You're talking about a different group of people by morven2 · · Score: 1

    You're talking about adult gamers who play online -- while the study here was of normal kids playing the whole spectrum of games.

    Most games, still, are not this kind of online environment -- for one thing, just about every console game isn't an online game, and often console games are multiplayer.

    I would definitely agree that becoming obsessive about online games might reduce your ability to deal with the rest of the world. It's the same as becoming addicted to any online environment; are obsessive online gamers any different than obsessive IRC addicts or IM-heads?

    None of this applies to a bunch of kids clustered in front of the Playstation, though.

  12. Re:Let's not be hasty by unitron · · Score: 2
    hallowed be, not by.

    It seems it never fails, the post that corrects someone else always contains a mistake of its own.

    I'm sure I'll see mine about .01 second after clicking "Submit".

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  13. Re:Let's not be hasty by unitron · · Score: 2

    Perhaps. I'm only an expert on the parts of language on which I'm an expert. And self-appointed at that.

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  14. Re:Let's not be hasty by unitron · · Score: 2

    LOL

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  15. the statistics nazi says... by Malachite · · Score: 4

    Bryce did her research by visiting computer gamers, often during regional or national competitions around Britain

    The population of interest is computer gamers but the sample is taken from those gamers who go to competitions. Therefore the sample is not random and one ought not make conclusions about all gamers based on gamers who go to competitions.

    A recent study by the Home Office indicated that those who regularly played computer games when young were more likely to go to university and get a better-than-average job

    Someone already mentioned correlation != causation, but I'll elaborate. Television sets are much cheaper than computers and internet access; also, university attendance is very much correlated to income. I don't have survey data to back this up, but it seems that income ought to have been considered to make sure that it's not a lurking variable. (affects both variables but is unseen)

    </soapbox>

  16. Re:quake? by whydna · · Score: 3

    hmm.. i can see how this would work based on the games from the mid-eighties (pacman...

    Yeah, if video games really affect kids can you imagine the result of Pacman. We'd all be hanging out in dark places, eating pills, and listening to electronic music... =P

  17. Re:Let's not be hasty by Delphis · · Score: 1

    anyone tried using smileys in RL ;)

    Yea, I just smile.

    --
    Delphis

    --
    Delphis
  18. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by HeghmoH · · Score: 2

    Plenty of people see a correlation between video games and violence and draw the conclusion that video games cause violence, so this isn't any worse.

    --
    Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  19. Re:Tends to != Guarantees by Grock · · Score: 1

    Actually, more people that have used computers are alive than dead, so you have no proof that all computer users will die!!

  20. Re:Role Playing Games by TeknoDragon · · Score: 2

    If you're referring to the situation: start of round, move, attack, end of round... keep in mind the rules are an approximation of what happens, as much as the q3a field is divided up into locations of finite accuracy (ints), where in life location is a vector of floats of infinite accuracy...

    My interpretation of the event you described would be "chao-baz continues his lightning-like movement across the room, striking an opponent who saw him coming and has begun to..." and continue with the enemy's action... the difference between that and a charge (moves half distance before and after the attack) would be "chao races across the room striking his opponent, who attempts to..." enemy's attack of opportunity "before chao lunges out of range". The difference added with tumbing is that the enemy has no chance to react.

  21. Role Playing Games by TeknoDragon · · Score: 5

    Hey, what about D&D? That helped me get a head start on my math way back when. I hated to add and multiply. D&D game mechanics gave me a better head for numbers.

    The only thing video games did was drive my ambition to hack warez that I downloaded and squeeze every last bit of juice out of that crappy old OS (DOS).

    1. Re:Role Playing Games by cornjones · · Score: 1

      i absolutely agree. RPG's helped not just in math and reading but also served to build a knowledgebase for different mythologies and some also tried to work a bunch of physics in that gave me a base of understanding.

      the most important skill, as i see it, was the problem solving using an arbitrary set of rules. ie given the thief's scale walls, the magician's 4 spells and your ball of wax you have to storm a castle. figure out a creative way to do it.

      that and it kept me out of drugs until later in school which I think was a good thing.

    2. Re:Role Playing Games by DeePCedure · · Score: 1

      If you assume he accelerates and deccelerates uniformly (poor approximation), you get 0-105 miles per hour in 3 seconds.

      I fail to see how this is a problem when you're talking about a fantasy game. A little suspension of disbelief is in order.

      The ability of a monk to run at incredible speeds is supernatural. It doesn't need to conform to the standards imposed by physics. Very few characters would offer even a slight challenge to real-life top-performing athletes, like Carl Lewis for example. Those who can outdo "realistic" generally have ability scores that exceed natural limits either because of magic, or just because it's a heroic fantasy game. They aren't realistic themselves so of course they'll be able to perform amazing feats and accomplish impossible tasks.

      If you can't let go of strict reality and embrace the fantasy for the duration of the game, I'd love to watch the debate (argument?) you have with your DM the first time an NPC mage lobs a fireball at you. Better yet, how about Time Stop or Reverse Gravity? :-P

    3. Re:Role Playing Games by persist1 · · Score: 1

      For me, the motivation pointed more toward earth sciences (at one end) and mythology at the other (which eventually developed into fairly mature spirituality).


      D&D sucked away a lot of my free-time when I was a young teenager, but more than just about anything else in my life at the time, it influenced me to ask why? and how? as such questions applied not only to the game, but to RL.


      Of course, after all the money I spent on rulebooks (I still own the complete 1st Ed. set, the only 1st Ed. books I don't have are the Greyhawk and Realms sourcebooks), I figure I owe T$R/WoTCrack/Hasbro nothing.


      Yes, for me it was huge.

      --
      ...When in doubt, think for yourself.
    4. Re:Role Playing Games by IronChef · · Score: 3


      D&D and Gamma World was some serious motivation for developing reading and writing skills. I discovered those games at a fairly young age and I give them some credit for boosting those skills.

    5. Re:Role Playing Games by triticale · · Score: 5
      Hey, what about D&D? That helped me get a head start on my math way back when.

      I knew a young man who was homeschooled in the unstructured mode - pointed toward resources and encouraged to learn. He had no interest in multiplication until discovering D&D at age thirteen, at which time it took him two days to "catch up with his grade level.

      Last I heard he was a geometer by trade; writing software for math visualization.

    6. Re:Role Playing Games by totallygeek · · Score: 3

      I definately agree about D&D helping with learning. No telling how many times I looked up the origins of the monster names in different mythologies. If I just had Google back then...

    7. Re:Role Playing Games by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      This is kind of off topic, but Gamma World was a great little game. I already knew all the math I needed for this game by the time it came around, but it was a great stimulant for the development of my imagination. I think I still have my original copy somewhere, along with those oddly carrot colored six-sided dice.

    8. Re:Role Playing Games by kcelery · · Score: 1
      In real life mode: velocity = distance / time.
      so time span = distance / velocity.

      But to the game designer the time span = attention span. Which is usually short for gamers.

  22. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by Surak · · Score: 2

    Just because factor A and factor B are both present in something, it does not mean factor B was caused by factor A, or vice versa. They could both be merely caused by a third, unseen factor. Yeah, that's a bit like saying 99% of criminals eat sliced bread, therefore eating sliced bread incites people to commit crimes. :P

  23. Re:Guns don't kill people ... by kubrick · · Score: 1

    Bullets do.

    (That's a link for all of us old-timers out there :)

    --
    deus does not exist but if he does
  24. Might make them smarter... by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 1

    Playing video games might make them smarter but it also makes them KILLERS! What price do we have to pay to have smarter kids? WHAT PRICE?!

    --
    Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
  25. This makes sense by SendBot · · Score: 1

    I think back to the days when Mortal Kombat (as the prime example) was being fiercely attacked by parents afraid of the hordes of violent predators video games were making of their children. Funny thing is that obviously none of them evert tried playing these games (or at least not long enough to do well and understand it), and they were all very stupid people with wild imaginations.

    I can't help but think of a parallel between these overly concerned parents and the type of people that watch a LOT of tv.

    Do you ever watch the evening news? Try holding a straight face when there's LIVE BREAKING news outside the bookstore about a woman that might be missing for a couple days. Everything the talking heads say must be said with a most serious attitude. The news anchor doesn't have time to tell if the story has any truth to it.

    It's a lot more fun to watch stoned. You can at least laugh at it.

  26. Civilization and Machiavelli by jfunk · · Score: 5

    We all know it though.

    A specific real-world example (my own experience):

    I played, and I still do, a *lot* of Civilization as a young lad. I later on read the works of Niccolo Machiavelli (The Prince, The Discourses).

    The truly scary thing is that I kept thinking of Civilization the entire time and the information made a lot more sense to me after playing all of those hours. (my conservative estimate: 3 or 4 months worth, but I hauled that number out of my ass)

    I had a better understanding of his works simply because of my experience in that game and what's more, my strategies in said game have changed, so that I am a much better player because of it.

    Of course, reading all of that has ruined me in that I now tend to write really long sentences, though I haven't yet achieved the one feat that I have only seen from Machiavelli and Dave Barry, which is, of course, the 1.5 page sentence, in which the author creates an extraordinarily long sentence, containing much information, all the while being grammatically correct, and conveying one basic idea in a surprisingly clear manner, such that the reader, after having read it, actually goes back to see where said sentence began, and reads it again, just to make sure that the sentence is, indeed, that long.

    1. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by mefus · · Score: 1

      So would you say CTP gave you the memes to wrap your brain around history?

      mefus
      --
      um, er... eh -- *click*

      --
      mefus
      In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
    2. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Small potatoes. For REALLY LOOOOOONG sentences, no one beats Hawthorne. Frex, in the prologue to THE SCARLET LETTER, there is a grammatically-correct sentence that is over three PAGES long, in very small print. You've been warned. :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

      It very well can I believe. It's called associative thinking. It doesn't matter if what you associate with it is true, false or just lucid. What matters is that you've got something to associate with your newly aquired knowledge. It also helps that you associate fun with such knowledge.

      Of course, school is meant to be boring to weed out non-comforming creative thinking. So we can't have that can we?

      - Steeltoe

    4. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by blazin · · Score: 1

      The first time I played Civ it was at a friend's house who really didn't have an idea about the big picture. He knew how to move stuff around and do battle, but no idea about the technology tree.

      We didn't understand that pottery or ceremonial burial were important and required for a lot of the higher level technologies. We got to the mid 1800s without even having a boat.

      I thought it was a stupid game until he finally showed me the technology map. Then everything made sense. Certain low-level technologies were then given priority to make it back on track for the cooler military and civil techs.

      Once this was discovered, it was off to the software store for my own copy and then hour after hour of play time.... And then Master of Orion caught my attention... But that's another story.

    5. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by jaciii · · Score: 1

      Try reading Hegel. He is the master of long sentences.

    6. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by Lostman · · Score: 1

      As long as your thoughts of Civilization were cohesent and not crack-headed there will be no problem... that was not the case with my obsession.

      Got Black and White... played game for about 3 days straight, then only 12 hours a day...

      Whenever I wasnt playing black and white and I was speaking to my girl friend about things I started thinking in black and white terms...

      One might be surprised what I was thinking when it came to deciding how to "Train" our dog... =)

    7. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by djocyko · · Score: 1
      Of course, reading all of that has ruined me in that I now tend to write really long sentences, though I haven't yet achieved the one feat that I have only seen from Machiavelli and Dave Barry, which is, of course, the 1.5 page sentence, in which the author creates an extraordinarily long sentence, containing much information, all the while being grammatically correct, and conveying one basic idea in a surprisingly clear manner, such that the reader, after having read it, actually goes back to see where said sentence began, and reads it again, just to make sure that the sentence is, indeed, that long.


      read some William Faulkner. he's got the 2 page sentence down.

    8. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by evilMoogle · · Score: 1

      I remember in middle school I was participating in a geography bee. The night before, I stayed up late playing the WW 1979 scenario for Civ II (it was in the first scenario pack that came out). I won the geography bee that day thanks to my Civ II gaming, getting two of my answers directly from Civ II.

      --
      Erik
      "You," Bite me.
      "Each and every one of you." Bite me.
    9. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by doubtme · · Score: 1
      Yes, if there's one thing I hate, it's people who moan whenever they encounter a long sentence. I can't write them yet (I'm working on it), but a long sentence is a thing of beauty, clarity and deep informativeness - it allows one to capture a much larger model or concept much more efficiently than dealing with it in parts. If you want short sentences, go hang out at a kindergarten.

      Of course, the downside is that those people who can't or won't read long sentences gain no understanding at all. But as Heinlein said, it is only the people who "think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion" that matter - and to do this, creating and conceptualising large models is a prerequisite.

      I've personally found Sun Tzu very helpful in games, especially against humans. He's basically required reading for "Diplomacy", which the British Foreign Service requires it's advisers and ambassadors to play, but I also wrote a text on deception and psychological warfare for Red Alert/Generic RTS's based on his writings... it worked brilliantly when you could pull it off, and cost little if it failed.

      What have other people found worthwhile reading? I've read some good stuff on military theory, but that is generally very wargame specific - although the idea of force projection and the associated concepts are useful at times in other games - what are the more general texts that people have found useful?

      There's no $$$ in 'team'...

      --

      There's no $$$ in 'team'...
      www..--..net - for incisive, w
    10. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      >> Try reading Hegel. He is the master of long sentences.

      No, no, the requirements include, "containing much information", "being grammatically correct", and "conveying one basic idea in a surprisingly clear manner". Hegel fulfills none of these.

    11. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by LastToKnow · · Score: 1

      While half a page may not be as impressive as some of the other records mentioned, my personal favorite sentences of unusual length come from Douglas Adams. "Space-lag," [Ford] said, "is very bad for sub-clauses. You'll have to assist me again," he continued, "by reminding me what I was talking about."

    12. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by peteypooh · · Score: 1

      This is an interesting point... I played a whole lot of Civilizations back in the day (still do time to time)... when I took higher level history classes, macro-economics classes, even a terrain analysis class, I found myself doing extremely well (in these classes, outside of my major.)

      When I'd help others with them, and they'd ask 'how does all this make sense to you?', I knew Civ had a lot to do with it. No, it didn't teach me all the stuff, but it gave me a mindset, it gave me a framework, I could see the 'big picture' so much better than fellow students who were trying to learn from textbooks. I caught onto Machiavelli's maxims before I'd finished reading them.

      Many classes - Poli Sci, International Relations... I had a definitive edge in all of them.

      And, of course, I absolutely smoked "History of the Military Art"!

      Of course, Civ and descendants are not your typical video games. They didn't help my hand-eye coordination a bit -- that is where moderation, activity, and occasional-exposure-to-direct-sunlight come into play. And if someone had told me that Civ was going to be an educational game, I probably would have never touched it.

    13. Re:Civilization and Machiavelli by peteypooh · · Score: 1

      I see your point - success in Civ definitely depended on understanding (and micro-managing) those simple models (enough extra food = population increase, trade * tax rate = tax income) to increase population, gain tech, fight battles, etc. But I do think it helped with the idea of cause-and-effect type history, especially in cases (most of 'em) where there is not a single, clear proximate cause.

      I'm trying to place it more exactly... what might have helped... maybe having the mindset of leading a state? What are the concerns to me?

      "Let's see - security of my own personal position (generally not a prob. in civ, you can't be deposed/assassinated/not re-elected), the security of the state (who are my neighbors? are they strong? threatening? who are my allies? if I am outnumbered/outgunned, who can I ally with (regardless of being strange-bedfellows) to get me out of the jam?)... let's see... I also want to have a large, happy population (begs the question of 'why' - in the game, it's for points. in reality, maybe for glory, fame, popularity?)"

      As a civ ruler, I tend to hold grudges, even for a long time. There are civs I like and I don't like. But, at the same time, I tend to do the expedient thing, regardless of who I like...

      This can be seen as a bit of a sad commentary - history reflects this -- the struggle for power, glory, and security overshadowing everything else. Why did Napoleon attack Russia in the winter? Why were religions sometimes used as tools of the state to manipulate citizens to fight? Why do I care about instability in Europe (my trading partners)? Why can countries that fought war be good friends a decade or two later?

      Sorry if I rambled a bit, I'm just trying to figure it out, and I think a lot of it has to do with displacing the idealistic 'if i were president, there would be world peace' idea with the reality of 'dang, i played this game, and I did the same stuff (only better!)'... I guess it helped me see how things interacted.

      A side note - perhaps the game created a greater interest for me in these subjects - that could have definitely contributed to success.

      A question for you -
      Whether or not you have developed an understanding of history that is useful outside of Civilization or social studies classes is another question entirely.

      What would you consider an understanding of history useful outside of Civ/Academia to be?
      (Not being sarcastic, I am genuinely interested in your response.)

      I'd start with understanding why things happen now the way they do... why wars happen, why social change happens, why economies go up and down, stuff like that... being able to understand is important enough for me. Also, the idea of 'those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it' comes to mind. What do you think?

  27. Re:Let's not be hasty by mefus · · Score: 1
    I'm going to draw some hasty conclusions about this study without really thinking about it:

    Whatever, it has been my own anecdotal evidence (sic, I'm trying to say, "my own observations are that") computer game playing, while improving hand-eye coordination and strategic thinking, (does) limit normal social interaction.

    Modern computer games train gamers to work withing the systems of chat room, message boards, and other onliine forms of communication. (however,) in a classical social situation (dinner party, traditional work meeting, academic classroom, etc,) the result that I have noticed is that the gamer is:
    1. More observant. That is, more likely to observe people's interaction with one another because, for lack of a better phrase, other people "are always stuck in promiscuous mode."
    2. Think more critically about the situation. They become bored and distracted in any conversation that seems to be something pieced together from old Friends re-runs or excerpts from cooking books.
    3. Have superior verbal skills. Nearly all computer related activities are text-based and expose the young gamer to myriad literary styles.

    I am concerned that we are developing a culture, that's already overrun the walls of the petri dish that is the 'Net, of people capable of making their own assessment of self-righteous high-brow palaver that is really merely another attempt to build a wall around the kid protecting him from new ideas.

    This is just my agenda. This is just based on anecdotal evidence. So it must be true, right?


    mefus
    --
    um, er... eh -- *click*
    --
    mefus
    In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
  28. Re:Still the obsessive will exist. by mefus · · Score: 1

    Heh, once I start a character in Angband I can't rest until he's won or bought the farm.

    If I have red eyes, you know I've succumbed.

    Er... I'm working a hobbit down the levels, right now. :)

    I'd be less embarrassed if I wasn't too old for this.

    mefus
    --
    um, er... eh -- *click*

    --
    mefus
    In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
  29. Re:long sentences will not be allowed by the cutof by mefus · · Score: 1

    Huh, I thought Heidegger was The One.

    mefus
    --
    um, er... eh -- *click*

    --
    mefus
    In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
  30. Re:wow by mefus · · Score: 1

    Johnny Haquer gestures fluidly.

    The earth elemental hits you. (more...)
    The earth elemental hits you. (more...)
    The earth elemental hits you.

    you die.


    mefus
    --
    um, er... eh -- *click*

    --
    mefus
    In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
  31. Re:Guns don't kill people ... by legoboy · · Score: 1
    No, they shoot dogs!

    I love you. Do you have a twin sister?

    --

    --
    If a tree falls on an anonymous coward yelling 'first post' in the forest, does anybody hear?
  32. Re:Do games make people smarter... by Dr.+Smeegee · · Score: 1

    A lot of that may depend on the game. I know Frogger makes me feel dumber than a sack full of hammers, while dopewars and nethack tend to give me concentration headaches.

    Dopewars especially makes for a fine memory/gambling/perceived violence buzz.

  33. More stories like this! by nakaduct · · Score: 2

    After all those hours spent sitting on my ass playing games, any suggestion that it was a good use of my time will be warmly welcomed.

  34. Re:Leisure Suit Larry by Drunken+Philosopher · · Score: 2

    All I needed to know about sex I learned from Leisure Suit Larry. Who says games aren't educational?

    That's right, always use a condom. =)

    --

    "There is a diminishing return on caution."
  35. In other news... by interiot · · Score: 5

    In other news... looking at porn helps relationships, because it helps with hand/umm... coordination, and gets people more in tune with their bodies.
    --

  36. Re:Let's not be hasty by tapiwa · · Score: 1

    I think the unwillingness to communicate is not because they feel that other people just do not understand. It is more because other people just aren't intelligent enough

    I think I am a fairly loud person, but I find myself suddenly quiet in some social settings where I feel that the 'audience does not measure up!'

    --

    Live today. Tomorrow will cost a lot more!

  37. ISIHAC! by gidds · · Score: 1
    ...and no-one's mentioned I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue yet!

    For those of you who don't listen to BBC Radio, it's a comedy programme billed as 'the antidote to panel games'. Amongst other amusements (most notably, the seminal game 'Mornington Crescent'), it has a round where the four panellists make up a sentence between them, adding one word each in turn, with the aim being to avoid completing the sentence. Admittedly, it makes for far less grammatical and logical sentences than those of the authors mentioned, but it's a whole lot more fun :)

    --

    Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.

  38. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  39. Re:wow by toast0 · · Score: 1

    hand/eye != foot/eye

    you may be able to move your hands well, but that doesn't mean you can kick :)

    i know i have good hand/eye coordination, but my arm/eye coordination sucks

  40. Re:quake? by Kintanon · · Score: 2

    I play cut-throat like that in clan matches or in serious honor duels. But in regular deathmatch play I'm usually honing one particular skill, like Rocket Dodging, or Sniping, or some other thing I think I need to be a little better at. So I usually will spend a game or two sucking while I use only one technique, or run around in the middle of fire fights trying to predict rocket fire. Then, just to teach the other players a lesson I'll win by a hefty margin.

    Kintanon

    --
    Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
  41. Re:quake? by Kintanon · · Score: 5

    I 've hit the Zone in Q3:A... That place where everything is reflex, where no one on the map can even touch you. You win games by 30 or 40 frags over the second place person and barely get touched. You breeze through crowds of enemies leaving only a fine mist of blood in your wake... Then 3 hours later you finally snap out of it drenched in sweat, heart pounding, on a massive adrenaline high. It's just like running a marathon or competing in an all day martial arts tournament. It's great!

    Kintanon

    --
    Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
  42. Re:Minds and body? by Student_Tech · · Score: 1

    Juggling improves hand-eye coordination too. Try to launch 3 objects (2 in one hand, one in the other) into the air and catch them 20 times w/o dropping them. My 5th grade teacher would give 6 A's to anybody in his class that could do that. (That was about 1994-5, and my best is 428 tosses).

  43. Re:Let's not be hasty by rtaylor · · Score: 1

    If I'm not mistaken, you just used all of those terms you claim to never use -- 'u or ur, or lol' that is. youer? Thats kinda 'leet :)

    --
    Rod Taylor
  44. Re:Lan parties? by rtaylor · · Score: 1

    haha... Every played a lan party with some real money riding on it? Believe me, theres no social interacting beforehand. Everyones in a state of parallysis as they worship their deity, relax their brain and do finger stretches and pushups. Afterwards -- once the gloating winner is gone with all the money -- the real interacting occurs. Come to think of it, it's almost like poker night.

    --
    Rod Taylor
  45. Re:quake? by MKalus · · Score: 1

    >>Well, I'm not a "leading professional" of the type the article refers to (being a sysadmin is RARELY life-threatening), but I can assure you that playing FPS games enhances your ability to concentrate and solve problems quickly.

    I take it you don't have the same users I do.... Man can they be dangerous if they don't get immideatly what they want....

    --
    If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
  46. Re:Let's not be hasty by Binary+Tree · · Score: 2

    Relax, we understand j00.

  47. Re:Games and Learning by JWW · · Score: 1

    Even Wizardry had cheat modes. There was a particular squence of actions that would make evil ninja's very wealthy allowing you to traing them to a high level.

    I hope I'm remembering this correctly, its been a very, very long time.

  48. Re:Let's not be hasty by mgblst · · Score: 1

    ...you should have said, as you writely noticed

    I got your original play on words, but this would have been evern funnier.

  49. Re:Video Games Saved My Life by mgblst · · Score: 1

    If it wasn't for Pong, I'd be probably be Jerry Springer.

    nah...that doesn't work, ok you can go away now.

  50. Re:quake? by mgblst · · Score: 1

    is that you IANHARD???

  51. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by mgblst · · Score: 1

    It seems more likely to me, that only smart kids could play the games. That is, you had to be smart enought to setup the game (particularly troublesome in the old days), before you could play it.

  52. Re:quake? by Moonshadow · · Score: 1

    Of course, that's when you get accused of cheating and kicked...

  53. High profile bananas by kimihia · · Score: 1

    Yeah, bla bla Colombine bla bla.

    What about the people that don't make it into a hundred tear-jerking articles?

  54. Re:Don't tell my kids! by spuk · · Score: 1

    Dammit! I was just going say that!

    --

    "Video bona proboque; deteriora sequor." -- Ovid
  55. Leisure Suit Larry by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 4

    All I needed to know about sex I learned from Leisure Suit Larry. Who says games aren't educational?

  56. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by isaac_akira · · Score: 3

    The greatest mystery to me is that people pay for this kind of flawed research. I mean, I can't even remember one which wasn't flawed/biased in one way or another.

    I think that's exactly the reason people pay for it. That's why these studies are almost always so flawed.

    Game Industry Exec: "Here is a $300,000. We'd like a study exploring how video games make kids smarter, and, umm... improve sexual performance among adults. Oh, and I believe you might find that they reduce cholesterol too. Check that out. Thanks!"

    - Isaac =)

  57. Zoning Out by Alpha+State · · Score: 3

    Most computer games are good for developing concentration. The ideal is to obtain a zen-like state which figther pilots and athletes usually describe as being "in the zone". This is when you feel like you are inside the game, everything is reflex and the outside world disappears. I believe this is a talent which is definately not developed by most other typical teenage activities like watching TV, socialising, etc. I agree that the degree to which game players learn to concentrate will give them a great edge in other skills.

    However, I'd still have reservations about having kids play lots of computer games. For one thing, zoning out is only good for some real world skills. If you want to be a pilot or racing driver it's great and for programmers and other technical people it's good too, however for other jobs it may be a bad thing. I feel that I do it too much (I'm an engineer), it makes me concetrate on some details and forget others.

    I'd also worry about the type of games. It's not the violence that concerns me , but the mindlessness of a lot of current computer games. Strategy and RPGs may be very good for developing a wider range of skills, but FPS games only involve a small amout of tactics beyond blowing away anything that moves. So, you may be zoning out but only processing very simple actions.

    Of course, this is only based on personal experience. YMMV.

  58. Playing Computer Games Makes Grammar Worse by willie150 · · Score: 1

    "Hey its just a study, but its amusing."

    I can accept a few then/than mistakes from Taco, but grammar this bad is crazy. Maybe someone needs to do a study to see if playing computer games makes grammar worse.
    --
    Better to stay silent, and let people think you're an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt
  59. Re:Guns don't kill people ... by LabRatty · · Score: 1

    Guns don't kill people ...

    ratty
    the rodent in the machine

  60. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

    The greatest mystery to me is that people pay for this kind of flawed research. I mean, I can't even remember one which wasn't flawed/biased in one way or another.

    - Steeltoe

  61. Re:Let's not be hasty by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

    No technology is inherently evil. They're just tools that we can use and build upon. Some inventions like biology warfare might seem completely wasteful, but it can also be seen as just a study.

    What matters is people, our intentions and the knowledge with which we carry them out. With a bad intention, anything may become a murder-weapon. With bad knowledge we cause accidents.

    - Steeltoe

  62. Re:Let's not be hasty by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

    It's also important to make a difference between short-term and long-term effects. The usual short-term effect of avid gaming is to become unsocial in RL. However, I don't believe this is a long-term effect of an otherwise social person. Of course, extreme exceptions always exist.

    There's also a difference between being social online and in RL. I believe a person can be influenced by online activity so much that it has an effect on RL behaviour (anyone tried using smileys in RL ;), but perhaps not so much over a longer term.

    All in all, the interactions and changes that may occur are so complex, there's no way you can draw any real conclusions from it other than we're all different from eachother.

    - Steeltoe

  63. His point by Steeltoe · · Score: 2

    His point was that the boy had no interest in math because he saw no use for it. When he got a use, he quickly learned what he needed and continued to study math.

    So instead, next time, I suggest you take a pause and do a little reasoning before throwing out obvious flamebait as a reaction to something nobody said except in your mind. (That roleplaying games are good for kids because this boy got interested in math because of it. He never said that.)

    - Steeltoe

  64. Re:Let's not be hasty by Fjord · · Score: 2

    Yours contains a meta-mistake, in that there is no mistake.

    --
    -no broken link
  65. Re:Let's not be hasty by cybercuzco · · Score: 2

    Small correction, I believe ebonics was what you were referring to. eubonics is the language of the EU (if not esperanto) ;-)

    --

  66. flow states by bigbigbison · · Score: 2

    I believe that the mental state they refer to is similar/related to (if not the same as) Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's flow states as first outlined in his book, Beyond Bordom and Anxiety.
    In my own work, I have used this concept and have concluded that gaming is similar to athletics (and other activities) in that participants are active and get into this flow state. We have all "been in the zone" at one point or another where we play the game and tune out everything else and do not have to deliberate over the best move, but can tell almost instincively what do do next. This is a couple of the criteria for what is called the flow state.
    The book Beyond Bordom and Anxiety is an interesting read if one is interested in such things.

    --
    http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
  67. Re:Let's not be hasty by RainbowSix · · Score: 2

    For me, I always type a complete thought. I never use "u or ur, or lol" or anything shorthand. I feel it is more personal that way. It has gotten to the point where I can't say "you're" anymore because it sounds too much like when people misuse the spelling "your" so I say "you are" or "youer" to distinguish between the two.
    --------

    --
    --------
    It's OK to be social, just don't tell anyone about it.
  68. Re:quake? by ninewands · · Score: 2

    i can see how this would work based on the games from the mid-eighties (pacman, bubble bobble [classic], 1942 etc).. i guess, the basis for this study is on what the "leading professionals" did in the mid-eighties.

    Well, I'm not a "leading professional" of the type the article refers to (being a sysadmin is RARELY life-threatening), but I can assure you that playing FPS games enhances your ability to concentrate and solve problems quickly.

    I gamed some in the late 70s and early to mid 80's ... most of the games of that era had AIs so dumb that you could run up monstrous scores just by memorizing a pattern of play. Frankly, I didn't game much back then because the games were not challenging enough to hold my interest.

    Now I don't game at all online because of a slow connection at home so LAN parties are the only times I play multiplayer. The result of this is that I sorta suck at multiplayer games. So what? I have fun, and my opponents get some relatively easy frags. This does NOT make me a homicidal maniac.

    It's refreshing to see that some psychologists (especially British psychologists) were able to overcome therir innate prejudice against anything that smacks of violaence long enough to take an objective look at this subject.

    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins,

  69. of course... by esoteric0 · · Score: 1

    your life does depend on it, when you're on an unreal tourney map with about 10 homocidal maniacs. kill or be killed man.

    1. Re:of course... by Jazu · · Score: 1

      You hit the nail on the head(or whatever that saying is): An artificial sense of urgency does wonders for your concentration.

      --
      My joke got modded as Insightful and my insight got modded as Funny.
  70. Re:Don't tell my kids! by syrinx · · Score: 2

    You have kids that are old enough to play (and presumably understand) Alpha Centauri, and you played Warcraft II in high school? Well I feel old.

    -------

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
  71. ObVious.... by L.+J.+Beauregard · · Score: 1
    Yeah, if video games really affect kids can you imagine the result of Pacman. We'd all be hanging out in dark places, eating pills, and listening to electronic music...

    Is this how raves got started?
    --
    Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
    Delenda est Windoze

    --
    Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
    Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
  72. Pros and cons. by AmoebafromSweden · · Score: 1

    Sure, thats possible. It's also possible the kids physical health are degenerating and although they will be very capable in the mind, they will also have a weak body.

    The lack of exercise when growing up will most likely have consequences for the health later in the life.

    The human body is constructed to be moving. Not sitting. I guess the americans in particular, have noticed this the most of all the current civilisations.

    --
    "Too late ... No time."
    Concorde pilot Christian Marty, moments before the supersonic jet crashed into a hotel in Gonesse on the outskirts of Paris.

  73. what I told my parents is true ! by klyX · · Score: 1

    "mom, it'll increase hand-eye cordination and concentration ! " - huge line I gave my folks begging for the original Nintendo.

    ---
    How long have you been listening to the world's famous?
    'Bout six weeks.
    Six weeks!

  74. Still the obsessive will exist. by etymxris · · Score: 5
    They noted one teenager who played for 70 hours and had withdrawal symptoms when he abstained for 3 days. When you see someone mentioning such an extreme case, it is clear they have an agenda to push. There will always be people who are very obsessed with any thing of their choice. It could be a rock star (groupie), their weight (bulemic), or any of an infinitude of things that a person can be obsessed about. The fact that such a person is mentioned along with normal gamers just exposes the researchers hidden agenda.

    Despite the fact that they are rare, you do not see the media giving tons of coverage to every person struck by lightning. People by now realize that even though being struck by lightning is rare, there is nothing spectacular about it. So the media doesn't cover it. If only the media would get over shark attacks. Sheesh. In any case, many people play video games, and many of them have different reasons for doing so: hobby, relaxation, obsession... Which type of person a media outlet chooses to cover as representing "gaming" tells more about the media outlet than it does about gamers themselves. Thankfully this article was mostly positive. Maybe I won't feel so sheepish about admitting to other adults that I play video games.

    1. Re:Still the obsessive will exist. by Altrag · · Score: 1

      Not to mention it being complete BS to begin with..
      Take oh.. anyone. Pick some arbitrary 70 hours of "relaxation" time from them (meaning, time during which they're doing what they want. This could include work for workaholics and the such)..
      Ok.. now, during those 70 hours, make them do something they probably dont want to..
      Let me guess, they started suffering from "withdrawl" symptoms (things like.. utter boredom, edginess.. which is most likely caused by said boredom.. other such nifty things)..
      Such a stupid correlation has nothing to do with the fact that the kid was an obsessive gamer, it has to do with the fact that he probably doesnt want to be doing whatever else is available to him during the 70 hours he'd rather be gaming.. if he WAS interested in doing something else, he probably wouldnt be gaming so much in the first place!

    2. Re:Still the obsessive will exist. by hivolt · · Score: 1

      There is are only two reasons to play games (and only two kinds of games):
      1.) The addictive massive rush of adrenaline (as Kintanon mentions regarding Q3:A)
      2.) Curiosity. Hmmmm. Should I drink that pink potion? What happens if I dip my dagger in it? What does this scroll do...Oops. Cursed gloves of fumbling!

  75. I think you were hasty. by kninja · · Score: 2
    I think a lot of people are being hasty.

    I recall that the study mentions that obsessive gaming is not good. It is important to have friends and have other interests, and computers should not be written off as not-important. My parents instituted a log system for me back in the days of the NES (nintendo entertainment system) and we would laugh about the bad japanese-to-english translations even as 2nd graders. My parents (smart people too) did take an interest in me, and made sure that I didn't play video games for too long, and that is a good thing (although I didn't understand why). I am interested in reading, computers (and assorted console systems), running (varsity in high school), choir, techno music, all the while doing quite well in school.

    Notice that TV does not enter into the picture here. That is the real killer of intelligence. That's another debate.

    I can still relate to obsessive gamers (sometimes I'm ashamed to admit it) as I too wanted the latest and greatest systems, yet I can relate to a lot more varied people as well due to my varying interests. If anything playing games has just added another type of person to the people I can be friends with: Gamers, and computer 'geeks' (in addition to other stereotypes such as athletes, musicians, vocationally oriented automobile fellows, and ravers). I'm a good example of this study, but I think that my parents regulating how much I could play had a big hand in it too. kninja

  76. Dude, I know what you mean. by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 1

    Friday night I was playing UT after work and the weirdest thing happened. There I was siting all by my self in the office, and BOOM! I WAS IN THE ZONE. Faces, low grave, 50% falling control. I got like ten flags in a game with over 15 people, and killed everyone in my path. IT WAS SWEET. p.s. I love that game

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
  77. Lan parties? by AnarchoFreak_00 · · Score: 2
    What about Lan parties? You can't get much more socialy intereacted then cheering at someone a few feet away when you blow there head off. And also what happens before, and after the game starts can count as social interaction.

  78. Re:quake? by Jimmy_B · · Score: 2

    I, too, feel I've "been there", only with Half-Life (record 40 kills to one death or so; more specifically, the Jailbreak mod, which I've since taken over as coder for); however, I must say that the ideal state is, in fact, only half-way inside "the zone". You need to be able to react instantaneously, to control your motions precisely...but at the same time, you need to keep a third-person, objective viewpoint of the game. As I see it, gaming breaks down to a small number of important, general skills. (All examples are oversimplifications.) The first is raw mental speed; by that I mean the ability to process information and react quickly. He who fires his railgun first wins. The second is parallel thinking; that is, processing more than one bit of data at once. He who fires his rocket, predicts where his opponent's rocket will land, and strafes to the other side while switching to and firing with plasma rifle wins. The third is abstract thinking. Being able to think of Quake's physics model in its own terms helps a lot when trying to dodge a rocket coming your way. The problem is, these skills are (for the most part, arguably) talents, not acquired abilities. Thus, people who possess these skills would make good gamers; people who do not would make poor gamers. The study got the cause/effect relation backwards. I also must say that intermediate and advanced play are different worlds entirely. For an intermediate player, there really may not be any more to the game than simple practice. At the next level, however, the "practice makes perfect" mantra no longer holds true; much like a hacker's larval stage, there has to be something to trigger a transition. Personally, I believe my transition resulted from experimenting with different elements of the physics model through Oz Deathmatch, and thus beginning to understand the game at one less level of abstraction. The difference between levels of play could be compared to the difference between a casual viewer of a movie, and an analyst picking out themes and symbolisms (I am the latter; movies made for it are *much* more interesting that way).
    ------------------
    A picture is worth 500 DWORDS.

  79. Not necessarily true by bildstorm · · Score: 1

    It depends very highly on the type of game and the setting.

    The online games do require some quick typing. I've noticed some people don't use the ultra-shortened convential typing, but use military acronyms and so on. I've also noted that on less fast-paced online games, people tend to write out full sentences more often and converse better.

    When I used to play games all the time, I was drawn to more strategic games, and not always war-oriented games. My first good computer games was Balance of Power, in which I had to think strategically with no violence. As time went on, I got a number of simulators with very complicated strategy guides that taught me a lot about how to think critically.

    --
    The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. - G.B. Shaw
  80. Well, James Joyce deseves to mentioned by nyri · · Score: 1
    As readers are mentioning long sentences, you should know that the last chapter of James Joyces Ulysses, Chapter 18: Penelope, consists of 8 sentences and 1600 lines of text.

    I haven't read the title, tough.

    --
    nyri

  81. Don't tell my kids! by hoegg · · Score: 3

    If my kids get a hold of this one, I'm done for.

    Seriously, I'd rather they play video games (especially ones like Alpha Centauri and Riven) than watch TV. But I'd rather they be involved in electronics or tae kwon do or ultimate frisbee too. Too much of any one thing can be detrimental... I know from my unfortunate summer of Warcraft II in high school.

  82. No, REALLY? Check this out: by MBCook · · Score: 1

    OK, what could I possibly say about this? How 'bout "DUH!". Anyone who plays video games a lot could have told you this. It's the old "video games build hand-eye co-ordiation" thing. The other thing that doesn't seem to be mentioned is how RPG, puzzel games, and especially the Zelda series (at least for me) build logic skills and skills of observation that I think would be hard to get in other places.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    1. Re:No, REALLY? Check this out: by banshee2000 · · Score: 1

      It's the old "video games build hand-eye co-ordiation" thing ... The other thing that doesn't seem to be mentioned is how RPG, puzzel games, and especially the Zelda series (at least for me) build logic skills and skills of observation that I think would be hard to get in other places. Don't feel bad. They didn't mention the *older* pinball games either.

  83. Uhh, yeah, I am studying! by rvaniwaa · · Score: 1

    Sure boss,I am just improving my mind and I have a web page that shows it!

    --
    main(i){(10-putchar(((25208>>3*(i+=3))&7)+(i ?i-4?100:65:10)))?main(i-4):i;}
  84. Re:Minds and body? by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

    As trollish as this is, it is also quite true.

    I have a bladder the size of a football ;)

    Who needs bodily functions, sleep, food, all for the weak!

  85. Tends to != Guarantees by enigma48 · · Score: 1

    I'll borrow the spirit of my 1st year Psychology prof for a moment for one important message:

    95% of people who died from cancer ate bread.

    The *only* way to be sure that bread causes cancer is to EXPERIMENT. 1 large group eats bread, 1 large group doesn't, compare the numbers. Anyone who reads this study and spreads the word that games make you smarter:

    Please don't be a doctor! Last thing I need to hear now is computers are gonna kill me.
    (After all, 100% of computer users die)

  86. Re:Let's not be hasty by startled · · Score: 5

    But if everyone plays video games except you, then you'll be the maladjusted one.

    You: "Hello, good sir. How are you this fine day?"
    hax0r1: "whatx0r?"
    hax0r2: "what j00 say!?"
    hax0r1: "I will own j00000!!!"
    You: "Um... excuse me. Do you speak English?"
    hax0r3: "Let's g0. This l00z3r doesn't speak 1337."

  87. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by strix999 · · Score: 1

    You can make a study that proves just about anything. As for the social thing, I think there is a large differnce between how console games and PC based games are precived. if you play games on a PC your a geek, nerk, ect..., but if you play games on a console, "Whoa that guys cool!" But that might just have been when I was in school, I'm 18 and a sophmore in college. It also might be part of the mooch factor, "He has a playstation, if I act like I like him, he'll hook me up!"

  88. Re:Video Games Saved My Life by John_Booty · · Score: 2

    If it wasn't for Pong, I'd be probably be on Jerry Springer.

    --

    OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
  89. Re:quake? by Traxton1 · · Score: 1

    Isn't this someone's sig? I'm sure they'll be so happy you jacked it and got the karma, hehe

  90. Re:Considering the rest of the population by coupland · · Score: 2

    ROFL. It's like a distilled version of natural selection.

    "Scientists have found that children who scratch their ass for 1 hour every day instead of watching television are smarter that children who don't."


    ---
  91. Sounds interesting, but the premise is flawed. by coupland · · Score: 5

    A couple quotes from the article that disprove this hypothesis:

    "Their minds and bodies work together much better than those of most other people."

    "Bryce did her research by visiting computer gamers, often during regional or national competitions around Britain"

    What her research proves is that gamers who are talented enough to play at "national competitions" have better hand-eye coordination, reflexes, and quicker responses. Duh, I already knew that. She should study me -- I play games constantly. And I lose. Badly.

    Rather than studying people who excel at gaming she should have studied people before and after they took up gaming. The unorthodox and obviously biased means in which this study was carried out suggests the author was only fishing for a catchy headline.


    ---
  92. Considering the rest of the population by NeMon'ess · · Score: 4
    I can't help but think of all the kids considered in this study. Plenty of kids I grew up with went home and did nothing but watch TV. Given how large the penetration of TV is I can't help but think that anyone who doesn't watch a whole mass of TV is at a distinct advantage.

  93. Re:Let's not be hasty by RazorJ_2000 · · Score: 1

    As a fairly hardcore UT player...I think you're basically correct. My personal observations on the 'net and in the corporate environment tend to agree with you.

    --
    pi=sigma{n:0-infinity}[(1/16)^n][(4/(8n+1))-(2/(8n +4))-(1/ (8n+5))-(1/(8n+6))]
  94. Guns don't kill people ... by Pentagon13 · · Score: 1

    Little kids that grow up on Duck Hunt kill people!

  95. Re:Do games make people smarter... by dragonmaster_zoc · · Score: 1

    actually, the brain is mostly fat( so exercise would be a bad thing?).

  96. Government ties Intelligence to Criminal activity! by DragonMagic · · Score: 2

    The Government has conceded that yes, Video Games make kids smarter, but they also make them more violent. Therefore, a request has been sent to all schools, warning them of the possible criminal activity of those "smart" kids.

    Dragon Magic

    --

    Human nature is the same everywhere; the modes only are different. -- Earl of Chesterfield
  97. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by G+Neric · · Score: 1
    yes, you correctly identify the flaw, that the group of gamers they are studying are not selected at random.

    Sample size is a more complex question. Remember this, though: sample size is independent of population size. When flipping a coin, 15 flips (samples) will tell you with a great deal of certainty whether the coin is "fair". It does not matter how many "coin flips there are in the population" (infinite? :). If gamers were selected at random, 100 could be way more than enough. In fact, 35 could be plenty. Depends on how many degrees of freedom...

    ----

  98. Makes us more intelligent... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3

    ...or better read?
    I remember back in the late 80's studying for Higher Physics, and reading a couple of pages of my textbooks while my ZX Spectrum games took 5 minutes to load...
    An excellent way to break up time spent studying and time spent relaxing (playing "Lords of Chaos", for example)

  99. a nice long sentence by Pynchon by Chundra · · Score: 1

    Through the rest of the afternoon, through her trip to the market in downtown Kinneret-Among-The-Pines to buy ricotta and listen to the Muzak (today she came through the bead-curtained entrance around bar 4 of the Fort Wayne Settecento Ensemble's variorum recording of the Vivaldi Kazoo Concerto, Boyd Beaver, soloist); then through the sunned gathering of her marjoram and sweet basil from the herb garden, reading of book reviews in the latest Scientific American, into the layering of lasagna, garlicking of a bread, tearing up of romaine leaves, eventually, oven on, into the mixing of the twilight's whiskey sours against the arrival of her husband Wendell ("Mucho") Maas from work, she wondered, wondered, shuffling back through a fat deckful of days which seemed (wouldn't she be the first to admit it?) more or less identical, or all pointing the same way subtly like a conjurer's deck, any odd one readily clear to the trained eye.

  100. Re:Let's not be hasty by balls001 · · Score: 1

    I hope to God your mis-spelling of 'write' is an attempt at humor =)

  101. The Ultimate Killing Machines... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    Smarter... faster reflexes... and deadlier :)

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    1. Re:The Ultimate Killing Machines... by flewp · · Score: 1

      Sounds like real world Universal Soldiers...

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
  102. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by quintessent · · Score: 3
    It just means smarter kids play video games.

    In fact, you're still skipping a logical step. It could just mean that those smart people who happen to play video games do better at it than everyone else (i.e. smart people could even play games less than others). I'll bet if you did a study at the world bowling championchip you'd find the contestants were also brighter in other areas. This does not necessarily mean that bowlers are smarter than everyone else. [bowlers, please disregard last sentence. It was a comment I pulled out of my hat, not one meant to be flamebait].

  103. Do games make people smarter... by SouperMike · · Score: 5

    Or do smart people play more games? Things like computer games and athletics develop ability to concentrate for longer periods. But, this development could just be the result of a long attention span wanting to be worked on. The brain is like a muscle, it wants to be worked out to become stronger.

  104. Neither, it turns out... by mblase · · Score: 3
    Read the article more closely, fellas.
    Youngsters who play computer games regularly but not excessively also tend to have more friends and be better adjusted than those who make do with traditional pastimes such as reading and television.
    That's compared to non-interactive activities like reading and television, not more-interactive activities like sports and playground play.
    "People who play games regularly seem to develop a mental state that we have seen before only in serious athletes or professionals such as astronauts, whose life depends on concentration and co-ordination," said Jo Bryce, who led the research. "Their minds and bodies work together much better than those of most other people."
    So they develop better reflexes and thumb-eye coordination than people who watch TV passively, which is no surprise. But that's not the same as being more intelligent or better educated.
    She found that although there remained a minority of gamers who were obsessive, the majority had a healthy mix of other interests and varied social lives. Playing games helped them to do better in other areas, including schoolwork.
    So people who play video games obsessively still rot their brains, but kids who practice healthy moderation do well. So what? Seems to me that kids who practice any activity in moderation with other activities will do well.
    Mark Griffiths, a psychologist at Nottingham Trent University and an expert in computer gaming, found recently in a study of 800 children that those who played games "moderately"- no more than two hours a day-tended to do more sport than those who played no games. They had more friends, were better adjusted and tended to read more.
    Of course, it's also possible that not being interested in sports shares the same cause as not being interested in games. This study was not scientific; it didn't raise one group of kids with video games, one group without, and expose both groups to an equal amount of other social activities. Correlation does not mean causation.

    There is a certain scientific approach to the claim that video games help kids and adults develop better reflexes and hand-eye coordination, but that's no surprise, and it's completely different from claiming it makes them "smarter".

    1. Re:Neither, it turns out... by markmoss · · Score: 2
      Correlation does not mean causation. Amen.

      Note that the link given was not to the study itself, but to a newspaper report on the study. Reporters and editors might have butchered the facts. But if it was described accurately, the UK gov't just wasted a research grant.

      What particularly bothered me was all the claims of better skills being "developed". You can support that claim only with a longitudinal study, where you measure the abilities of your test and control groups repeatedly over a period of years. Then, if the two groups had the same scores at the beginning and different scores at the end, you might have actually proved something. If you randomly picked who went into groups x1 (gamers) and x2 (TV-watchers), and then sent a large man out to shadow each test subject and force him to conform to your plan, it probably did. But when the groups are self-selected, it's possible that choosing x1 and developing more y are both due to z, which you don't know enough to measure. And in a cross-sectional study (that doesn't follow the subjects over time), choosing x1 was quite likely related to having more y in the first place.

      For example, although it's not surprising if shooter-type video games improve eye-hand coordination, merely showing that gamers average better ehc doesn't tell you whether gamers developed that from gaming, or the uncoordinated just bombed out of the games and went back to the boob tube. To me, showing that moderate video gamers go out for sports more makes it seem likely that they were better coordinated to begin with. (E.g, terrible coordination kept me out of sports as a kid -- and if video games had been invented, I don't think I'd have been racking up the record scores. D&D, in the original text-based version, was a game I really could get into -- but I was too adult by then to have the free time.)

      As for intelligence, it's obvious that smart kids select challenging entertainment, while boobs prefer to watch the boob tube. It wouldn't be suprising if it also works the other way around (games increase intelligence) but you can't prove it either way from just a correlation. Likewise, video games quite likely increase your ability to concentrate, but you'd see the same correlation if people who couldn't concentrate didn't play the games.

      So this really doesn't say anything that a reasonable and unbiased person wouldn't have guessed in the first place. The only reason the authors (or perhaps just the reporter?) seem surprised is that they were biased against "geeks" going in. This report, devoid of real information as it is, might help dispell that prejudice. Bookmark it and beat the geek-haters over the head with it regularly -- they're too dumb to see the flaws, right? 8-)

  105. *sniff* by Technodummy · · Score: 2

    Wizardry... Mission Asteroid... it's just not the same anymore...

    not to say I don't love Alpha Centauri

  106. Re:long sentences will not be allowed by the cutof by FatOldGoth · · Score: 2

    Slightly (OK, very) OT, but your subject reminded me of a wonderful report that came through the IBM Infoman heldesk software I used back in my days of *shudder* corporate IT support. Infoman had a very limited length description field for each ticket, which made it difficult to input a meaningful description. I can't remember what the exact fault was in this case, but the description in the summary field read:

    User reports that text has been trunca


    --
    --

    I would be a paid subscriber if Taco and Hemos weren't such cunts
  107. It's true ! by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3

    I am convinced that having played Donkey Kong when I was young helped me develop early my barrel-avoiding, ladder-climbing and blond girl-rescuing abilities.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  108. Re:Let's not be hasty by Eharley · · Score: 1

    Like I said, my thoughts were based on my own experiences. I'm glad to have a contrasting opinion. Thank you.

    I think it's important to have friends, to make time away from the computer, and to enjoy other forms of entertainment besides the computer and the TV.

    Frankly, I'm not blaming this on gaming. I'm just stating what I've observed, the relationships that exist between poor communication skills and gaming, and a simple justification for each observation.

    You're insight that parents are the key to successful childhood development shows that you are wiser than your age (14?). My mother is a 3rd grade teacher in the ghetto in California. I grew-up in similarly under-privledged areas. The children that succeed, no matter their habits, are the ones whose parents care for them and take an active part in their development. My mother sees this first hand in her classroom. The disciplinary cases have parents that are hardly present in their child's education. The model children have parents that come to her and ask for summer activity ideas, volunteer in the classroom, or simply attend semi-annual parent teacher conferences.

  109. Re:Let's not be hasty by Eharley · · Score: 2

    We've got a long way to go, and I'll be either senile or in the grave when the time comes.

    Either way, it wont matter to me.
    But how will such colloquialisms effect the advancement of our soceity and technology?

    Let's face it, the Internet is developing Eubonics. How many speeches, patent applications, journal articles, and other forms of communication have you read that have been written in Eubonics?

  110. Re:Let's not be hasty by Eharley · · Score: 2

    Very good point.

    It's interesting to ask if chat rooms are making us a lesser society or if chat rooms are bringing together otherwise socially disenfranchsied people.

    Perhaps a little of both, but the latter makes me feel better about the technolgoy.

  111. Let's not be hasty by Eharley · · Score: 4

    I'm not going to draw any conclusions about this study without thinking more.

    However, it has been my own anecdotal evidence that computer game playing, while improving hand-eye coordination and strategic thinking, does severly limit normal social interaction.

    Modern computer games train gamers to work within the systems of chat rooms, message boards, and other online forms of communication. When the gamer is in a classical social situation (dinner party, traditional work meeting, academic classroom, etc), the result that I have noticed is that the gamer is:
    1) Less social. That is, less likely to interact with other people because, for lack of a better phrase, the other people "just don't understand."
    2) Think less critically about the situation. They become uninterested in anything that doesn't relate to current games or to the prospect of new games.
    3) Have poor verbal skills. Nearly all computer games operate without a verbal component. The verbal skills of the gamer atrophies.

    I am concerned that we are developing a culture, that is growing, of people who are less than ready to live up to their full potential.

    This is just my concern. This is just based on anecdotal evidence. I accept the fact I may be totally off base.

    1. Re:Let's not be hasty by Sparo · · Score: 1

      I empathize and concur. I too am a lifelong gamer, a grammar hound, and somewhat anti-social. I don't attribute it to my passion for gaming, I simply accept (and sometimes relish) that it's an element of my personality. I too have difficultly communicating directly with groups, particularly large ones.

      Some things came to mind while reading your post.

      Reading is still a significant part of gaming, particularly in the RPG genres. I would suggest that children (and adults) who enjoy those games must read and comprehend text continuously, and there is a Pavolian reward for understanding that text as quickly as completely as possible. This stimulates and improves comprehensive speed and ability

      Of course not all games have text, but most non FPSs (first-person shooters) do.
      As for FPS games, While Quake and its ilk are examples of games that may not develop comprehension, they do (as you suggest) hone strategy and decision-making abilities.

      There's something else I'd like to point out regarding this script-kiddy dialect. While it is a distortion of the english language, it still requires (for the time being) that the kids understand the original meaning (and lets hope spelling) of the words they use, and if not, then I propose that even draconian enforcers of grammar such as myself will simply have to remember that the English language is a whore - it has a barely reputable mother (saxon/german) and a host of fathers (latin, old anglo, french, aboriginal)and as such must and WILL change according to time, geography, culture and - gulp -technology.
      .t.

    2. Re:Let's not be hasty by morcego · · Score: 1

      I don't know if I should agree with you or not.
      By one point of view, you are right, of course. Ppl are really forgeting how to right and speak correctly.
      On the other side, isn't that the effect of the natural language development ? How many ppl do you know that say "thy" anymore ?
      But I do agree that there is a very thin line between ignorance of the language, and the language historical evolution.

      ---

      --
      morcego
    3. Re:Let's not be hasty by morcego · · Score: 1

      Thanks God someone noticed it !
      I do sometimes (often?) mis-spell. The main reason is that I'm not a native english speaker (I'm brazilian). But this time, it was a joke (or a joke attempt :-)), as you rightly noticed.

      ---

      --
      morcego
    4. Re:Let's not be hasty by chrylis · · Score: 1

      Online chat, antisocializing? There are at least two major benefits to chatting/instant messaging: some people, for some reason, will open up online when they wouldn't in person, possibly since the computer seems more impersonal and less dangerous to talk to than a person; and no-extra-cost communication with distant friends. My best friend lives about 300mi away, but we can talk for no cost but our Net connections whenever and for however long we like.

    5. Re:Let's not be hasty by TheOnlyCoolTim · · Score: 1

      If you are playing an FPS you have to type real quickly cause someone might be coming to kill you...

      For example, when I am playing TFC, it is better to type:
      "flg in spiral w/ hw + sg"
      compared to:
      "The flag is in the spiral staircase, guarded by the Heavy Weapons Guy and a Sentry gun."

      If I tried that, while I was using correct grammar and spelling, the enemy would be using correct aiming techniques directly at my head. Tim

      --
      Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
    6. Re:Let's not be hasty by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 2
      it has been my own anecdotal evidence that computer game playing, while improving hand-eye coordination and strategic thinking, does severly limit normal social interaction.

      Well, maybe computer games, but if you want to see a social video game, just get out your N64. With its 4 controller slots standard and TONS of REALLY FUN 4-player games, the N64 is a great party gaming platform. Me and my friends have hours of fun playing the likes of Goldeneye and Super Smash Bros.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    7. Re:Let's not be hasty by yerktoader · · Score: 1
      I once heard someone put it to me succinctly.

      "I pay my goddamn taxes, I'll say or spell however the hell I like!"

      As abrasive as it is, for those who find spelling and pronunciation in informal conversation a minor detail, it is a way of life. Besides, those who just want to chat find that those who tell them to spell correctly are ridiculous. It's an informal situation and many people are poor typists.

      Whether or not some of these people should even have a computer is another story....

    8. Re:Let's not be hasty by Ziffy · · Score: 1
      Yup. That comma in your second line should have been a semicolon or a period.

      Hopefully, I didn't just make another mistake...

    9. Re:Let's not be hasty by banshee2000 · · Score: 1

      once I started college and met a bunch of Quake addicts in person, my social life skyrocketted.
      and
      It's interesting to ask if chat rooms are making us a lesser society or if chat rooms are bringing together otherwise socially disenfranchsied people.

      Technology has always had to deal with this question. Can the same not be said of the telephone which lessened the activity of visiting people? What about the television which further isolated people from one another? Are those two innovations evil as well? .

    10. Re:Let's not be hasty by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      At least Google will still be usable by gamers as they have a h4(x0r language setting.

      --
      Nice Marmot
    11. Re:Let's not be hasty by nixxy · · Score: 1

      I frequently mispell words and use poor grammar, but its not due to games its just because i'm lazy. But I dont use the abbreviations of your or you and many of the others.

      And I do sometimes use old english type words such as "thou" and "thy" but the only reason i do is because I like them.

      While games may encourage logical thinking, or puzzle solving skills as well as hand eye coordination i think they also affect peoples social skills in a negative way .. the same can be said for online chat (except it doesn't have the benefits).. I know its affected me

      I dont completely agree with this study
      ------------

      --
      ------------
      "There is a thin line between genius and insanity and I can't walk straight"
    12. Re:Let's not be hasty by pipsey · · Score: 1

      Well, you're at least partially right. I'm an avid gamer myself, and I notice that other gamers have horrible grammar. However, I'd like to think I'm an exception to that rule - poor grammar is one of my pet peeves, and that makes reading many posts on Slashdot an irritating process. Still, you won't find me correcting others' grammar, because nobody ever listens to grammar rants, and it's rude besides.

      You're also at least somewhat right about gamers being less social. For example, I know I'm antisocial. I simply don't deal with other people very well offline. While I can be clear and eloquent when posting a reply to someone on a message board, talking to the same person face-to-face leaves me stuttering and feeling more than a little stupid. Is this a product of gaming, or just a normal personality trait? I'd vote for number two, but who knows what I'd be like without the net?

      However, saying that gamers think less critically is simply untrue. In fact, I think that many gamers have sharper minds - especially those who play war simulations, strategy games, RPGs, and the like.

      While your points may be true ON AVERAGE - don't judge a book by its cover. I'm a hardcore gamer, but do you see me post things like "ur wrong, im more social from gaming?" Conversely, I'm just one person - and every gamer, just like everyone else, is different.

  112. Kids that grew up on Quake don't kill people... by mike260 · · Score: 4

    ...they just maim a lot of people's feet.

  113. Re:Games and Learning by mike260 · · Score: 5

    If you see games as a tool to teach people to persevere, overcome and work hard then yes, cheat codes are a negative thing.

    However, if you see games as something to have fun experiencing then cheats are generally a good thing. They're a tool to skip frustrating, badly-balanced areas of a game and get to the fun stuff; a player who's really enjoying a game generally won't resort to cheating.

    Now, all kids have to do is look up the cheat codes for God mode, and get after it with a BFG
    Are you really bemoaning the fact that today's lazy kids don't work as hard at playing games?

  114. it does make people smarter by unformed · · Score: 2

    By playing Unreal Tournament, the next time I go on a hihg-school rampage, I've got a less likely chance to get shot by the cops.

    Or wait, bad analogy. Here's a better one:

    The next time some crazed maniac goes on a high-school rampage, I'll be more able to escape the gunfire...

  115. Re:quake? by tjb · · Score: 1

    Heh, you play a whole different kind of game than I do.

    In my view, the key to deathmatch is weapon control. I know I'm not much fun to play against (according to my fraternity brothers from college), but I can absolutely dominate a game by never letting a weapon sit on the ground. I do not (!) camp, I tend to run around like a madman grabbing all the power ups laying around and tend to play a strict denial game.

    This allows me to make up for my complete lack of skills by being utterly abusive. I never involve myself in a fair fire-fight. I maintain control of the powerful weapons, and when I kill somebody, I know that they are suddenly at their weakest so I make a run to a spawn point in hopes of waxing them again. Failing that, I head to the weapon I think they are heading for and try to pick them off while they blindly dash for the RL.

    Its a completely different gamestyle, and I think the combination of skills and strategy could make for a fearsome (perhaps, professional level) player. You should really adjust your strategy, and if you are as tactically good as you say you are, well fuck, who needs a day job :)

    Tim

  116. Re:Long Sentences by triticale · · Score: 1

    I think Merle Haggard wrote the longest sentence, in Mama Tried: "I turned 21 in prison doing life without parole..."

  117. Re:quake? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

    We'd all be hanging out in
    dark places
    Check (no sense in dumping more watts into the only airconditioned room in my apartment)
    eating pills Nope.
    listening to electronic music I've got Tangerine Dream's Le Parc queued to go. Got a problem with that?

    But don't forget the ghosts. (I've got a big whacking stick ready for them!)

    Other than that, I can say that playing video games hasn't affected me a bit. Writing them, well...

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  118. Sure... by telstar · · Score: 1

    Where else are they going to learn how to strafe-jump while reloading their M4 and taking out the enemy positioned in an elevated position? Well, aside from high-school that is...

  119. OT:Games and Learning by grammar+fascist · · Score: 1

    Are you really bemoaning the fact that today's lazy kids don't work as hard at playing games?

    I say, this deserves at least ONE "+1 Funny." I haven't laughed this hard for a long time.

    --
    I got my Linux laptop at System76.
  120. Flawed study by BuddyPacer · · Score: 2
    Bryce did her research by visiting computer gamers, often during regional or national competitions around Britain, and giving nearly 100 of them a series of psychological tests and questionnaires.

    Maybe the well-adjustedness of the subjects is what led them to be involved in tournaments in the first place. Which came first, the sociability or the 18hrs per week of gaming? The study doesn't indicate at all, and isn't designed to prove, that games lead to smarter or more well-adjusted kids. It just indicates there might be a correlation. Correlation != cause and effect. Maybe the kids are more polished & smarter than the norm because they're in a higher, more-privileged socioeconomic class, which having a computer still tends to indicate unfortunately.

  121. quake? by ardiri · · Score: 1
    "people who play games regularly seem to develop a mental state that we have seen before only in serious athletes or professionals such as astronauts, whose life depends on concentration and co-ordination...Their minds and bodies work together much better than those of most other people...They had more friends, were better adjusted and tended to read more."

    hmm.. i can see how this would work based on the games from the mid-eighties (pacman, bubble bobble [classic], 1942 etc).. i guess, the basis for this study is on what the "leading professionals" did in the mid-eighties.. unfortunately, i dont see the average "quake" or "unreal" player ending up in such a position. if what they say is real - we're gonna have to watch our backs in ten years!

    .... argh.... i see you have a vast knowledge of human anatomy, now, please put that chainsaw down... i beg of you!...

    1. Re:quake? by ardiri · · Score: 1
      Yeah, if video games really affect kids can you imagine the result of Pacman. We'd all be hanging out in dark places, eating pills, and listening to electronic music... =P

      i was actually looking for this quote when i wrote the message.. but, it slipped my mind :) hehe.. the sad thing is, its so true! :P /me sighs.. need another renaissance ball - the one in perth, australia this year just rocked on.. judge jules, dave seaman and timo mass.. *thump*thump*thump* :(

    2. Re:quake? by ardiri · · Score: 1
      Moderation Totals:Troll=1, Total=1.

      man, i must have really f*cked up. i was wrong about the chainsaw.. - the real problem is those /. moderators who feel that taking a poke at quake is an insult to their intelligence - could have put those moderation points to better use. :) i'd like to see a correlation chart between frag counts and humor respect when the word "quake" is mentioned.. that'll be a fun study..

    3. Re:quake? by znaps · · Score: 1

      And this method is exactly how the legendary 'Thresh' won practically every Quake tourney he entered...put'em down and keep'em down. Not pretty but effective.

  122. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by mgebbers · · Score: 1

    >>They could both be merely caused by a third, unseen factor. DRUGS! :D

  123. Re:Games and Learning by Andux · · Score: 2
    Nintendo power, anyone?

    Anti-emulation progaganda, anyone?

    --
    (Do not sign anything.) -- Fell, Planescape: Torment
  124. Games and Learning by totallygeek · · Score: 4
    I look back at the time I spent on Zork...good night, I read all kinds of things to work out problems. Then, Wizardry...the mapping, the remembering spell names.

    Now, all kids have to do is look up the cheat codes for God mode, and get after it with a BFG.

    1. Re:Games and Learning by eWulf · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember POKE-ing many of the games on my Amstrad CPC 464.I seem to remember you used to be able to buy dedicated hardware for the purpose as well!!I'm not sure it is fair to say that cheating on computer games is new.

      --
      "If Stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?" - Will Rogers
    2. Re:Games and Learning by KingAzzy · · Score: 1

      I always admired little 10 year old kids who could remember all the movement combinations in the Mortal Combat series (and clones) and execute them so seamlessly during gameplay.

      --

      --
      $ chown -R us:us yourbase

    3. Re:Games and Learning by The+Jboy · · Score: 2

      Whatever. I can see cheat modes making things easier, but really, not all games even have them, and many that do require you to *earn* them. Besides, with the BFG comment, you're comparing two different genres. Games like the Zelda games still require plenty of cognitive thinking skills to figure out the puzzles, etc. The internet does make it easier to find walkthroughs and guides, but they've been around for a long time too. Nintendo power, anyone?

    4. Re:Games and Learning by Nihilanth · · Score: 1

      what a laughably short-sighted point of view.

      What does a child learn when he/she skips to the last chapter of a novel and tosses it aside?

      What does a child learn when he/she passes a class by cramming?

      what does a child learn when he/she takes 8 years of music lessons and never practices?

      Should we then infer that all of these things are equally useless?

      Don't pretend that the games of yester-year are more intrinsically worthwhile than today's games. Sure, there are lots of great classics, but you only get OUT of something what you put INTO it, this applies to games as much as it does anything else.

      An individual incapable of self-discipline with all the tools for greatness will accomplish nothing

    5. Re:Games and Learning by Nihilanth · · Score: 1

      Let's not forget that cheat codes are the stepping-stone to reverse-engineering the game, and inspiring children to learn how to do that is more valuable than parental warning labels or coma-inducing arrays of statistics

  125. Video Games Saved My Life by micje · · Score: 2

    If it wasn't for Pong, I'd be watching Survivor and Jerry Springer. Thanks!!!

    --

    The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from. - ast

  126. Re:Minds and body? by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

    > people who play games regularly seem to develop
    > a mental state that we have seen before only in
    > serious athletes or professionals such as
    > astronauts

    Well, the answer is obvious.

    Professional or olympic athletes have approximately 20,000 hours of practice by the time they get to the top levels. Astronauts practice for thousands of hours to perform chores for one mission.

    What's the common ground? Kids play games for thousands of hours.

    --
    I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
  127. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

    Yes, and the existance of this article is yet more evidence that the press is in the entertainment business, not the information business. I don't understand why such a P.O.S. article would get posted to /. - Someone is asleep at the switch.

  128. Minds and body? by Nurgster · · Score: 1

    "Their minds and body work better together"

    Is that just another way of saying Quake improves hand-eye coordination? If so, all I have to say to this is...

    "Well duh"

    --
    "Faith is the last resort of a desperate man" - Me
  129. Hmm... by conebrid · · Score: 1

    Obviously several thousand TKing, laming, generally sucky Tribes players were left out of this study.

  130. Shit! I'm white, I bet its because I play games by CrazyJim0 · · Score: 1

    Good analogy though.

  131. Re:Playing games does not _make_ people smarter by The+Milky+Bar+Kid · · Score: 1

    Playing games makes them smellier, though.

    Have you BEEN to a 250-person LAN? 250 games, one can of deodorant - it's a nightmare.

    --
    This post is about truth, beauty, freedom, and above all things, Karma.
    --
    -- This post is about truth, beauty, freedom, and above all things, Karma
  132. Architecture by grepnyc · · Score: 1

    Well, after making a bunch of DooM maps in 1994 & 1995, I felt that I was ready for an internship with a local architect. After all, not everyone can figure out the difference between a room and a sector right? You've got to be pretty bright to understand all those item codes too. Yup, and every level must have an exit. Very important.

    I figured that there couldn't be that much difference between working in DoomCad and some fancy-shmancy professional 3D design tool. If I can design a sliding door in Doom, it must be easy to do the same in the real world. Right?

    The architect turned me down. So I made a map of his office, and 1 week later I was there to give him my own interpretation of the Columbine treatment.

    Just kidding.

    pressure/grep


    --------------------------------

    --


    Microsoft Fucking Sucks!! Up The Penguins!!
  133. uh-oh by psych031337 · · Score: 1

    One study says playing games makes kids intelligent. Other studies have found it makes 'em critters aggressive. Now, i let's hope we can build enough jails for all those upcoming ultra-intelligent psychopathic serial killers(tm).

    --
    +++ath0
  134. Selfdestruct Mechanism by Dutchie · · Score: 2
    The video games/movies/TV paradox of whether it's 'good' or 'bad' for 'children' is a very challenging one to consider. First off, when I read 'children' in the context of these kind of reports, I always get a bit paranoid. The reporter, knowingly or not, is then trying to reach our emotional side, as opposed to our logical side. I would much prefer to find out how the violence influx of all these media is influencing us, whether adult, child, male, female.

    I'm often tempted to say that 'the way nature intended it' is 'good' but this alone is far too simple a point of view I believe. After all, we are part of nature, we create much of the environment around us, like a bear creates his own cave pretty much. Does the fact that a bear lives in a cave make him an unnatural being? I think not. Similarly, I don't think the 'things' we create around us make us 'unnatural' neccesarily.

    However, nature has a way to deal with excesses of particular things/species in ways we often cannot fathom. Mind you, 'video games' by my earlier description have become part of our 'nature'. Violence has ofcourse always been part of our nature.

    Nature encourages improvement. Nature encourages better adaptation to the world we live in at any particular moment in time. However, nature also kills excessive cancerous species. So, a very interesting (well to me:) thing to wonder is when nature is still nourishing us, and when nature will start turning against us.

    Do video games create supersadistlittlehitlers that will kill us all, or enough to get the numbers right again? Maybe, and maybe they are just yet another innovative tool to make humans adapt even more to their increasingly competitive environment. Video games have been around for quite a while, it would be far more illustrative to see 'where are all those videogame players from back then now?'. Was Bill Gates a fanatic video game player? Larry Ellison? President Bush? I don't care much about a bunch of kids having supernatural reflexes because they play quake often, blah. Where is that report that links 'ideas' to 'reality' ?

    • Imagination is more important than knowledge.
    --
    • Imagination is more important than knowledge.

      • -- Albert Einstein
  135. Johnny and Mum by zero2k · · Score: 2

    Mum: Johnny, are you gonna take that gameboy with you to class?
    Johnny: Yes mum, the researcher said I'll pay better attention if I play games.
    Mum: Ok.

    Mum: Johnny, start doing your homework or you'll have no time.
    Johnny: Mum! The researcher told me that playing games will improve my intelligence so I'll be able to do my homework much faster!
    Mum: Ok

    Mum: Johnny, turn the game machine off and go play with your friends.
    Johnny: But mum, the researcher said that I'll have improved social interactivity if I play games. [*BANG* *BANG* *NUKE*]
    Mum: Ok

    Mum: Johnny, it's time for dinner!
    Johnny: But mum, according to the research I'll be able to improve my bodily interactions if I play games, so I'll be able to adjust to hunger.
    Mum: Ok.

  136. long sentences will not be allowed by the cutoff p by discogravy · · Score: 2

    Of course, reading all of that has ruined me in that I now tend to write really long sentences, though I haven't yet achieved the one feat that I have only seen from Machiavelli and Dave Barry, which is, of course, the 1.5 page sentence, in which the author creates an extraordinarily long sentence, containing much information, all the while being grammatically correct, and conveying one basic idea in a surprisingly clear manner, such that the reader, after having read it, actually goes back to see where said sentence began, and reads it again, just to make sure that the sentence is, indeed, that long.

    the master at this was this guy, who wrote one sentence (either in "the sound and the fury" or "light in august" or maybe "absalom, absalom!", i forget) that spans ~3 pages or so. Every lit. major tries to do this at least once, but all of them fail in the one pre-requisite, i.e., being William Faulkner. (Although David Foster Wallace has come close.)

    anyway, after reading the article, wouldn't it make more sense to assume that the smart kids (e.g. ones who would find "news for nerds" insteresting) would be indoors playing games and not outdoors? all games give different types of education, i'm pretty sure that if you spent 60 hours playing Mario Bros. or something you would probably get dumber instead.

    -d.
    --
    Slashdot: When News Breaks, We Give You The Pieces

  137. Virtual Valerie by flewp · · Score: 1

    I wonder how the game Virtual Valerie fits into this study....

    --
    WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
  138. Video Games/systems Tax Deductible by flewp · · Score: 1

    Does this mean when tax time comes around I can deduct the cost of video game systems as an educational expense?

    --
    WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
  139. Super-intelligent serial killers by wheany · · Score: 1

    If we are to believe all these different studies, there'll be thousands of super-intelligent serial killers in the future. Scary.

  140. For instance... by Nathdot · · Score: 2

    Today's generation of disenchanted youth knows the importance of strafing when holding up a convenience store.

    Kudos to you Doom! Kudos to you Quake!

    I'm just suprised we haven't seen a spark in the number of chain-gun incidents in police reports

    :)

    PS. For all of you just an alt-tab away from an FPS: Yes this is toungue-in-cheek... sheesh! :)

  141. Long Sentences by GospelHead821 · · Score: 1

    I could be mistaken, but I'm fairly certain that Dostoyevsky has a sentence that long in Crime and Punishment. Just my two bits.

    --
    Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
    Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
  142. wow by madman2002 · · Score: 2

    Does this mean if I play Quake for 72 hours straight I'll be able to find a way to circumvent any type of encryption AND use my superior hand/eye coordination to kick the shit out of all the federal agents who come to arrest me?

    --


    http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/article1 015.asp A spin on the old, if Microso
  143. What The Didn't Reveal... by Roadfever · · Score: 1

    The study was funded by 500 British elementary school students who pooled their lunch money all term.

  144. comparing against what by goderisgoderis · · Score: 1

    "traditional pastimes such as reading and television" If that's the population you're comparing against, no wonder the outcome of the research. Try comparing with kids that are active with the boy scouts, or are part of a soccer team. Not that I dislike the outcome of that research of course..