Survey Tackles College Gaming Stereotypes

Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to an AP/Yahoo story discussing a survey on college gaming, whose results seem to challenge stereotypes about videogames interfering with college studies. According to a researcher for the project, which surveyed college gamers throughout the US, "It's not taking the place of studying; nor is it taking away from other activities. What.. [college students] seem to have done is incorporated gaming into a very multitask-oriented lifestyle." In fact, playing games can even save you time, quips college gamer David McNulty, "It takes less time to play a few games than to go downtown or see a movie with your friends. It's easier to meet them online and shoot at them."

Comments

Games don't eat time?

[0x0d0a]

Games don't eat time? This guy hasn't played Zangband...

Not completely true

[ZenBased]

Although i have to agree with the fact that not every college gamer is nerdy or anti-social, they cant be serious when they say it doesnt impact someone studies.. if you play 6 hours a day, and you go out regulary and do stuff, there isnt much room for studies anymore, or is there? It also eats into your sleeping time, not good for concentrating. Maybe they just polled some people who play 1 hour a day or so?

Re:Not completely true

[DjReagan]

If you think that most people play 6 hours of computer games each day, then you have a very odd view of the world.

Re:Not completely true

[Babbster]

Or maybe they simply polled people who play games. There are a lot of people who don't consider videogaming their primary hobby but still enjoy playing. These people are usually referred to as "casual gamers." This term I've found is most often used by the "hardcore gamers" who use it derisively because they feel that the existence of casual gamers means that they get fewer 70-hour RPGs and insanely difficult shooters. I suspect that the "casual" gamers outnumber the "hardcore" gamers if only because games like The Sims and Madden dominate the sales charts year after year.

Me, I like the idea of more and more people playing video games casually. More of them buying video games pumps more money into the industry as a whole, which causes more games to be released. This means that software developers can keep people like me (who play as many as 8-10 hours a day) occupied...not to mention more high-tech employment so that Slashdot participants can keep up their workday posting habits. :)

Re:Not completely true

[Guppy06]

"if you play 6 hours a day, and you go out regulary and do stuff, there isnt much room for studies anymore, or is there?"

You're assuming that those six hours would have otherwise been spent studying.

Re:Not completely true

[PainKilleR-CE]

The study surveyed college students in general, finding that 2/3rds of them play games, and then gave additional data on the ones that do play games. If you play 6 hours a day, you definitely are not in the majority anyway (though averaging in some of my weekends I could easily be in the 6+ hours a day group). My experience in college was that it was perfectly possible to balance even an average of 6+ hours of gaming a day and still get all of my work done, but it was much harder to do so when I started working full time. Many times gaming is just a 10-30 minute break from studying, while other times it was more like 10 of us drinking and playing tournament-mode KI on the SNES on a Saturday evening.

In answer to your question, they polled people who play 6+ hours a day, people who play 1 hour a day, people who play 1 hour a week, and people who don't play at all. The article states that while half of gamers (people that play games at all) felt that it detracted from their study time (this sounds about right, most of the people I know in college think that gaming cuts into their studies), the reality (as opposed to their perception) was that their study habits really didn't vary from the habits of those that didn't play games. In other words, the people that don't play games have plenty of distractions from their studies as well, or those that play games probably are the types that would study a lot more than they really need to ;)

As someone else said, casual gaming is good for the industry. Not only does it pump money into it, but it also breeds more acceptance of it. Also, with the number of people that grew up with the Atari 2600 and now the NES, it's likely that we'll see more and more casual and hardcore gamers coming up, because more and more people started gaming at an early age and learned to balance gaming in their schedule as they saw fit.

Re:Not completely true

[pascalb3]

I'm not sure what the age demographic is here for Slashdot posters, but when I read news articles about this (as well as posts) I can definitely see a huge generation gap. This study was completely suprised about all of the conclusions it came to, yet I was not suprised at all. As a recent college graduate, this atmosphere is what I've been experiencing for four years; people playing games in class, studying, getting work done, IMing, emailing, sports, all of these activities coexist in a contemporary college environment. This comes as no suprise to those between 16 and 26. Not as though older people are ignorant of this fact, they just consistently misunderstand current culture.

My generation is one of multitaskers and speed-demons. Everyone I knew at college did not just sitdown and write a paper, most would also have the TV on, play MP3s, actively IM, and perhaps have a game of Freecell going. It's not that these students magically have more time in their days to play games, sleep, and study, it's that most of the time they do activities simultaneously.

Re:Not completely true

[PainKilleR-CE]

This comes as no suprise to those between 16 and 26. Not as though older people are ignorant of this fact, they just consistently misunderstand current culture.

I agree here (and no surprise as I'm 25). What I'm finding, though, as I work in an environment where I am definitely the youngest person working in-house (we have a few my age or younger working mostly on the road), is that older people are slowly getting more into gaming, although they typically stay in the sports games and only occasionally go into other areas (Tomb Raider, Splinter Cell, etc). A lot of people here have an XBox, and a couple have PS2s (though most of those for their kids, or nieces and nephews, at least that's what they say). (The reason for the high percentage of XBox users here has to do with HDTV support and online gaming, from what I've heard). Some of them played the occasional computer game, and a few of them had an Atari or an NES before, but most didn't bother really keeping up with what was recent in console or computer gaming, and for a few the XBox was the first console they've owned since the Atari or NES. I definitely think most of them would be surprised at this study, even though they have no problem putting in some game time with their work schedules.

My generation is one of multitaskers and speed-demons.

My biggest problem with college was the pace, especially when it came to computer courses, which seemed almost glacial. In one course in particular the assignments were handed out ahead of time, and I found myself well over half way through the work within 2 weeks, despite not really spending much time outside of class working on it (in fact, for the first week I didn't even have the compiler at home or any way to import outside work without typing it in during class, so I did no work outside of class). On the other hand, some courses definitely needed the semester schedule, although maybe people more oriented to those fields would not agree.

Everyone I knew at college did not just sitdown and write a paper, most would also have the TV on, play MP3s, actively IM, and perhaps have a game of Freecell going. It's not that these students magically have more time in their days to play games, sleep, and study, it's that most of the time they do activities simultaneously.

Exactly. Then again, some of us do survive on less sleep ;) With the multitasking capabilities of modern computers, though, it's much easier to handle typing a paper, doing some research, and getting in a simple game (and some IM, MP3s, etc). I may not need to go to the library at all to do some research, and if I do, I can often have a fairly thick book list to look up when I get there, rather than trying to make that book list from the library's resources. Music has been a constant companion in my life since I was about 12 years old, and there's little time in my day when I'm not listening to it. Games are just another part, what I do with friends, or when I have nothing else to fill the time, or when I need a break from whatever I may be working on at home (can't play games at work, though I may catch a quick cell phone game on my smoke breaks if no one else is outside). I also tend to keep a fairly thick library of games at home. The point is not that I have time to play all of those games now, it's simply that I enjoy (or know that I will enjoy) those games, and may play each in short bursts, and would prefer to spend my entertainment money supporting developers that put out games I'd like to play, but may not have time to play now (but will eventually, as long as I can keep my consoles and computers working long enough).

saving time

[redune45]

Although I'm sure that gaming has helped me relax many times, there have been far too many times when I should have been studying, but just got stuck in the "just...one...more...level" endless loop.

Further info

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.pewinternet.org/
You can see their research fellows and what-not. As I am a college kid - I can tell you that every woman I know hates computer games save for solitare, and LAN parties are synonymous with sausage festivals.
Since I was skeptical - I noticed that the head researcher was a Steve Jones - doing internetworking since 1979 etc - maybe weighting some views in an attempt to make himself not look like so much of a tool?

/rant
socializing is talking/chatting/phoning real people - NOT masquerading as GHoSTFacEdKilLler93
end rant

Me, Myself & I

[beders]

Personal experience alert!

At university I was known as "computer boy" by a group of girls, as they could all see me playing Championship Manager for hours in my room. One of them married me eventually, so its not the problem it could be :)

My point is... Excessive drinking and partying made me fail my first year, not gameplaying.

nice to see

[ionyka]

Its nice to see that finally researchers are proving that games arent really as bad as everyone thinks. Sure they can take up time, but they also help relieve lots of stress. And myself being a girl, its nice to see the percent of girl gamers rising. I even read in that article about a girl game-character developer whose trying to make some game characters more geared towards women, which i thought was a nice idea. Hopefully this shows the masses that think all video/computer games are bad, that they really are just human nature to our generation, and we need them terribly :)

Ye olde days

[Anonymous Coward]

For whatever reason people assume that having ResNet or whatever is going to kill your average geek's life in college.

In my time, it was the arcade that did it. My first degree was from Street Fighter II University-- majored in Ryu/Ken with a minor in Chun Li.

I swear I didn't do anything else in first year. The arcade has since gone the way of the dodo. Heck at least in yer room all your books are there looking at you.

skewed survey.

[ColonBlow]

They should resample after Half-Life 2 comes out!

That ought to blow the bell curve.