Slashdot Mirror


Why Do Computer Games Claim Lives?

Ektar wrote to mention an article from Chosun, a Korean newspaper, asking the question why do videogames claim lives? The article is in response to some recent high profile gamer deaths. From the article: "Apparently rare overseas, such cases make frequent headlines in Korea. Why? Experts point to the poor environment of the 'PC bang' or Internet cafes that have mushroomed nationwide. Generally dark and poorly ventilated, they cater to gamers who tend to smoke heavily. The bad air and light can increase the danger of sudden death, experts warn."

14 of 321 comments (clear)

  1. The game did it. by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gotta love the shift of responsibility.

    I take it the game just reached out on its own volition and killed the people?

    Thats as bad as saying "the SUV ran over the child", or " a gun shot the teller during the holdup".

    Cant anyone take responsibility for their own actions any more?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:The game did it. by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In these people's cases, I think it's fair to say the game did it to them. They're kinda like a lab rat pressing a lever to get more cocaine.

      Like the majority of gamers I know I've occassionaly gone without a night's sleep because i was up gaming. These guys are doing the same thing... but to an extreme.

      Fundamentally, it's a compulsion just like gambling, food, drugs (alcohol/harder stuff) or sex can be.

      And most of the aforementioned things aren't usually considered to be 'addictions' until they begin having a negative effect on your life.

      Games are to those gamers, what heroin is to a junky. And they ODed.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:The game did it. by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Drug use can instill some very very low level urges in a user.

      Even after you've weened a druggie off the physical dependence they had on their drug of choice, you still have to deal with the psychological dependence.

      Former users get cravings just from walking by a building they used to do drugs in, or seeing a person they used to hang out with while doing drugs.

      A psychological dependence is much harder to break.

      And you're responsible to get the problem fixed. No one is required to help you or make it easier for you.
      I'm not sure what country you're from, but some countries have this concept of 'the public health'. You might be shocked to know that in some countries, accepting addiction is not something that the government considers to be in the best interests of 'the public health'.

      Not to mention when the destructive behaviors that addicts begin to manifest start spilling over and affecting other people. So while nobody is required to help you, and it is your problem, it is in society's best interest to keep you from wreaking havoc on other people's lives.

      People like you deserve to get held down and injected with heroin. It might not be your fault you're addicted, but let's see how easy it is to fix your problem .

      FYI- Nicotine is more addictive than most if not all street drugs. Some people quit and some people can't.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:The game did it. by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Once you break the physical addiction, you still have a psychological one to deal with.

      That is the reason that most addicts go back to using. Not because their body craves sex/drugs/gambling/food but because they can't quiet the mental urge which is constantly saying "i want it."

      Yes, some people can quit cold turkey without ever looking back, but some people can't. Not because they're weak willed, but because their brain is wired funny.

      I wonder how many of the people opening their mouths and saying "addicts should be responsible" have actually had to deal with an addiction in their own life. Or watch someone very close to them do self destructive things & refuse to stop

      And I don't mean "i crave chocolate," I mean "I weigh 500 lbs, why can't i stop eating" or "I look like a skeleton, why can't I stop taking meth"

      These people aren't stupid, but they usually do benefit from AA/SA/NA at the min and institutionalization at the most extreme.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:The game did it. by Karlb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He escaped.

      --
      When all else fails, you've won.
  2. Life claims lives by G4from128k · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why does this surprise anyone. Everything in life "claims lives." Driving claims lives. Taking a bath claims lives. Sitting on the couch claims lives.


    I'm not even a gamer and I can tell this is just another example of sensationalist journalism.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  3. Cause of death: Darkness? by Caspian · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The bad air and light can increase the danger of sudden death...

    Um... darkness isn't deadly.
    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
  4. Because it gets reported by damiam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People die all the time while laying in beds. No one publishes an article every time it happens, wondering "why beds claim lives". Yet every time someone dies while playing a game, it's big news. Never mind that they've chosen to go for days without eating, drinking, or sleeping; apparently it was the game that killed them.

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  5. Why? It's obvious by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Videogames claim lives because the government wants to regulate video games.

  6. It's next on the list by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Because dying of disease, infection, drowning, poisoning, hunger, thirst, and/or war is now rare.

    The longer you live, the more likely you are to die of something new. The newer it is, the more likely it gets your dead self in the newspaper.

    The more hype it gets in the news, the more people think it's more significant than getting hit by a car or falling out of a tree.

    Someone cries on TV. Lawyers get involved. New laws are passed that prohibit things. Life becomes a little less worth living. People resort to videogames to escape. And then...



    Maybe someday, we'll wise up and just allow people to make their own choices.

  7. More anti-game hype and idiocy by deacon · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From the summary



    Generally dark and poorly ventilated, they cater to gamers who tend to smoke heavily. The bad air and light can increase the danger of sudden death, experts warn."

    So the games themselves do not cause death. Instead, and unhealthy environment, poor nutritional habits, and general Lard-assed-ness cause death.

    Who knew?

    Next we will discover that video games don't make you kill others, and that guns just sit there unless some picks them up and uses them.

    What is this, Masters of the Obvious week?

    Feh.

  8. Why do computer games claim lives? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well eh they don't?

    There was a time cars claimed lives. This was in the day when it was thought that having a sharp metal pin aimed at the drivers chest and directly connected to the front of the car was a good design feature. Same with regular glass windows and nice sharp metal knobs. Saves you the worry of how to get out of your vehicle after a crash I suppose.

    In that way cars killed their passengers although the more accurate claim would be that it was the designers of the car that killed the passengers.

    You can say that smoke claims lives (smoke as from a fire) but this again is a fairly direct form. You would not say that love claims lives despite the fact that an awfull lot of people commit suicide over a broken heart.

    It is not the gameplay that killed them. If say you were playing a DDR game that just kept getting more and more intense until the user falls dead THEN the game would claim lives. If you played fear and got so scared you suffered a heart attack THEN the game would have claimed a live.

    Just taking bad care of yourselve is not the games fault. Sitting motionless in a chair eating bad food is not restricted to gaming. Just ask your average soccer widow.

    All these guys seemed to have neglected their body for a prolonged time and were probably not the most healthy in the first place.

    One article claimed the 38 year old male in question had existed on a 20 day diet of instant noodles. Eheh and before? Because I know from personal experience that the body can live a lot longer then that on instant noodles. I am willing to bet a few bucks that before he wasn't exactly a 2fruit+veg a day man either. So the real newsstory is, man who neglects his health totally does not live to a ripe old age (38 was once an advanced age for a human to reach)

    The other has someone having a 9 hour gaming session? Well I doubt anyone would be able to do that without having to pee and even then so what? I done far longer sessions. Perhaps this person was not the most prime example of the human species? If 9 hours in chair kills you then all this proves that darwin was on to something. You know there are people out there who for fun do 12 hour marches? What about pole-sitting contests?

    Nah I am afraid that as I read these stories it is just, not very healthy person dies doing something to extreme. I had an elderly neighbour who died going to the toilet (yeah how do you like to discover that eh?) Apperently the "pressure" caused a bloodvessel (internally) to burst and she bled to death. Going to the toilet is bad for you? No she just was old and that was her time. If it hadn't been then it would have been if she had bend down to lift something heavy. Sad but that is live. No need to make a headline off it.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  9. Re:IQ, addictive personalities, and Korea by Arcys · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can't compare IQ across populations. IQ is standardized on a population and then only predictive on that population. If the test had of been standardized on African-Americans, Asians would score below 100. Its all down to how good your culture is at answering the IQ questions picked. The source you picked is a bit suspect as at least one of the authors seems to have a racist agenda.

      " In 1991 I extended my work on race differences in intelligence to other races. I concluded that the average IQ of blacks in sub-Saharan Africa is approximately 70. It has long been known that the average IQ of blacks in the United States is approximately 85. The explanation for the higher IQ of American blacks is that they have about 25 per cent of Caucasian genes and a better environment." is a quote from R. Lynn's web page, and this is no where near the most blatant.

    Now I suspect you didn't go far enough in your research to find this, but just remember that IQ has long been used to justify racial superiority. When ever you see a cross cultural comparison based on IQ please consider the source.

    As for the rest of your post, as a psych student I would be very interested to see the correlation between intelligence and obsessive behaviour (of any kind). While it is a stereotype that more intelligent adolescents play video-games, I would need evidence to show that there is any causal relationship.

  10. Cigarettes and alcohol by forgoil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Take a look at home many gamers there are out there, then look at how many of them die from these kinds of situations. Not that terribly many, right? Now take a quick peak at two of societies most common forms of entertainment, nicotine and alcohol (for those cultures who don't subscribe to those particular poisons, I leave it up to the reader to substitute). How many people dies every year because of those two? And not just from the direct causes (alcolism / lugn cancer) but from side effects such as the users killing others.

    So the point is, games are far less dangerous than alcohol and nicotine. Fix those problems first instead of whining about obvious cases of mental illness where society is unwilling to find and treat the people who are sick.

    Now move along, nothing to see...