'Boozy Gamer' Researcher Questioned

Via GameSetWatch, a Gamespy interview with Sonya Brady, the person who ran the research study we reported on a while back. The one that claimed gamers enjoy getting high, drinking alcohol? From the article: "What kind of feedback have I received? My feedback from research colleagues and other older adults has generally been positive. What I find most interesting is the feedback I have received from adolescents and young adults. Some people are interested in learning more about the research, even if they are skeptical of the results. Other people have been very angry."

Comments

Boozy Gamer?

[Saven Marek]

When I saw "Boozy Gamer" I thought for a minute I was reading about some future Ubuntu release.

Explain to me...

[Bieeanda]

...how gamers are any different from other [young] adults, in that they as a group tend to enjoy drinking and experimenting with drugs? For that matter, how are 'gamers' defined as separate from young adults as a general population?

And for the question of the year: Who really gives a shit? Come on, young people are demonized as a matter of course, particularly for drinking or doing drugs. Trying to draw a causal link between games and that sort of behavior is unnecessary.

Re:Stupid headline...

[halivar]

Now what am I going to do with my afternoon?

Get drunk. Play a game.

Further research needed (and get better summaries)

[the_demiurge]

The original research said that a group of people were made to play either GTA or the Simpsons driving game (Hit and Run). The people who played GTA had more permissive views of drug uses than the people playing Hit and Run. Assuming that their methodology for those results are valid, the research still leaves a lot of questions unanswered:

What if they were made to play other sorts of games? What would be the differences between Katamari Damacy and Tetris, for example.

What if they were exposed to other sorts of things? What would be the difference between playing GTA and watching Casino? Or between watching football and watching fishing.

I think more data is needed to avoid making an oversimplified generalization from these results.

People don't like to be questioned

[SmallFurryCreature]

If you are slightly older and wiser then your average teenager, you might have seen similar reactions to other studies.

Believe it or not young ones but there was a time when some people claimed smoking wasn't just not bad for you but actually GOOD for you. Boggles the mind doesn't it? You can imagine that smokers having grown up with idea that smoking a good thing didn't react all that well when people started telling them how bad it is.

Even worse when smoking parents were being told they were harming their childeren.

It is a sorta holy war. A constant one is the debate as to who is right when it comes to working hours. The americans with long working weeks or the europeans with short ones. Part of the problem is perhaps that their is no right answer but I think the main reason that such a discussion always becomes a flame war is that each side feels themselves being attacked for a fundemental part of their livestyle.

To test the effects of violent games on gamers lets use another hobby but one where we have very clear examples of the violence it generates. Soccer.

I am sure even americans have heard about violent soccer fans (hooligans) that are a major problem in europe and have been since I was a kid. Almost every match needs a sizable and costly police force to keep things under control. Even with this huge cost to the taxpayer it still frequently goes wrong and you the results are very clear closed of city centers that look like a disaster struck and a constant bill for public transport in destroyed vehicles (and a train costs a lot to rebuild).

Now I challenge you with this. You go on public tv in europe and claim that soccer is the cause of this violence and that restrictions should be put in place to curb the violence. Good luck.

The evidence of violence is very clar as is the link. If a hundred hooligans go out of the stadion and on a rampage it doesn't take a genius to figure out that if you forbid audiences at soccer matches you would limit the problem.

Hell, even simpler suggestion. Let the soccer clubs pay for the police presence. They make billions they can afford it. Good luck again.

So, nobody likes to be told that their hobby is the cause of problems. Nobody likes to be told what they should do.

So is that strange that gamers react strongly to being told that their hobby is bad and should be regulated or even banned?

It doesn't matter if the accusations hold water. What matters is that your lifestyle is being questioned. The smoker doesn't want to be told to stop smoking, the soccer fan doesn't want to pay for the soccer hooligans and the gamer does not want to be restricted in the games he can play.

Very normal. But is it helpfull?

Smokers have lost, soccer fans hangon because soccer is a billion dollar industry with a wide fanbase. Gamers? Well, we are not exactly popular are we. We don't have the public on our side.

Does it really help our case of "violent games don't cause violence" if we react violently against anyone who claims it? Isn't that rather like claiming "I am peacefull and will kill anyone who claims that ain't so"?

It is easy to feel attacked in your personal freedom but when you attack your enemy for claiming your violent you are only proving his point.

Worse, perhaps we are like those smokers who claim that smoking ain't bad for you. How many gamers are even willing to consider that the link between violence and gaming could exist? Based on past experience, not many. This is another holy war and both sides got their fanatics.

Re:People don't like to be questioned

[Aim Here]

I think you need some facts.

Police forces in Britain already send the football clubs a bill for policing their event. The police don't make a profit but they do recoup a big portion of the costs.

Violence between fans at football matches is very rare these days, due to policing and segregation and whatnot. What violence there is tends to take place away from the football ground itself. If a fight happens between rival fans on a train 30 miles away from a football stadium, how realistic is it to blame the football clubs? Come to think of it, if there is some sort of causing link between gaming and violence, it's likely so subtle and tenuous that you really cannot point any finger of blame at gamemakers, or censor them. You can't say speech isn't speech because if you say something to half a million people, two of them might twist your words enough to use them to kill somebody. Pretty much every preacher, politician or rock star in the land would have to be forcibly silenced if that was the case.

Top football matches in the UK are already rather expensive and the football fans rarely complain, except if venal American asset-strippers happen to take over their club.

Re:Booze and videogames is utterly stoopid.

[SpectreHiro]

Drinking while gaming can be very tricky business, so it pays to put a little forethought into your imbibing. The following tips should help:

1. Choose hard liquor - Drinking beer or wine is too hands on. Try drinks that are effective with quick gulps (whiskey, vodka, tequila, etc). These also lessen your need to visit the piss-bucket.
2. Choose the right time - The best times to drink are A) During level loads, B) While waiting to respawn, C) Before gaming (pre-gaming) and D) While paused.
3. Consider technological answers - There are numerous small pieces of equipment that can ease your in-game drinking, from something as simple as a straw, all the way to Camelbacks and those awesome beer-hats worn at baseball games.

And if drinking is too hard... Try drugs instead.