Slashdot Mirror
Video Racing Games May Spur Risky Driving
kiwimate writes "A study concludes that people who play car racing games may be more likely to take risks and drive aggressively when driving in real life.
According to the article, "The study appeared in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, published by the American Psychological Association"." Just because after I play Grand Theft Auto I want to ram other cars does not mean I'm a worse driver. Honest.
After playing GTA; Vice City, I saw a parking lot full of police cars, and I thought to myself, that would be worth it.
I never did.
Now I broke the ice, everyone else can post there coming-out story.
I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
This is a pretty stupid assertion.
Wouldn't the people most likely to enjoy this genre be predisposed to this behaviour?
Why don't these "researchers" understand the importance of self-selection?!?
And who, according to insurance companies, is the riskiest group? Teenage boys.
Next study! People who date teenage girls are risky drivers!
People who play racing car games may be more likely to be seagulls.
Question everything
Crashing constantly in GTA actually makes me more careful by fear of having as many accidents as in GTA
You just got troll'd!
Or are people who are more likely to like taking risks the one's that are playing racing video games more often?
Say it with me: Correlation does not imply causation.
watching 'care bears' for an extended period of time will make you a more caring and sensitive person.
Any time i see the 'video games made me do it' excuse, I think that the appropriate sentence should be forced to watch 'Barney' for an entire month. Since the person is so easily influenced, this should work perfectly for rehabilitation.
People who like to drive cars really bloody quickly and dangerously, surprisingly, also like to play computer games where they can drive cars really bloody quickly and dangerously. Other people on the otherhand, who are less interested in killing themselves in flashy cars, prefer other types of games. Sounds a bit like reverse causation? Really should be a cohort study.
Routinely carjack cars and then drive them 90mph in the wrong lane looking for the biggest collision I can cause.
:-) ) come from not being patient enough. They have nothing to do with speeding or aggressive driving.
Hehehehe..
Most of my driving mistakes (no collisions
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I wish real driving were like video games. I want a car you can total, push "X" and it's totally repaired and back on the road, and somehow you emerged from the fiery wreck fully conscious and without a scratch.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
I've seen this after movies too. I remember well seeing "Gone in 60 seconds" (when it came out, long ago) and then watching all the idiots do burn-outs from the theatre and go peeling out. The funny thing was that apparently the cops were aware of this too, so they had some cars strategically placed after the shows ended.
Of course one could still bring up the cause->effect arguement, as it's unclear as to whether or not people drive like idiots due to game/movie influence, or people who drive like idiots like those types of games/movies.
Definitely not GTA, GTA has the shittiest racing system ever included in a game. The checkpoints are retarded. If GTA made people go out and act like GTA then it would lead to lots of intentional rammings (not to mention murder, carjacking, burglary, and all-around thuggery.) I think that this is quite plausible; however, it's not the law. I actually drive SLOWER than I did before I became a Gran Turismo junkie, but it really taught me to follow a line, to preload, etc etc. I think a lot more about what the suspension is doing, for example, when I make a turn than I did before.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yeah, after playing Burnout for a few hours at my friend's place, I had to REALLY concentrate to get out of the new driving techniques I learned. It was a great exercise in actively brining something I do rather unconsciously back in to the main focus of my mind.
... I kept peering around corners wanting to shoot fire extinguishers.
Not that I ever actually did it.
Of course, if I could've gotten my hands on that shrink ray gun thing...
Anyone else find it curious how almost overnight after the dems took congress cnn started spouting democrat issue/platform centric stories? I guess it's probably just a sign that the democrats taking back congress inspired this type of study to take place. But then again, what's with the sudden use of the words "assault weapon" in every gun related story?
Sounds like another one of those studies that "show" that the virtual world of video games has a direct correlation to real world behavioral patterns. Just like the violent fighting and war simulation games, people have been driving like idiots for years before video games ever surfaced. Just ask your grandpa about his days as a hot rodder or hell, just pick up a Hot Rod magazine and flip to thier now monthly coverage of "Hot Rod History".
Aggressive driving and street racing have been part of all motoring cultures since the start. The first guy with a car was a neat idea and a novelty when it first hit the cart paths. Not until the second guy to get his car running did anything really take off. You know what the first thing that they did with those cars was? The took them to the beach and raced them to see who's car was faster!
Yeah, video games cause violence, aggressive driving and other degenrate bahvioral patterns. I suppose next we'll hear that Liesure Suit Larry has cause an entire generation of males to have a propensity towards visiting hookers?
I don't see what the big deal is anyways. I've been playing racing games for years, and if there is one thing that i learned its that no matter how bad of a wreck you get in, you can always just start the track over.
Browse at -1 to keep an eye out for abuses.
I played GTA pretty seriously for awhile. The sense of freedom was amazing.
When I first played (and when my wife first played), we tried to obey the traffic laws and stay in the proper lane. After realizing how pointless that was, we were driving on sidewalks, ignoring pedestrians, and laughing with glee when running red lights.
Your brain is very good at unlearning old skills and relearning new ones. The catch is that when doing very similar things, it's easy for one set of skills to bleed into another. Switching from throwing a whiffle ball to a softball requires a period of adjustment. Driving like an insane maniac to a law abiding citizen requires a degree of concentration.
The vast majority of people will likely use caution, focus, and not have any problem at all. Some folks, however, may have difficulty making the switch. Ban all driving games? That seems a bit silly. Banning cell phones or music in cars would likely have a more concrete effect.
I can attest that the study is correct in its results.
My grandmother never played GTA, and she only drives in the city, always in 1st or 2nd gear at most. She never had any serious accident.
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
This is the only "video games make you want to do things" studies I have ever agreed with but after playing racing games in which I always try to ram people off the road I admit that I want to try it more in real life. Now have I ever acted on this? No but I admit its there.
Of course, I am reefering to when I see a flower on the side of the road I want to pick it, and add it to my inventory. I swear those little pink flowers look just like Mageroyal. and the bruiseweed looks like bachelor buttons...
No real plants were harvested for the making of this post.
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
... And I don't mean that it's a dupe. Didn't we hear this stuff about games like Grand Theft Auto? IIRC, those who wanted these games banned used the case of Devin Moore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devin_Moore) to illustrate this (it should be noted that he was represented by Jack Thompson)?
I don't see hordes of psycho people running around with anti-social behavior that can directly be traced back to video games. If there are people out there who do have anti-social behavior, maybe it's due to the fact that they were kind of out there to begin with.
Just a thought.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
A study has shown that people who are generally behaving badly in trafic are more likely to enjoy games like GTA. Other research has shown that people who are using have had an X-Ray taken of a leg are more likely to have had a broken leg. This clearly shows the dangers of X-Ray imaging. Statistical Relation != Cause
I'm a keen driver, and a strong advocate of road safety, so I've looked at a fair bit of the research that's available. Most variables that have been found to affect driver attitude are based on something that is happening while they're actually in the car: things like tiredness, drink and drugs obviously have an effect, but so do things like the type (actually, speed) of music you're listening to. (Some groups of drivers also generally exercise better judgement regardless of the immediate circumstances: to find out who, take a look at what counts for/against you when your insurance premium is worked out!)
Then again, perception of speed is also affected by recent experience: think how slow it feels when you come off a high speed road into a town, even if you're doing the limit around town, and compare that with how that limit feels when you're just starting driving and already in town. That's perception rather than attitude and judgement, though.
So while the conclusions here seem plausible, they're also a bit unusual. I saw a story very similar to this a few days ago in the UK media. Anyone know if these are all the same thing, or there's a recent research trend generating several sets of results in quick succession?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
My 5 year old's driving skills have deteriorated precipitously since he started playing NFS at age 3. I expect him to be on par with everyone else on the road by age 17.
One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
Apparently this study was spurned from interviews in Portland, Oregon. I don't think they've mastered the art of drifting through corners.
We could live in a world without excitement. A world in which we are not stimulated or thrilled. A world in which we could only watch movies or play games approved by the Flanders family of the Simpsons. There will be unbalanced people who will be inspired by what they watch. So instead of collecting cat skulls, they pretend they're the hero of GTA. Or Manhunt. Or Barbie Horse Adventures.
Note that they found a correlation between driving fast and people who play racing games. Maybe people who like to drive fast can't drive as fast as they want, so they pop in a racing game simulater. As far as the shooter game comment, most young men are aggressive to one extent or another. If someone blows off some steam by playing Halo 3, I would prefer that to them blowing off someone's head in real life.
What annoys me most about this sort of study is there very rarely seems to be any sort of effort made to determine cause-and-effect. ie isn't it unsurprising that people who enjoy driving are more likely to be bending the rules on the road? Who plays driving games... young men. Who is the most aggressive / risktaking demographic who will end up taking risks... young men.
Cause and effect are all the wrong way round here.
I'm surprised there's no mention of the Burnout series where one of the core objectives is to go as fast as possible in a short amount of time to cause maximum damage. Some easily swayed sap with a total lack of common sense/inhibition might try to reproduce the multi-bus crasher in one of the later levels!
Actually if anyone is that much of a rube they shouldn't be allowed to even be by themselves without supervision. Once again, the line between reality and video games is very simple and easy to teach to those with a head on their shoulders.
Today's hilarious captcha: bloody
I'm a better driver after I play video games. I learned 90% of what I know about cars from Gran Turismo 3. I can see the lines of a turn, can apply the use of braking and acceleration better, and I am better at avoiding other drivers and retaining awareness of my surroundings. I think bad drivers should play more racing simulators and stop doing so many studies.
"Luck is a tag given by the mediocre to account for the accomplishments of genius." -Heinlein
I guess it is time to start playing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_Driver/
Vi havas e-poston.
Do you want the terrorists to win by not playing Video Racing Games (that) May Spur Risky Driving?
What will your children see in your sad eyes when you tell them that you failed to protect them from Video Racing Games (that) May Spur Risky Driving?
Terrorists don't play Video Racing Games (that) May Spur Risky Driving and that's how they will destroy your country: With superior driving skills.
There! These games will be banned now for the sake of free^H^H^H^Hsecurity and the children.
Next news puh-leeezeee...
It's nice to have some empirical backing for this, but it's kinda obvious that learning to drive in an imaginary world with no physical trauma and unrealistic laws of physics introduces some habits that aren't conducive to safe driving in the real world.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
People that like football are more likely to buy and play football video games. ...And maybe people that get a kick out of driving fast and dangerous also like to play games that let them do the same thing for fun.
Sheesh. Jumping to conclusions is one thing, but these days jumping to causation is a far more widespread.
My cousin bought a simple car racing game targeted for very small kids. His son, a five year old, has never done any games other than Reader Rabbit before. First time he tried it, he eagerly took the control, shot off from the starting point crashed straight into some building and the screen showed a completely wrecked car. The boy started crying, "I broke the car!". Small children are enthused by very mundane things. That boy would play for hours with his video game console's "select language" menu item and repeately power down and power up to watch the booting prompts and flash screens.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
True. I played a good few hours of Colin McRae rally, and then went out for a drive in my Scooby. I suddenly realised that I was driving as I had been, in front of my PC with steering-wheel and pedals, except it was on the quiet evening roads of $country. Quite scary really, although I was ultra-tuned, and alert.
Drive a diesel car now. With no turbo. And a bit of a misfire.
Get your own free personal location tracker
...but I can see how this would be the case. By the way, is there any comparative study about driving after racing go-karts or using bumper cars?
"The researchers then studied 68 men and found those who played even one racing game took more risks afterward in traffic situations on a computer simulator than those who played another type of game."
Oh man - you mean, after playing a game where you're rewarded for driving recklessly, the same gamers drove a little recklessly IN ANOTHER GAME?
SHOCKING.
The end conclusion is totally nonsensical.
"The question of age restrictions, legally or voluntary, should be discussed not only for "shooter" games but also for [racing] games, which have an impact on traffic safety," Kubitzki said.
The research didn't prove that. Correlation != Causality. Why do so many researchers have a problem with this?
Mods: Disagreeing with me != my post Offtopic / Flamebait.
World without hate or war, invaded. Tragic?
What a joke............. I was an idiot drag racing moron when I was kid and there was no racing video games to speak of. It's called being a teenager. All this is; is another excuse bad parents can use about its not my fault that I suck ass at raising my kids and blame a video game instead.
Bad drivers make for bad drivers, not videogames. You might be a little desensitized if you play racing sims or games that reward reckless driving, but even real race car drivers suffer the same desensitizing and thats more serious. Experiencing 200mph IRL is not the same as experiencing 200mph in a videogame. Those guys feel that driving on the freeway is a crawl.
You constantly struggle for self improvement - and it shows.
Hooray for bad Engrish on fortune cookies
So evidently, it's actually imagination (or loud music) that causes incautious driving. We should enact bans immediately.
In racing (and crashing) games, there is an element of simulation. So having taken risks in the sim, is a player more likely to take similar risks in real life? Maybe. And after countless simulated crashes, maybe these drivers are more qualified than others to take risks on the road (not that it's any safer)... This is true of a lot of games: simulation and mastery of complex situations can lead to altering one's behavior in rl, potentially in both positive and negative ways. Now can we fault the makers of the game for any of these alterations? I don't think so...
Somewhere high above the planet's surface, Jack Thompson's parachute opens, and he begins his slow descent in another mission to save the world from video game-inspired horror. God speed, you American hero!
I quote:
"A study concludes that people who play car racing games may be more likely to take risks and drive aggressively when driving in real life."
Well yeah, people who play tennis MAY be more likely to molest small children but that's a pretty big may. Research that needs to resort to "may" often suggests that it's actually rather inconclusive but would like to make itself sound important anyway so that sites like Slashdot post it.
Just to emphasise this, FTA:
"The researchers then studied 68 men and found those who played even one racing game took more risks afterward in traffic situations on a computer simulator than those who played another type of game."
Gee, imagine that, people who play computer games understand that there are no consequences of driving recklessly in a computer simulator (aka just another game).
After I play GTA, I want to go up to stopped cars, open the driver door, punch the driver in the head, drag them out of their car, steal it and drive off.
And I can't even drive.
Xenu loves you!
Being an avid Burnout 3 and Burnout Revenge player, I'd say playing these games increases my reflexes to unexpected terrain pop-up in real life.
One time, after playing Burnout Revenge for about 6 consecutive hours, I went to go get some energy drink from the grocery store. Of course I found the secret shortcut through my neighborhood and behind the store, when out of nowhere a semi-truck was reversing from the store's loading dock right in front of me. My instinctual Burnout skills kicked in a swerved and avoided him and made it to the store safe and sound.
Granted, had I not been playing Burnout Revenge for the past 6 hours I probably wouldn't have been going 90mph behind a grocery store, but that's besides the point.
I always had this problem after a marathon session of Super Mario Kart or Mario Kart 64. I was all over the road, and a power slide couldn't save you...
I can drive faster, but also much better, and I'm much more aware of what my car is and is not capable of.
Of course, I recognize that my car and the roads are more variable and probably less ideal than most of the simulations, and the ramifications of mistakes are much higher. So I leave bigger margins. I guess other people maybe don't have that viewpoint. Maybe they would have been reckless drivers anyway.
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
People who like to drive dangerously IRL have a preference for car racing games?
Did they rule that out?
---
"The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
I'm not going to say much, but I will tell you it was about the same time Need For Speed Hot Pursuit was still new that I found out a 1985 Honda Accord could survive city dumpsters & 1-2 feet of air under the tires.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
As a long time motorcyclist, and big fan of the game Road Rash, I can certainly tell you I was tempted to take more risks after a multi-player race fest at the office. I usually disciplined myself to wait 15-20 minutes after playing before heading home. Some of the "default driving decisions" were changed after playing the game for a while. They all reverted back eventually, but hoping on the bike right after playing for an hour was NOT a good idea.
I don't know why GTA is always mentioned when somebody talks about games involving cars ...yes it's a driving game, but there's a big difference between driving a car to mow down people and driving a car to win a race. The former is just silly and uses the car as a vehicle (pun intended) to drive (pun intended also) a story or a plot. The latter is, depending on the game, a true test of how driving is supposed to be done, or not done.
True story, as it just happened a couple of months ago: For the first time in my life my car severely fishtailed on me and without ever having experienced it before in real life, I knew what to do in that I had slammed enough rally cars into the snow in various games like GT4 to know "oh, when the car goes like this, I should do that..." and I translated my controller movements into real turns of the wheel. And it worked! I got out of it and kept going.
In this case I feel like my time with GT4 made me a better driver because I recognized a situation I had never experienced in real life but had so many times in the game that I was able to "figure it out". I'm not even going to pretend I'm ready to take an Aston-Martin Vanquish out on the Nurenburg, but I get the difference between "real" driving and "fantasy ha-ha no big deal if I crash a $600k car into the wall at 200mph" type.
Frankly, if I really had a Vanquish, I'd be too nervous about getting it into an accident that I doubt I'd ever leave the garage.
after playing Vice City a long while I did start thinking differently in the car... not necessarily more recklessly, but I envisioned the same scene in the game as I was driving in... in a weird deja vu sort of way... I do think games desensitize people to simulated activities, driving situations, as well as others. People who are desensitized to activities look at activities more mundanely... dead people don't scare you so much when you see them in person after seeing them in movies a lot... so crazy ass driving may not be as scary after playing a lot of simulated gaming?
Why do you think nascar racers play games to learn tracks? Maybe all the recent collisions in nascar can be blamed on video games? Doubt it, but maybe?
they are more equal to the boys these days than ever before.
and insurance companies are catching on quickly.
of note, in my area on the news when a boy crashes a car or dies behind the wheel it is usually just him or at most one other but girls seem to fill the car which makes their fatal crashes even more so troubling.
as for video games leading to it, if theres money to be had a lawyer will find it
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
... they put people in a fairly realistic driving game where they were perfectly safe from harm and encouraged them to drive badly.
They then put them in another driving simulator where they were also perfectly safe and they drove worse than those who hadn't played the video game.
At not time did they put them in a situation where their driving may have had actual consequences to themselves or others, but they taught them it was fun and safe to drive recklessly in a video game and then put them in front of another video game? Why am I not suprised...?
----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
At least GTA taught me how to cushion the impact of my speeding car by hitting pedestrians.
If anything, video games have made me a better driver. On my way to work, I make sure to do more slide-boosts, more lane changes to avoid bananas, and throw more red shells than ever before. This has given me more time to work and less time to commute (Can anyone say PRODUCTIVITY?). While other drivers are running into explosive snow-men and having their items stolen by ghosts, I'm consistently finding myself at the front of the pack.
Traffic jam? I've found that spiked-blue shells can cut through the thickest traffic in mere seconds.
Some asshole riding my bumper? Let's see how he likes it when he's running into a trail of bananas.
Case and point: Video games have not negatively impacted my driving. Idiot researchers...
The study also found that people who frequently play car racing games are more likely to drive late-model Japanese subcompacts, and modify these vehicles with such embellishments as randomly placed stickers, ugly and near-useless bolt-on aftermarket spoilers, shorter suspension coils, chrome tailpipes, neon undercarriage lighting, and highly reflective aftermarket rims.
Interestingly, no actual performance gains are realized from such modifications.
In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
While on the cell phone trying to follow his directions to get to his house. The bastard could hear me, and was directing me into cul-de-sacs on purpose just so I could "score more points."
I have great friends!
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
You know, after playing Frogger for hours on end, I used to feel like going out and walking across five lanes of traffic and several alligator-infested rivers.
I feel MUCH better now, knowing it WAS the video game's fault.
The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
What about taking risks on a computer simulator. Imagine that!
that being a dangerous driving chav-type tends to cause the playing of GTA, not the other way round... Not that I'm thinking that they're looking at this problem from the wrong direction, or anything...
For most people "good driving" means "The particular way I drive." Drive slow? Slow drivers are good drivers. Drive fast? Fast drivers are good drivers. Drive carefully? Careful drivers are good drivers. Drive recklessly? "Daring" drivers are good drivers.
Nearly everyone thinks they are a better than average driver. They aren't.
Bad drivers have certainly been around long before video games. Hell, I'm sure there were Roman charioteers who yelled at other charioteers, "Learn to drive, ya moron!" That does not in any way imply that video games do not contribute to reckless driving. RTFA, the experiment was well designed.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Say it with me: Correlation does not imply causation.
Yes, it does!
What it doesn't do is prove causation. Of course it implies causation. Then you investigate that implication.
Psychology isn't science, anyway. Psychiatry (which actually requires an MD), Neurology, etc. is generally scientific. But Psychology is pseudo-science, designed to fill the gap in a liberal arts education after they removed the old-fashion "Bible Study" or "Ethics" courses from the ciriculum.
Research from psychologists is like research from creationists - Technically, we shouldn't discount their research based on who they are, but in reality it is almost always flawed. As a person who lives in a world where I can't possibly check out the details of every single scientific study, a good rule of thumb is to consider every bit of research coming from psychologists to be bullshit.
Oh, you are too lazy? Then I shall help you out. Yes, they ruled that out by taking people who had never played video games, giving them a driving test, having them play the games, and take another driving test.
Sorry, I know you wanted to feel like you were smarter than these scientists and had, like, totally thought of something they hadn't. Maybe next time.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
So, people who had played a driving game are more likely to drive badly in a simulator? ok....
there was a period of my life i played doom for hours a day, every day, for months on end (endlessly downloading free mods)
and, i am an avid gun control advocate. for example, i think the line "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is a hilarious example of propaganda, because it conveniently forgets that a gun is not neutral technology: it is designed with a specific purpose in mind, that enables people to easily express murderous will in a way that without easy access to guns, they would not be able to express
now some of you might say that this represents an interesting bit of hypocrisy on my part: that i am saying a gun enables evil actions, but a violent video game doesn't
exactly. tha tis what i am saying. 100%. ill will, violence, is in the heart of every man and woman (and child: study your average toddler for five minutes). therefore, there is nothing a violent videogame can impart upon a person that is not already there. a violent videogame can not enable someone to think something that they already had thought of before. violent rage and anger is violent rage and anger. it is original sin. we are not born vessels of purity that are corrupted. we are born screaming shit flinging demons (again: study your avergae toddler) that is molded into cilivized human beings. media cannot ENABLE you to violence, but it can enable the HARMLESS RELEASE of violence that already exists in you. it's not like suddenly people started commiting crimes they had never thought of before because of a videogame. are you telling me ancient rome was populated by video game addicts? blamign violent media for the state of the world is a classic bullshit "the devil made me do it" effort at avoiding personal responsibility
meanwhile, a gun is a bit of technology with a specific purpose: to kill people. the argument that a gun is neutral, without intent, is false: millions of hours of mental effort and design went into making a tool that, in your hand, is ideally designed for point and click murder. that has real meaning as to the blameability of a gun
this is real life, not fantasy we're talking about now. most people can tell the difference
now technology IS neutral. something like chemistry, or physics, is neutral. for example, E=MC2 is neutral technology. what does it mean? it doesn't mean anything until applied. a nuclear power plant? not neutral, a quantifiable good. a neutron bomb? not neutral, a quantifiable evil
likewise with guns: a blasting cap is a quantifiable good: it is meant, it is designed, for the purpose of shaping hills for highways, for example. what is a gun meant for, designed for? the underlying chemistry for a blasting cap and a gun is the same, and is neutral. and of course you can use a blasting cap to kill someone, or use a gun to do good: compete in target practice, announce the start of a race, etc. but these examples are ludicrous: you can't argue that these esoteric uses have any bearing on what 99.999% of guns or blasting caps are INTENDED for
INTENT. it's a magic word. it changes the argument
so yes, guns kill people. and if you parse my words above, i am not destroying the concept of personal responsibility by saying that: if you play violent videogames for 10 months straight, and go out and kill someone, you, and YOU ALONE, are responsible. because fantasy, media, cannot enable you to do something in real life. actually, the opposite: it can enable the harmless release in fantasy of pent up energies that might be imparted on someone else in real life. violent videogames are catharsis, a bleeding of ill will that already exists in us, each of us. a violent videogame can NEVER impart into someone a murderous will in real life that would not exist had the videogame not existed. to say it can, is to buy the lame excuses of a criminal
but, in real life, if you had a piece of technology which made it easier to express your ill will? that has real meaning. guns ENABLE evil. they are DESIGNED to be efficient killing machines. if you honest
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Wow, I should not post when knackered.
See subject.
;-)
After a day flying down the slopes or railing through twisty, rocky singletrack, I think I'd be much more prone to 'risky driving' than after playing some video game that does nothing to put you in the element. After a day of *actually* dealing with speed and dangerous conditions on much less stable 'vehicles' you tend to be a bit more confident on a relatively tame road.
And the WRX really does need to be properly driven every now and then
Last time I had one of these urges, the Police found me crashed into a tree with a hand of bananas, an assortment of turtles in the trunk, and a bag of hallucinogenic drugs.
The mechanics also said that it's the first time they've ever seen mushrooms stuck in a gas tank.
"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson
It's true, after hours of playing Burn Out, hopping in the car for for a trip to the store have me playing with visions of swinging over into oncoming traffic and going big. And ironically, I was in a serious accident, totalled the car, but walked away from it without a scratch, just shaking the glass out of my hair and clothes. (miracle of modern engineering) So I have this vague notion that it might not be so suicidal.
Of course it's all insane. But I can't deny the thoughts haven't happened. GTA though? Naw, never went driving afterward and though, oooh, lets go kill hookers!
OT, I'm not into the mission so much as just cruising around, running from cops a little(!) and bumping the radio. That's the best part of those games, being able to free-wheel around for a bit...the hell with the silly missions.
Wow, this just gives me flashbacks of a certain...incident...after I played Katamari Damacy, involving a medicine ball and a cat...
...city slickers that play Postal 2 may be more likely to dress up as hicks and put a cat on their shotgun as a muffler.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
I would really like to see a similar study, where they replace "video racing games" with the latest James Bond movie, and see what kind of response they get. On a broader scale, a study to answer the following question: "Does ___ influence (violent behavior | aggressive driving | general bloodthirstiness)?" and fills in the blank with a book, a movie, and a video game with the same subject matter, and see which has the greatest effect.
the entire study never had people actually drive a car, after playing the video games they were moved to a 'simulator'. Isn't a simulator just another video game??
Simulators pose no consequence to ones actions. consequence is what creates restraint. therefore, moving the participants to a simulator can not prove or disprove what the study set out to show. There were never any real consequence applied to the subject so what is being measured?
I'd like to see the results of this study after the subjects have viewed The Fast And The Furious 1 and 2. It's amazing that Violent and sexual movies are a-ok but games are seemingly always held to a higher standard. Books are also fair game for the most pornographic and violently graphic scenes, and are available for all.
-Gel214th
Anybody remember Stunts? Back in the early days of polygonal graphics, you could design your own track and then run around it in various simulated vehicles. The physics model was rather Dukes-of-Hazzard-ish when it came to jumps. At my dorm, one guy became so notorious for a really nice (I hear Dixie playing) jump followed immediately by a 90-degree turn that you *never* made, that these combinations came to be known as Kevin Turns. A typical utterance while driving a newly-designed track was something along the lines of, "Godd***it! Another Kevin Turn!"
Anyway, since my college days, I'm always wary when cresting an unfamiliar rise, even when I'm offline in reality. Apparently there's a circuit somewhere in the back of my brain that is on constant alert for one of those Kevin Turns.
J
Jesus told him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me. - John 14:6 NLT
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
I know that Kirby is directly responsible for an overweight America, so this really rings true for me.
Saving the World: One Drink at a Time
The article dwells on phrases such as "risk-taking" without really explaining what that refers to. Something might qualify as "risky" for a poor driver and as "not risky" for a highly skilled driver. On top of that, there is such as thing as driving "too cautiously" and that can be just as risky. For instance, stopping on an on-ramp and proceeding only when the adjacent lane is clear of cars rather than moving continuously and merging with traffic normally. I'd say the "stopping" is done by overly cautious drivers, but these drivers would definitely not show up in such a study as "risk-taking" people.
So, I basically don't care about what this study has to say considering how much detail is lacking in that report on it.
I like basketball!!1!
... that what we bathe our minds in will affect us.
How and how much it will affect us are debatable, but the standard Slashdot denials seem a bit naive.
In other news, Katamari Damacy has proven to cause Diogenes syndrome (Compulsory Hoarding) in players.
Space Invaders players more likely to become Fighter Jet pilots !
PacMan players more likely to develop eating disorders !
Politicians to start paying to develop games where the player has to vote for them !
Click on my website to download my new creation : a game called "Give me all your money, and pay me hookers"
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Believe me, I hate to admit this.. I'm a huge video game nut, I've been playing them all of my life and the video game witch hunt going on is annoying the hell out of me... but this is somewhat true. Speaking from personal experience...
I'm not the kind of guy predisposed to risky driving, in fact I'm right the opposite, I never speed and if I'm not paying attention when driving I'm more likely to slow down significantly below the speed limit than otherwise. I always make proper left hand turns (god, hardly anyone can do this?) and I always use my signal... but when I play driving games I drive a little faster, and take a few more risks. It's not complete insane or anything, but it is slightly more aggressive driving than I normally would do.
For example, outside of my town there are a couple of 45 degree slopping turns on a highway that I used to pass everyday on the way to and from work. They're just sharp enough that most people slow down for them, but truthfully you don't have to. When I was playing Gran Turismo A-Spec I was inspired to take those turns at higher and higher speeds. I never got completely wreckless with it and never had any problems because of it (no wrecks) but I definitely was thinking of the game when I did it and I'd say I was inspired to try it because of the game.
Now it's been a few years later and I hadn't done that in a long time.. until last fall when I was playing through Need For Speed: Most Wanted. Yep... same thing.
There is a very clear corelation to me between playing driving games and more aggressive driving in my own behavior.
Sigs are awesome huh?
Haven't played a lot of driving games, but I have had the thought "that oncoming car in the other lane's trying to get into my space, maybe he carries!" -- drop cloak, tractor, fire fire fire fire.
Which is actually not that different than standard Italian driving (was living over there at the time), so maybe it wasn't the Netrek after all.
You'll have that sometimes...
After particularly long sessions of Burnout, I've had flashes while driving where I just think how cool it would be if I suddenly turned into the opposite lane of traffic or drove through a guard rail. Not suicidal at all, mind you, but strictly thinking how cool it would look.
And yes, I'm being dead serious about this. (No, I've never acted on the impulses!)
I hate to say this, but after an intense session of Most Wanted I find myself being more of a lead foot and not having patience for slow drivers. Now granted, I'm like this without playing Most Wanted, (1994 300ZX Twin Turbo will do that to you), but I catch myself being even MORE aggressive after a couple hours of Most Wanted. I'm an adult and should be able to control myself, but it really does something to you psychologically I think. I guess this study proves what I already suspected. That being said, I haven't had a ticket or accident in years so I'm still being careful, just more aggressive with a car that can handle it. It's not like I'm out there flying around haphazardly in a Lincoln Towncar. ()
that picking up, doing, beating up and robbing a hooker would make me fail my driver's test?
My friends and I were playing Need for Speed III and Grand Turismo (IIRC) on the old PlayStation 1. We went out and my friend totalled his sports car with us in it. The weird thing was that the accident was just like the ones in the game.
However, it is a lot different when it happens in real life. In the game, you are not afraid you are going to die. You also do not get to watch the sheet metal on the hood crumple or fluids from severed lines spray the windshield. My other friend learned why you should wear seatbelts even in the back seat.
We walked away more or less unharmed, but it could easily have been worse. People who play such games a lot would do well to remember they cannot do these things regularly in the real world and get away with it.
Given all that, I would generally blame the driver and not the game. My friend was definitely a reckless driver to begin with. Whether the game's similarity to reality is a coincidence or an influence is hard to say.
All data is speech. All speech is Free.
When I was a teen-age boy, we learned our driving skills from "The Dukes of Hazard" and a certain Steve McQueen movie. None of us died, oddly enough, and a little gaol time straghtened most of us out eventually.
Anyway I don't recall any rookie blunders in the '70s or '80s remotely like the attempted stunt driving I have noticed in the last couple of years. Little teen-age girls too; NEVER saw that in the olden days. I have been attributing it to video games because these maneuvers seem born in ignorance of basic physical laws. The ones we learned VERY WELL during the Evel Kneivel period.
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
We have a house rule that you cannot get behind the wheel of a real car until at least 30 minutes after playing Burnout. As it's crash mode is a popular party competition, I'm sure we have saved hundreds of lives with the rule.
Does this mean that those of us who grew up playing the 1980s "fender-bender-and-you-die" games are automatically better drivers? Yet another reason why Gen X is the third coolest American generation behind the Founders and WWII.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_ imply_causation
Oh and for the record, any "race car driver wannabee" worth his salt knows that GTA is NOT a racing game. Yeah it's got cars in it and yes you can drive them with reckless abandon, but for me, that's not *racing*.
Anyone want to hit me up in PGR3 or Forza2 when it comes out, my gamertag is: orbus451
Those who take risks on the road are more likely to enjoy playing computer racing games. I don't know, man, I never jumped on a turtle or ate mushrooms until I played Mario Bros.
No one of consequence
I remember back in the day, I would play marathon sessions of "syndicate" and then go to work at an amusement park. I kept imagining mowing down the crowds of people with a mini gun. lol. Or after playing "lode runner" for hours and then trying to read a book, I would imagine that little guy running across the tops of the words and dropping through the spaces. I think video games do have an impact on your perception, at least in my case. Not that I actually would have ever shot anybody... but I can see how they would have an impact on a relatively normal person... If thats what I qualify as. :)
I played Midtown Madness for years, my favorite mode being the variant where you pick up the gold and run with it. You got the other guy to drop it by ramming his car.
I played GTA for years now too. The level of violence you can get away with in a car there is amazing.
Don't get me started on Burnout 3. I love crash mode.
I have no tickets in real life other than parking, and I've never shot a weapon at another person. I have both a motorcycle and a nice car, as well as a handgun and shotgun for range and skeet shooting. I'm capable of it, I choose not to.
The games don't bleed over into reality unless you let them. The kind of weak minded findings that all these studies come up with boggles my mind. Sweeping generalizations for the loss.
I recently completed a second play-through of Half Life 2 (I haven't had the game long, shutup), and now I feel like I must go out and create havoc for The Man (Our Benefactors) in order to free all people from tyranny (and space aliens)!
However, I haven't been able to do this yet for a few reasons:
- I lack proper armaments. I've gotten the crowbar, and am waiting on permits for the pistol, six-shooter and shotgun, but automatic rifles and rocket launchers are hard to come by, and I don't think anyone has a dark energy gun. Also, I'm having trouble getting my Zero Point Energy Field Manipulator to work (it's great at shocking chipmunks, though).
- Enemies; I don't see a lot of people running around wearing full suits and gas masks, so I'm not sure who to attack. Also, all crabs I've met to this point have eight legs, not four (but I've killed them anyway, just to be sure).
- I don't have a ragtag group of fellow freedom fighters to command. For that matter, nor do I have an old black scientist buddy or his cute, intelligent daughter to help me out. Not even a rogue undercover security guard! Can you believe that?
However, once I have these problems sorted out, you can bet that I'll start my wave of resistance, as Half-Life 2 was such an immersive and moving game that I have no choice but to emulate it.Of course, if I could've gotten my hands on that shrink ray gun thing...
you already did. look inside your pants.
Yeah, that's where they lost me. I don't see how they can draw any conclusions about real-life driving behavior from this. They've discovered that playing one video game can influence one's behavior when playing another, more realistic video game. Woohoo.
But maybe you should read up on what it actually means t ion>here</a>.
<p>So no, logically speaking causation implies correlation. The converse does not hold.
Here in Oregon they run some interceptors because of the freeways. The cars usually are camaros or corvettes and have computer work, stiffer suspension, sway bars, etc. It all depends on the agency and their intentions. The new ones are Chargers, big fat chargers. Of course it's nothing like back in the day when they supercharged and seriously built the cars, but the targets are changing. Back in the day the fastest cars you would come across were big block muscle cars and you just needed to run them down in a straight line. In todays world, the cops are getting far more worried about the imports. When you can pull over a little Japanese car and not know if it's got 80 horse power or 400 horse power, and it will out handle the crown vic in the corners, you really have to start making some tough calls. Of course I'm not talking about a Honda with a wing, I'm talking about a purpose built car and a driver that really has the ability and the desire to get away. Generally the new rules are that if it's risky it's better to just call off the chase and catch them later rather then kill somebody. If a car is running from the cops at over 120, they generally deem that as too hazardous and call off the chase anyway, so no reason to build cars to go much faster. This is why I think they should stop buying Fords and start buying more fuel efficient cars to replace most of their fleets with. I have relatives in law enforcement, and we use to get a good laugh from arguing who could out run who. In the end, you can't outrun Motorola and a radio doesn't get in a wreck. My car might have been able to out corner and had a higher top speed then an interceptor, but it doesn't matter then they can just call in a chopper or phone in a road block.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fitte st
obligatory and probably repetitive just-let-dumb-people-get-themselves-killed statement goes here
I find that hard to believe as if there is one thing I've learned by playing racing games, that's that no matter how good you think you're, you always end up crashing anyway.
So, racing games, should actually make people more prudent drivers...
I've learned not to play Motorstorm before going out.
Really.
-- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
In college one of my friends got me into CART racing. I started doing harmless things like zig-zagging when traffic backed up to "keep my tires hot." I never did anything dangerous, but it must have looked pretty stupid or amusing to other drivers
Yeah, baby! I loved getting on my nitro-feuled crotch rocket and running down pedestrians, beating on cops with a chain, or better yet, kicking the sucker and taking the nightstick out of his hand. Nothing's funnier than running down those old ladies with walkers!
When I get out of prison I might buy a computer!
Fuck those morons, really, they used a simulator to test! OMG. The bad thing is that the headlines would say "Video Racing Games make you a Risky driver" while the actual test is so freakingly dumb and invalid
.. to people who like to drive fast?
To assume a causal relationship is stupid, and it's exactly how Jack Thomson et al twist these sorts of findings.
I bet people who play Second Life or the Sims are more likely to have a myspace page.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
After weeks of playing Gran Turismo 2, especially the new Rally Modes, I was driving to work on a day where it had snowed 4-6". The road back to the industrial park had not been plowed (driven on, but not plowed). I started to intentionally spin out the back end of my FR 1990 325i to drive in a controlled sideways-slide, recover, then do it again the other way. (It was a straight, level road, so it was pretty safe) It was great fun until I neared the entrance to our lot.
About 50-100' before the lot entrance, the road slopes downhill a little. Then, our driveway into the lot goes back up at a slight slope. You could call it a 90 degree turn with the apex at the bottom of both downhill slopes. The (predictable?) result was, as I slowed down and started to turn, at one point, I stopped turning and started sliding. I rolled the car into a ditch onto its side at the lot entrance. I had to crawl out through the sun roof. The other guys from work got the car off its side and back upright, but I still had to get a tow truck to pull it out of the ditch.
Do racing games make me a more aggressive driver? I have to admit that they do. ^__^
I've built up so much character I have an alter-ego
To everyone who tagged this as "obvious": absolutely.
In a past life I was the technical lead on IndyCar Racing II at Papyrus Design Group. After spending all day driving a simulated IndyCar at 200+ MPH, it took some serious decompressing to not end up blowing down the freeway as fast as my real car would allow...
Don't underestimate the power of The Source
A regular group of friends of mine and I used to get together at our local bar/arcade to spend an evening playing Daytona. Admittedly after playing for a few hours I found myself driving a bit more aggressively, but it always passed within a few minutes once I fully came to my senses (I don't drink so alcohol was never a factor).
This study is pure garbage as far as my experiences go. I have mostly played driving games later in life and have actually become LESS aggressive of a driver during this same period.
I have played racing games for a long time. In fact, I love Need For Speed: Most Wanted. However, driving my real car, using a wheel and pedals has not been influenced by driving a lamborghini, using arrow keys and the space bar.
What HAS influenced my driving was attending a defensive driving course (basically racing school) where they taught us to conduct high speed maneuvers and control sliding. Of course this made me more confident that I can drive faster and still remain in control.
I'd also like to make it known that many teenage males play racing games, whereas many teenage girls do not. Yet when the next teenager flys by you at 20+mph over the speed limit look over, they probably have a ponytail. Being a teenage male myself, I can tell you I drive better than any female teen I know.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
Perhaps, video games give us a world where we can try things before having real repercussions, and that is the real problem - not the games themselves.
Perhaps, if the simulation is real enough, it serves as reinforcement for trying similar things in real life, and a place to experiment new things.
For example... if you notice you can get through traffic easier in a game by riding in the bus lane, maybe one day if you are frustrated enough you will actually see that option in real life.
In reality, there are rules and consequences, but those don't exist so much in a game since you can always start over. People tend not to "think outside of the box", but games can cause one to question the authority and usefulness of societal structures that have no inherent meaning.
Now, violence is entirely different than traffic laws...
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
Until Need for Speed can simulate all senses to the point where I cannot distinguish the game from reality, I gotta say that one doesn't influence the other.
Just like playing Battlefield for months won't teach me to be proficient with an M16.
What really disturbs me is not the comment, but the +3 insightful mod. Either the modding system has failed us or /. is no longer "news for nerds."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_ imply_causation
i am perfectly happy to backtrack and say that all of my words should only apply to handguns as you say, not the nebulous concept of a firearm, which can include things like rifles for hunting deer, etc. because my original point was to have people look closely at what a tech was designed for: it's intent. rifles are clearly for hunting deer. handguns are clearly for killing people. so your point is well taken, and i adjust my argument accordingly, thank you for pointing that out
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It's a lot easier to obey traffic laws in real life than in GTA. If anything it will make people better drivers. But it sets them up for a huge disappointment when they are a victim of a crime and they find out first hand how inadequate real life police force is when compared to Vice City.
i said "gun control" and that means many things in many people's minds. what i mean by gun control is a governmental effort to control all gun sales, and monitor evey single gun purchase and by whom. of course criminals will still get illegal guns. that's not a valid argument against trying to assert controlin an effort to minimize needless loss of life: oh look, someone somewhere will cheat, therefore, we should give up all sense of societal responsibility and social conscience. pfft
the problem is, we live in the usa with a real group of people, politically connected and motivated, who thinks there should be no control on guns at all. pure stupidity/ evil on their part
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
mainly because your questions have nothing whatsoever to do with what i said
but good attempt at smearing and stereotyping me. i'm not a leftist. but if in your mind, stereotyping who i am and labelling me with a kneejerk word rather than articulating a substantive response to my argument is how you deal with reality, then who am i to question you, right? far be it for me to interfere with your closed minded approach to the world and actually ask you to think critically about some of your assumptions, some of which may be wrong... but that's impossible, right?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I remember having marathon games of Carmaggedon and leaving the office to discover that just walking down the street without running over people was surprisingly difficult.
I can't see how driving afterwards would be unaffected.
Still I think people talking on their phones while driving probably outweighs any of it.
Not to mention the ones who are text messaging.
If someone is going to murder someone, then they are going to do it, with or without a gun
i think how easy it is to do and how much damage can be done has real bearing on the success rate/ survival rate though
Does a gun make it easier? Yes. Then there should be more precautions against selling a firearm to someone with the mental capacity to kill another human being as a first degree murder.
so we agree. what you said is what i mean when i say gun control.
We should probably place a ban on steak knives as well, because if someone couldn't use a gun to kill someone else, I'm sure a knife up someones sleeve will work just as well.
no. because a gun was designed to kill people. a steak knife was designed to cut steak. i already aplogized to someone else in this thread for talking about guns, and not specifically hand guns. so i rephrase: hand guns are my target, not all guns, because my whole point, after all, is to look at what a technolgoy was INTENDED to do. cutting steak? putting holes in people? it matters, and it makes a difference
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
...about that. I've never played GTA (in any of its incarnations), nor most other racing games since my C-64 days, and I still drive like an idiot :D
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
i said gun control: which means just regulating the sale of all purchases. of course some will cheat, but the existence of cheaters does not mean we give up our human conscience. in other words the whole "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" piece of propaganda is another hilarious pile of bullshit: if you make it hard to get a gun, it's hard to get a gun. for everyone. end of story. period. making something difficult to get matters, regardless of the existence of a black market or not
furthermore, you hinted at the third bit of propaganda: the existence of guns fights fascist governmental tendencies. this makes me role my eyes it's so retarded
#1: fascist ideas can bubble up, just as much as they can trickle down, and fascist impulses are ALWAYS enforced with a gun. in other words, the tendency to reach for a gun is a fascist tendency in and of itself: to go to mortal violence to solve your problems rather than words. in a civil society, therefore, guns have no value, unless you are the ones trying to go fascist
#2: if, and when, the usa goes authoritarian/ dictatorial/ fascist/ etc. (in real life, not in the hysterical fantasies of some that we're anywhere near there) then i fully support handing out guns to whatever resistance that arises. but: we're nowhere near such a state of being, therefore, to talk about guns in the populace fighting fascism (that doesn't exist) is just pure paranoid schizohrenia
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
but the very existence of gun shows proves me right. a temporary forum is no guarantee of my rights to be free of someone questionale having easy access to guns. here today, gone tomorrow, enocurages quick and easy sales, the path of least resistance, too speedy "background checks", etc. gun shows are bullshit. no such thing as stringent monitoring there. an established gun shop, meanwhile, can be strictly monitored
it's almost like gun shows exist strictly because they allow some logistical circumvention of more stringent control of gun purchases. due to the very nature of their temporariness, all gun shows should be banned, period. established, well-monitored permanent gun shops only
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The tired mantra of "correlation!=causation" whenever research gets presented on Slashdot is really annoying. It is true, but so often it is applied incorrectly. If you read the article, you'll notice that they did a true experiment. If you are a researcher and you want to establish causation, one thing you can do is run an experiment, because then you have control over who receives what treatment. If you assign people to groups without bias, and you observe a difference between a control and an experimental group, you have strong evidence for a CAUSAL link. Note the difference between a true experiment and, say, a survey. In a survey you have no control over who gets what treatment.
The key here is that you should be thinking "correlation ALONE does not imply causation". They have MORE than causation; they have results of several true experiments. But "correlation+experimental control" DOES strongly imply causation. In fact, this is the basis of all experimental science.
there it is: the whole point of what i wrote, completely over your head
what is a device INTENDED to do? what is the problem it was designed to solve? what is it's intended purpose in being designed, manufactured, and sold?
INTENT matters
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I am no long time driver just learning in fact, I am from uk and why I don'nt play alot of driving games I have played all recent GTA's, now why this does'nt make me drive dangerous I do have habit of instinctivly trying togo wrong side of rode cause thats what I am used to :)
...or if it was my fellow denizens of highway 101, but in the last couple years it got so bad that it seemed like everytime I came home and calmed down, I'd perfomed some dangerous, pointless butthead maneuver out there on the freeway. I've since rearranged my work so that I don't have to drive much, and that seems to have helped some.
I did have a concrete experience of a game changing my behavior while driving though. Battlezone II involves driving around in tanks, with the fun option of hopping out of your tank, sneaking around on foot, and blasting your opponent out of his tank with a sniper rifle. The counter to this tactic is to never sit still. After about the first 6 months of playing Battlezone, I found that I would get major anxiety sitting at stoplights, and finally figured out that it was my subconscious telling me "MOVE IDIOT! YOU'RE GONNA GET SNIPED!"
They don't have half the effect of coming out of the local go-kart track and driving home :O
;) That effect from the karts could have been quite disturbing for some i imagine. You want to GO-STOP-TURN much quicker than your real car is going to want to !
Hehe, going from very tight little 40mph go-karts on a hairpin indoor track and hopping in my old explorer with worn shocks i actually had to concentrate on driving normally half the way home!
Never had anything near that effect from a video game, those wear off by the first block
Read the article you linked: "In the most literal sense, to say a "Correlation does not imply causation" may sometimes be incorrect." Nerds can be pedants too, you know!
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Hello. I would like to take the opportunity to karma whore. I have noticed this article covers a scientific study whereby the conclusions could be used to support policies that the majority of Slashdotters would oppose. I have therefore correctly concluded that the study is flawed. I am going to take the most simplistic possible interpretation of what the headline says the article says the study covered. I do not have time to read the summary or article, let alone the actual study. I therefore will first write in all caps a statement to the effect that not every correlation can be used to infer causality. My implication is that the scientists have not done any work to check for any other factors at work, and did not use experimental design in such a way as to make the cause and effect directly observable. In fact, I will point out an incredibly obvious possibility why the samples could have been related without the cause and effect. I have discounted the possibility that this occurred to the people conducting the study at any point; the fact that this version of events is more politically acceptable to me is all the evidence I need. I will also make a sarcastic comment to the effect of "how many times do I have to tell people this?". This is an insightful and useful comment, because all scientists read every comment on Slashdot, but due to their stupidity, they have not yet learned to come out with results acceptable to posters. Similarly, they are obsessed with the forwards flow of time. This can be seen by their arrogant announcement of inventions after they are working. Slashdotters are much smarter. Time could flow backwards tomorrow, so it's a good idea to post ways in which existing inventions will never be made to work. Anyway, back to the subject on hand. Since I have declared myself smarter than all scientists, and who are you to argue (as you can't post then moderate), you must clearly now mod me Insightful. Good day.
I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
If you believe correlation implies causation, here's a website you may be interested in: http://www.seanbonner.com/blog/archives/001857.php
We need more pirates!!
i cover both your points, if you had bothered to actually read what i wrote:
#1: a baseball bat was designed to hit baseballs, not people
#2: a handgun was designed to kill people, not compete in the olympics
INTENT of design MATTERS. a tool is not morally neutral. if a device, like a handgun, is designed to easily kill people, that matters
maybe you'll have read this far, in which case, congratulations!
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
NO! This study suggest somthing i don't like, its obviously stupid. Har har Witty correlational joke!
I have recently completed a scientific study which shows that human conception is responsible for 100% of crimes. Furthermore, data from the study indicates that conception is probably always fatal. This study showed that every crime ever recorded was committed by a person who had been conceived, and that the majority of people who have been conceived have died as a result of their conception. Although a large number of conceived persons are still living they seem to share the traits which ultimately led to death in those who have expired, and can be expected to die within the next several decades.
A control group of an infinite number of people who were never conceived turned out to have never been involved in any crimes, and they did not die.
You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
Very true! And it still makes me wonder why people never do studies on football or basketball or other sports players. I know of two girls that were raped in highschool and they weren't by kids who played GTA. They were by the proverbial football players who had too much testerone and not enough common sense or courtesy.
"No one will really be free until nerd persecution ends."
Sure. Company I was writing video games for (Atari) got an arcade version of Pole Position in our group's little area for evaluation. Anyone in the building could wander by and play it.
In the first two weeks after we got the machine, three people totalled their cars on the way home (after having played it for 20+ minutes). One guy flipped his car getting on 101 ("A little too aggressive on that on-ramp, Bob?")
Any sufficiently advanced technology is insufficiently documented.
For a few months, I played Midnight Club III pretty heavily until I beat the game. Now, I notice sometimes while driving that when the road gets really busy, my perception heightens and I begin to see everything in slow motion as if I had the "ZONE" ability from the game. The races in Midnight Club are extremely fast, and I think that winning those races gives me a better awareness of what is actually happening on the road. I think a better study would be to see how games help people become better drivers.
I also wonder how many people go out and buy certain cars because they enjoyed driving them so much in the games. Were it not for Midnight Club, I probably would never have bought the Murcielago.
Not only that, but did they consider that maybe gaining some GAMING EXPERIENCE with the first game, let the subjects feel more confident about PLAYING the second game? so naturally instead of creeping around like they didn't know what they were doing, they played with more confidence (ie. more aggressively).
Geesh. Talk about lame conclusions.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
... those who played World of Warcraft more often resorted to striking wild boars and skinning their hides while on a nature walk than those involved in the study who were not exposed to the video game.
Researchers conclude that if a video game were marketed in which the player was tasked with wedging an opposable digit into the anal orifice of the character, the individuals playing the game would be more likely to pursue a career researching the connections between video games and human behavior.
perl -e "eval pack(q{H*},join q{},qw{70 72696e74207061636b28717b482a7d2c717b343 637323635363534323533343430617d293b})"
is to drive carefully. I'm not talking about Grand Theft Auto or Need for Speed, try Live for Speed, Richard Burns Rally, GTR, etc. Just try running like a maniac in one of those to see what happens. You don't even need to be really fast to screw up big time.
Well, actually, I'm 23 and didn't bother to get a driving license. University is a 15 minute walk from home, if I drove there, I'd spend 10-20 minutes in traffic plus 30-60 minutes on the parking lot line. I can get pretty much anything I want walking less than that. If I need to go downtown, well, there are penty of buses plus the subway to get me there. I live in a big city (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), just thinking about dealing with bus drivers, taxi drivers, and so on, gets me tired. Really, if you ever come to Rio (it's a really wonderful city), do not rent a car. Buy a city street guide (not just a simple map), so you can look up for buses that will lead you to where you want, or just ask someone passing by. It worked for me when I moved in here.
Now, if I lived in the same city as my parents (smaller town, better traffic, must wak more to buy stuff, public transportation sucks, etc), then I'd drive. But definitely, not like I do in NFS, it's a fun game, sure, but if you ever been in a car on a bumpy road at high speed, you would know it's not really a good idea. I prefer to be patient and stay in one piece, without wrecking a car or injuring people.
My anecdote: I used to play the "Daytona" arcade driving game a lot. After a session, I'd get in my Mazda Miata and start driving it the same way. It probably helped that the Miata handles similarly to the "Daytona" cars, only at about half the speed.
You know, the worst drivers I've spotted on the road are the old people that are too old to be driving, and most of them never played a video game in their life. Sure, overly aggressive driving might cause some problems, but I'll tell you, it doesn't cause nearly as many accidents as outright incompetence or inability to conform to normal traffic procedures or speeds.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
FPS lead to increased shootings?
don't you think that it's ok for your grandfather to give up his right to hunt deer with a handgun, or at least find it a lot more difficult to get one to do that, so that potentially hundreds of lives lost to hand guns in cities every year be saved?
and don't say "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns". this is propaganda, an empty half-truth. the truth is that when you make something difficult to get, it's more difficult to get, period, for everyone, including the criminals. the black market exists, it always will, no matter what laws you pass. so the response to whether or not handguns should be more strictly controlled is simply a question of what you think is right and wrong
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I believe this phenomenon is not just contained to video games: I have noticed that after a day of snowboarding, I drive home from the hill quite aggressively for a while, and fully expect my truck to 'carve' into the icy road beneath me just like the board. It takes one slide a few feet past a stop sign for my higher brain functions to take over and start driving properly again - its not until I'm almost home that driving again feels natural.
My wife does the same thing in her Subie, and we both agree it is the 'snowboard effect'.
Personally, I was driving risky before playing the games and long before. But playing games like Forza taught me a respect for certain situations and making saftey out of it. Turning damage on forces you to play nice with walls and other cars. Just because, if you get damaged you will find yourself limping back to the pits and likely losing the race. I've also learned how to avoid risks of losing control. Learning how to control a slide when needbe. When to brake before a corner and when to press the gas in and coming out of a corner. The highlights of how all cars work sliding or otherwise. Sure I still do some risky behavior. But, A) its usually by myself and away from other vehicles. B) never with friends in the car C) never really cutting it close D) in far more control than before. So instead of doing a 40mph corner at a 100mph before such games such as Forza motorsports. I'm usually doing it at 65-70mph so I have a little more room to manuver should I need to. Rather than being on the absolute edge of what my vehicle can do. It also reduces the tire wear significantly. I've only once been in an accident with a curb and thats because I pressed the brakes while in the corner(bad idea) before my forza days and in my early days of driving. Now I brake first coming into corner. Then gas my way around the corner assuming I'm driving a FWD. Or if I think its a safe fun thing to do I'll go back to corner and throw the back end into a slide perfecting the apex and hugging the line around the corner pressing the gas just enough to keep me in a controlled slide and flooring it when I'm ready to leave the slide. Also, my racing simulation driving has probably prevented far more accidents than I can count Hard driving arcade, Grand tourismo, forza, r/c pro am, ect.. I keep a close eye on whats going on around me and in my fifteen years of driving the only accident I've had is the one in my first 6 months which only cost 1500 bucks. Just from watching I've managed to avoid many accidents before they happened. I have had several instances where I predicted it coming and by that time I had already backed up enough away from traffic to avoid it.
Yeah, driving games spur risky driving just as much as Burger Time caused risky eating.
BTW..... Does anybody else remember playing that on the NES, or is it just me?
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
Here's something to think about. If games in a negative sense are as ineffective as slashdot wants us to believe? Then it stands to reason that games are ineffective in the positive sense as well.
I learned in NASCAR 2005 (EA):
10. you can always carry more speed through the high line
9. right turns are completely unnecassary
8. sometimes you can get away w/3-wide in a two-lane turn but there's never a happy ending w/4
7. never exceed 55 mph while leaving the gas station (just ask Kyle Busch:)
6. the fine art of the burnout (smoking tires after a win)
5. "reach up there 'n pull them belts tight ONE MORE TIME!" (o.k., that came from Fox but had to throw it in)
4 a. red means stop
b. yellow means caution
c. green means RESTART!!!
3. never bump-draft into a turn - only on the straightaways
2. MUFFLER?!? we don't need no stinking muffler... bwa-ha-ha-ha!
1. BOOGITY! BOOGITY! BOOGITY! Let's go racing boys!!! (ditto #5)
Yes, some people MAY drive like they do the games they play, but what about real racing, like NASCAR, INDY CAR, F1, DTM, Rally driving, GO Karts,...etc. has a study been done on those people to see if they drive more aggressively(on public roads) than anyone else?
As for insurance companies, they are all sexist, putting rates up for males, yet more females have accidents, just look at their claim lists.
What you say, males have more accidents, NO THEY DON'T!
I'd like for once for these articles to not assume I'm too stupid to wonder how exactly the tests were performed. Anyway, is it not possible that those who play these games with risky behavior are more sensitive to their own risky behavior in real life? How do you account for this? And why don't you compare the actual driving record versus taking one's word for it? They might be then able to correlate how long after playing games for what duration that these alleged acts of bad driving occurred. Then you can tell me when I can drive on the 405 after playing Burnout 3 for a few hours ... bastiges.
I don't know... I had to delete GTA from my computer because I was becoming way too agressive; destroying car after car while trying to run over pedestrians. (The damn light poles in RL don't break off and fall away as nicely as the ones in GTA.)
-
...is the tags applied to this story: "duh" and "obvious". So when a study comes out that implies a link between racing games and dangerous driving it is "obvious", but when a study comes out that implies a link between violent games and violence it is shouted down as blasphemy? I don't get it.
That's an easy question to answer. We don't do these studies against sports because the people making the laws were brought up to revere them. In fact the majority of our population really believes that sports heroes, music idols, and the like are better people than others, that they have more valid views, et cetera. For example they always trot our celebrities to talk about the danger of climate change, as if they knew one fucking thing about it... When gamers become celebrities to mainstream society, which will happen if professional gaming ever takes off more throughout the world, then you're going to see the end of this "are videogames bad for society" shit. At that point we'll have "are space aliens bad for society" or "is using the fuck-o-tron for hours every night turning us into a planet of cock zombies" or some other ignorant crap.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I think most games contribute to faster reflexes. As your reflexes go up, so does your intolerance for driving like a grandmother. It's like saying that exercise gives you more energy. It's kind of obvious.
Most of the people I know who drive real slow are the same people who won't play today's video games because they complain about too many buttons. Why should I be forced to drive like a snail cause everyone else is retarded? I'm not saying we should drive like we do in video games, but 35 mph is parking lot speed to anyone who regularly plays fast moving games.
Sure, most people are sane and make a big joke out of this. But to think that violence in video games doesn't contribute to violent actions is completely ignorant. Real accidents and real deaths really do happen as a result of some people's minds having been conditioned by video games. There's Columbine, that highway shooting, and recently where I live, there was one incident where two people in fast expensive cars were racing and killed someone. The cops found a copy of GTA on the passenger seat. On the other hand, it might make some people that would otherwise do something dangerous, realize that racing can be dangerous, and might actually choose to not cross that line. Should we limit the amount of violence in video games? Do we want any limits at all? Do we want anarchy? Do we want any society at all? Do we really not care or give a crap to whatever happens? Yes we need to limit the amount of violence. The ratings aren't working. Ratings are more of a special macho kiddo stamp of approval. I'm too lazy right now to come up with something that'll fix it. I'll leave it to the government. Hello-ho ! MacFly-hi ! Work to do !
Thanks for pointing that out. I should've elaborated earlier. In the scheme of TFA, correlation does not imply causation in the most literal sense, but it may imply causation in other studies.
In a logical sense it may be untrue to say the following about a specific claim: an established correlation between alpha and beta does not imply a relationship about alpha and zeta. The reason is because in some cases, a relationship beta happens to be a "necessary circumstance" for the existence of zeta. In the world of social science research, studies of correlation are used to suggest causal relationship, but it's rarely the case that they would (or could) prove that the studied correlation is a "necessary circumstance" for a causal relationship between the studied population and the causal relationship being proposed.
If, however, they were able to obtain driving records from a large number of gamers and compare them to driving records of non-gamers of similar socio-economic backgrounds and ages, then a logical argument might be reasonable that alpha implies zeta, in the logical sense, depending upon the methodology.
For example, I still almost get myself killed every time 'Black Bettie' comes on.
Only because the general population uses the term "imply" in a different context to mathematicians/statisticians/logicians.
The original objection to "correlation does not imply causation" is as flawed as objecting to "an astronaut will weigh less on the moon" because one can confuse mass and weight. The definition intended is clear from the context, and the statement is 100% correct. It isn't pedantry to object to the phrase, it's ignorance.
So they're saying that they let people play a driving video game, then put them in a simulator... which is still just another video game, only the scoring is different.
In other words, people were still in a video game driving a pretend car.
I don't believe this has any bearing on real driving. If they let people play GTA and then put them behind the wheel of a real car and had them drive an obstacle course, then I'd be interested in the results.
Did you ever get the feeling the story is too damn long and in the present tense?
I think you'll find that it goes a little like this: Those who are most likely to take risks and enjoy driving aggressively on the roads are also most likely to enjoy playing car games.. Who would have thought..
Never happened. True story.
Many comments here seem to imply a causality between playing games and reckless driving, one that isn't put forth in the article. I'm sure those who play video games are higher risk drivers, but not BECAUSE they play those games. Most likely it's those who are high risk drivers that are attracted to such games. I know it's certainly true of myself :)
Yet another stupid and probably wrong conclusion by reporters and psychologists.
Might it be possible that people who drive in an aggressive manner are more likely to be attracted to driving games than people who drive in a defensive manner? Might that be a better explanation of the correlation than "driving video games make people drive in a risky manner?"
Support SETI@home
This just in: Katamari Damacy players may be dangerous drivers.
A session of Go-Kart racing will also affect your driving. One time, driving back home after having a Go-Kart session with friends, I took a right hand turn, kart style. The rear end of my car lost traction, and I power slid for a second. I have a front wheel drive car. It was on tar. I took extra care with my driving, for the rest of the journey. It frightened the hell out of me at the time. I'm just glad that I instinctively controlled the slide, there were not many cars on the road at the time, and there were no police either.
All i know is that I drove aggressively before I even owned a a videogame console, so I can't blame it on that. But i crash a hell of alot more in the videogames than in reallife(zero).
This would mean there is hope that dating simulators may get us laid.
Table-ized A.I.
Anyone remember back when car dealerships used to distribute custom versions of the PS2 game, Gran Turismo, featuring certain vehicles customers would come in to test drive as a means of advertising? If they are still doing these kinds of promotions, I wonder what kind of effect this will have on the dealerships actually allowing test driving of these vehicles in the future... or even allowing test driving of any vehicle.
8==8 Bones 8==8
I played videogames a lot when I was a teenager. It didn't make me drive faster or slower, being a teenager made me drive faster and take corners hard even on wet roads. Hey, people do stupid things.
But I'll credit Gran Turismo for the fast reflex and know-how to stabilize the vehicle before ending up in a ditch (embarrassingly in a ditch, not dangerously).
I can snake even better in real life!
Mr. Period: Nine is the one that's right by ten!
Nine: One day I will kill him. Then, I will be Ten.
I have been playing driving/racing games since long before I had a license, and I feel that playing those games actually made me a better driver. I know how to accelerate and how to stop, and how to avoid an accident. I have a clean driving record, but I do enjoy such driving games as Need For Speed Most Wanted, Burnout Revenge, Gran Turismo, and Ridge Racer. I have a driving simulator on my computer called Live For Speed. It's fun, and very realistic (except the dying part). It's games like these that keep driving fun to me. If it wasn't for them, this daily task of driving back and forth to work would become droll and boring, and I probably wouldn't pay as much attention to the road, or even care. Sure, I've had temptations to try the things I've done in videogames, but I know that the physics and control in the real world isn't the same, and let's face it, the cars in the game are in much better shape than my POS.
People who pass me fast
..Right
I side draft like I am blocking! (Try passing in slow lane, oops I got close to contact, did it scare you)
Sometimes I get within inches on the expressway
If video games influence, Nascar is a bad influence
Half a dozen people have already replied, but I think I can do even better (I'm not a karma whore, I just provide certain services to lonely... oh, never mind).
:. C (by 1, 2 therefore it is cloudy)
The problem is in multiple meanings of 'imply'. In casual use, 'imply' is synonymous with hint, suggest - e.g. How dare you imply that about my mother.
In formal logic, 'imply' is the English language way of saying a conditional; often symbolised by an arrow. A logician might say "Rain implies that it is cloudy", which could be represented symbolically and used in a logical proof like this:
R = It is raining
C = It is cloudy
1 R -> C (Premise, if it is raining then it is cloudy)
2 R (Premise, it is raining)
3
Note that in the logical statement R -> C, if R then always C, and if not R then maybe C anyway. If it is raining then it is always cloudy, but it could be cloudy without raining.
So, unfortunately, in the casual sense correlation does imply (hint, suggest) causation - but in the logical sense correlation does not imply (necessitate) causation.
.evom ton seod gis eht
The thing with skids is that you have to turn in exactly the *wrong* direction in order to regain control. I've only lost control of my car twice in my life. Both times I instinctively did the right thing, which meant *turning into oncoming traffic*, and didn't crash either time. I didn't learn that from driving - I learned that from the thousands of times I've played racing games and spun out there.
Of course he has muscle memory; he got it when he learned to drive the car. He also got a completely separate set of muscle memories from playing the game. They are essentially independent of each other, and muscle memory gained from using a gamepad isn't going to help you with a steering wheel.
But here's the kicker - the game did save him from the skid! Muscle memory is only half of the story.
When I'm playing a racing game (or you, or anyone else), I'm gaining low-level muscle memory on how to move gamepad sticks. That's useless in a real car. But I'm also learning high-level stuff about what cars do when I control them. So if I get my game-car in a skid, my brain learns to say "TURN THE WHEEL LEFT NOW!" and the muscle memory goes "OK, MOVING STICKS THAT WAY". When I'm in a real car, I use the other set of muscle memory I got learning to drive - my brain still says "TURN THE WHEEL LEFT NOW!" and my muscle memory now goes "OK, TURNING WHEEL LEFT NOW". The interface might be different, but my intent is still translated to the appropriate action.
"A study concludes that people who play car racing games may be more likely to take risks and drive aggressively when driving in real life."
Another study concludes that people who suck playing a driving game with a proper FFB wheel may be more likely to drive hesitantly in real life.
Myself as a case in point. I lived on the Need For Speed series during my teen years. Other than combat flight simulators the only thing I wanted to do was drive fast.
Now lets look at the accidents and tickets I've accumulated...
Accedents
1 92 Plymouth Sundance Duster, bent up rim for taking a corner at 20MPH when it had black ice on it.
2 92 Plymouth Sundance Duster, forgot to turn my head when backing out of a driveway shared with another house and scrapped the side of the neighbors car doing about 5MPH.
3 85 Chevy S-10, bent up rim for taking a corner at 20MPH when it had black ice on it (that would be the last time that happened, hate Michigan winters some times).
4 95 Ford Taurus, front bumper was run over by one old lady when I failed to see a stop sign in a town I was unfamiliar with and stopped partway into the intersection and she could not avoid me.
Numerous accidents avoided due to my being able to handle driving sideways on snow covered roads or being able to react fast enough to avoid incidents.
Speeding Tickets:
None, 0, nadda.
Obviously all these driving simulations have lead to me being a very reckless driver. Now I don't know if GTA would cause more significant problems than other simulators as I've had no interest in playing the series but this could also indicate that less reckless people (I'm one, I swear!) gravitate to less reckless games.
Because they start with the conclusion that their sponsor chosed and then try to build a study around it?
I'm of two minds.
Living in snow country, I understand there is value in gunning it a little in a safe place to get a feel for road conditions and to remember how to correct out of a slide. Not to say you want to encourage people to power slide through corners and the like but there is something to be said for a good simulation being useful to train a person in emergency reactions.
On the other hand, if a game offers points for running down pedestrians, I can just see this coming up in court. "I don't know what happened Judge! I was distracted doing my nails, on the cell phone or whatever and I just didn't react to brake for the pedestrian for some reason." Being a _very_ cynical urban runner for about 20 years, trust me, we'll see this defense in vehicular manslaughter cases -- and who can say it wouldn't have some basis?
Back when Quake was new, one of my Quake-playing friends commented that it was the best anti-war message he'd ever seen. You play for a couple minutes, and then bang, you're dead, for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Makes you realize how easy it is to be dead when the bullets are flying, he said, and he'd never go to war.
You'll have that sometimes...
Have these stupid fucks not thought along this line (much similar to violent video games)
Its not that the games make these people bad drivers, its just that bad/agressive drivers might just happen to like playing racing games? Cause or effect ffs.
This pisses me off when people try fuck with video games like this. They are not the fucking problem.
- White Knight of the Order of Mihoshi Enthusiasts