Slashdot Mirror
Video Game Conditioning Spills Over Into Real Life
doug141 writes "Lessons learned in video games may transcend computers, PlayStations and Wiis. New research suggests that virtual worlds sway real-life choices. Twenty-two volunteers who played a cycling game learned to associate one team's jersey with a good flavored drink and another team's jersey with a bad flavored drink. Days later, 3/4 of the subjects avoided the same jersey in a real-world test. Marketers and lawyers will take note."
It seems very strange to suppose that intentionally creating an association between visual and taste stimuli would magically not work, just because a video game is involved.
I mean, people have been learning things on television screens for decades. And projection screens for decades before that. What on Earth is surprising, or even interesting, about showing that putting a game controller in a person's hand doesn't thwart this method of learning?
-Peter
This has nothing to do with "lessons learned from video games" and says everything about the power of marketing.
The shouldn't come as any surprise. Computer simulations are routinely used for training and conditioning in a variety of situations from flight training to military applications.
Twenty-two volunteers who played a cycling game
Good to see they're using a nice large group of test subjects.
The last thing the videogames industry needs to every game festooned with ads for products the gamers would never buy in the first place.
First you bitch that you want the virtual worlds to be as realistic and lifelike as possible.
Then, you bitch that there are now ads in your virtual world, which of course is nothing like the real world(yes, that is sarcasm you smell)
(Goldmember) This is no pleasing you.
How is this different from going to a live game and drinking a certain brand of beer while you're in the stadium??
As others have pointed out, the world is full of stuff we associate that way. Video games are hardly unique.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
The last thing the videogames industry needs to every game festooned with ads for products the gamers would never buy in the first place.
I know, I'm never going to buy "bad flavored drink" no matter how many jerseys I see it on.
I think you may be draws a faalse dichotomy.
The first one is probabyl refering to look (tectures) and physics, while the second is advertising.
At least when I say 'real as possible' I am referring to look and behavior of objects.
I don't mind advertising, just as long as it's a natural fit in the game, and not some 10 second cut scene of someone drinking a soft drink.
Of course that won't happen becasue advertiser want to 'grab your eyes' and in order to do that they must stand out. So instead of a racing car with stickers from advertiser you would expect, we will get flashing ads, ads on the car radio, ads when the character watches TV, and so on.
Plus, if game companies want to be advertising companies that gets eys with games, then games should be a hell f a lot cheaper.
Google is an advertising company that get's eyes with a free and simple to use Search engine. A search engine that cost a big ol' pile of cash to run.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
First you bitch that you want the virtual worlds to be as realistic and lifelike as possible.
Then, you bitch that there are now ads in your virtual world, which of course is nothing like the real world(yes, that is sarcasm you smell)
What? Who wants games to be as "realistic and lifelike as possible?" I want GRAPHICS to be as realistic as possible, the actual content and gameplay can and should take liberties. Example: mirror's edge would be a terrible game if you randomly landed wrong, broke your femur, and had to spend months of real game time doing therapy before you could continue. Rock band would suck if you had to spend hours upon hours practicing, only for the band to break up and the game to be over after one gig. Super mario bros would have sold zero copies if the italian plumbers had to face a clogged toilet rather than saving the princess.
Jesus man, what kind of boring ass games do you play? Games are SUPPOSED to be unrealistic in that they take the boring or annoying (read; ADS) out.
(Note that if you were joking, little too subtle there, and the insightful mod didn't help.)
I'm tired of the "X/Y/Z doesn't affect me" mantra. Everything affects you.
Does reading slashdot 12 times a day affect you? Yes.
Would reading the entire constitution of the US everyday affect you? Yes.
Does skipping a night of sleep affect you? Yes.
Does holding down a full time job affect you? Yes.
Does playing video games affect you? Yes.
Everything you engage in affects you. It's called being human. It's not a question of whether something affects you, it's a question of whether you are mature enough to recognise HOW it effects you and make appropriate adjustments if necessary.
The insistence that you are somehow superior to every aspect of life and can only be affected if you allow it is just immature arrogance.
Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
<sarcasm>Good to see they're using a nice large group of test subjects.</sarcasm>
The article is here: http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/reprint/29/4/1046.pdf
Could you please point to which of their inferences you think breaks down because of statistical problems caused by the sample size?
If no such problem exists, the sample size was fine.
I recall reading a set of guidelines for writing psych papers (discussing and critiquing an article). They said quite explicitly that complaining about sample size was about the cheapest shot available, so don't do it unless you can really back it up.
To the mods who think my parent is insightful: could you please spell out to me what the insight is? Because I haven't seen any problems with the sample size, only an unsubstantiated claim.
good point, though your use of "irregardless" somehow make it seem less valid....
It really depends. Correct product placement in some games does make the virtual world more immersive. You should hop down to gametrailers and take a look at the new Yakuza game, where when you walk into a supermarket, there are high-rez versions of a number of products (but all within context). The same could be done within Dead Rising without upsetting the gamer. Now I agree, I don't want totally out-of-place adds in my games, but in some contexts, it actually works pretty well. If a game does have to include adds to bolster it's revenue stream and can't gracefully include it in the game world, they should just add it as a footnote in the loading screen. There's little harm in that, as you're already waiting.
Well, I hope your comments aren't directed at me. I'm 100% for parents controlling the media their children consume. I convinced my step-mother not to allow her child to play GTA III.
I do, however, absolutely believe that I am better equipped to choose what media I consume than any politician. GTA III is one of my all-time favorite games.
-Peter