Slashdot Mirror
The Right Amount of "Challenge" In IT & Gaming
boyko.at.netqos writes "In an essay entitled 'An Epiphany I Had While Playing Pac-Man,' the author talks about how smart people need to find a certain amount of intellectual challenge from day to day. If they don't find it in their workplace, they'll end up playing complex, 'smart' games, like Civilization IV or Chess — and if they do find it in their workplace, they're more likely to sit down with a nice game of Pac-Man, Katamari Damacy, or Peggle. Quoting: 'When I look back on my life, and I compare the times in my life when I was playing simple games compared to the times in my life when I was playing complex ones, a pattern emerges. The more complexity and mental stimulation I was getting from other activities — usually my day job at the time — the less I needed mental stimulation in my free time. Conversely, in times when I was working boring jobs, I'd be playing games that required a lot of thinking and mental gymnastics.' The author then goes on to speculate that some IT workers might subconsciously be giving themselves more challenges by choosing to deal with difficult problems, rather than performing simple (but boring) preventative maintenance and proactive network management."
This doesn't hold truth as much as TFA says. The reason for changing your game genre from strategy and "smarter" games for something simpler isn't really that you have to 'think' so much elsewhere. The main reason is time. You can just quickly play around in simpler games.
I loved Civilization and Settlers series and other kinds of strategy games as a kid. But I had lots of time after school. Now that I think of it, I also got a lot coding done just for fun. I coded games for fun, and this was before I had stable internet, so almost noone even saw them. I just liked doing it and I had time. It wasn't that much for challenge or so, I just liked it. I however also did like games where you had some thinking.
However after you got used to games, you saw how AI reacted and what was the best tactic, even in games you had to use lots of strategy. For example in Civ2 I always went for science and tried to stay away from wars until I had discovered everything. It was so obvious and I knew when is the best time to start fighting, that the challenge went away. But I also liked that aspect most, even while hating it.
I do still play Civ4 and other such games, but as you grow up you have great amount of other stuff to take care of. Specially in mid-20's, when work and spending time with your gf takes lots of time. This seems to change again 30+ when things get more settled.
I also have a lawyer friend that likes to play tennis and golf (yeah, so guessable!). Not really lots of thinking needed. But he also likes to play chess and some other games where you need to think. You can have it both ways - peace your mind with something you just *do* that doesn't requre thinking. Then on other times play some game that does.
Another great aspect to this for myself is physics games. I still think Civilization series etc are my favourite games, but sometimes it's just fun to mess around. Physics games are great for this. You just build something, destroy something, experience around and see what happens. Physics games also is a genre where both of these world combine; you need to think some, but you get fast fun and experience around.
The author then goes on to speculate ...
'Speculate' is far too kind. 'Strange unwarranted conclusions' was all I found. Here's the conclusion:
Considering that I thought of all of this while playing Pac-Man ... maybe sometimes our brains work most efficiently in a "lower gear."
And other great misunderstandings like:
Earlier in this blog, I noted that technology geeks gravitate towards games like D&D because they give people simple boundaries to storytelling, and straightforward challenges to overcome.
I must say I was not only confused but I was getting that feeling that I get when I see an episode of crossing over with John Edwards. You know, where a guy hits on a few truths and draws a bunch of conclusions from it that are crazy but people don't care because they want to believe it.
I don't think the things he notices hold any universal truth to them. I, personally, spent two years playing World of Warcraft while working a fairly complex job as a developer for a Fortune 500 company. And that game has the ability to be the most complex or mundane (take your pick) game you can play. And I did both things. From highly orchestrated (via vent) raids to mindless farming (hey, we needed Elemental Earths for those damned repair bots in the raids). And you know what? I enjoyed it all. And when I was doing simpler stuff in grade school and high school, I played Tetris. Tetris II, Tetris Worlds, Tetris Attack, you name it I played it. And that's mostly what I did. Pretty much the opposite of what he claims. Maybe I'm part of a different generation than he is but I could see myself playing either a complex or simple game. Right now, it's all about the entertainment factor and I'm currently looking at more complex MMOs like Darkfall Online and Mortal Online but at the same time I'm getting drunk with my friends playing Wii Sports or Rock Band.
This overly analytical opinion piece started with a huge problem and that's a terribly small sample set. So small that it fails to account for diverse gamers that are often playing multiple games at once--like my own anecdote.
My work here is dung.
I like the way I feel when I'm thinking.
I like the way I feel when I'm being creative.
(In fact, I like the way I feel when I'm being procreative, but that's another story.)
I like the warm fuzzy feedback I get when some cold jagged radical slams into place in an equation.
But it all blows up if I'm drinking fine wine and doing mathematics. People are harmed.
Please, people, for the sake of the children -- don't drink and derive!
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
I'd like to agree with TFA. The more I wreck my brain at work, the more likely I am to give it a break at home. On the flip side, The more bored I am from 9 to 5, the more likely I am to want to challenge myself. Just in the same way as I find myself more drawn to do carpentry or art work, when I've been fillout forms and doing repetitive, monotonous tasks at work just to get the feeling of "creating something." You've gotta flex all the "muscles" of your brain to get a good workout. Mashing buttons and using quick reflexes are just as important as creating long term strategy, or plotting which Civilization to play politics with. Life is all about finding that balance, and sometimes games vs reality is a great way to do it.
... anything intellectually stimulating at work, you end up posting on Slashdot.
If any HR fucktards get a hold of this notion, they will start to poke into the gaming habits of their employees to try and gauge how productive they are. Were you overheard mentioning that you liked Civilization IV? You need more tasks! We can't have people going home at the end of a 10 hour work day with enough energy to do anything for themselves! That would be horrific!
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
I play games because they're fun.
smoking copious amounts of weed.
I'll see your hokum and raise you a boondoggle.
...the author talks about how smart people need to find a certain amount of intellectual challenge from day to day. If they don't find it in their workplace, they'll end up playing complex, 'smart' games, like Civilization IV or Chess
Well, I always try to find challenging games during work hours, so I don't think I classify in either category.
Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.
I agree with the general tone of your post: playing games is consuming entertainment, not so different from consuming TV, films or music. If you are on a creative mood, then better try and create something.
However, I've actually found a positive correlation between the mental stimulations provided by work and leisure. In the worst case, my day work has been so mind-numbing that I haven't found any creative juices left in the evening. Thinking begets thinking, but it's best to do something different in your spare time. One summer I found myself designing and prorotyping electronics both at work and in the evenings, which was not as fun as I'd expected.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
I have found there is an inverse relationship between someone's opinion of their intellect and the real thing.
Where do you get your inspiration from? If it's only from your own personal experience I suspect that your books may have an audience of 1. Games, TV, Books these are all shared experiences with millions of other people. Without incorporating shared experiences you seriously undermine the value other people will get out of your contribution. You are also in serious danger of producing work which has already been done by other expressionists many many times before and likely better, not that your version won't have it's own charm and intriguing twists on the theme.
You may want to re-evaluate your position on popular culture and culture in general. You really don't want to write Buffy the Vampire Slayer thinking that it's a completely new and original idea.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
The theory is that people like to use up their surplus mental energy, and that the more of it you do at work, the less you do afterward.
"Killing brain cells with chemicals" counts as using up surplus mental energy.
So... you say I'm "sounding defensive" for pointing out flaws in your reasoning, and trying to nicely explain why you come across as harsh. Then you go on to make unfounded assumptions about my life, and insult me.
And then you wonder why people think you're being a dick.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard