Slashdot Mirror
Average Gamer Is 35, Fat and Bummed
kamapuaa writes "According to a study published in the upcoming October issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, the average US video game player is 35 years old, overweight, and tends toward depression. Specifically, female video game players tended towards depression, while males tended towards large BMIs. While the study itself points to several conclusions, one researcher noted: '... habitual use of video games as a coping response may provide a genesis for obsessive-compulsive video-game playing, if not video-game addiction.'"
On the flip side, the Washington Post is running a story about the mental health benefits of playing video games.
Video games as coping mechanism. That's an interesting way of looking at this. I found that when I played World of Warcraft, that's exactly what it was. It allowed me to cope with not having a girlfriend and deaden my emotions to the outside world. In that sense it became very addictive. I think it would probably be very similar to drinking alcohol or some drug.
It's funny because WoW is the only game that did that to me. I'm glad I stopped playing because now I don't feel like an automaton (gradually regaining my humanity), but I really feel bad for all the people who are like me who are still playing for that reason. I think WoW is a great game if you can just play it as a game to have fun, but I'm just not one of those people.
Funnily enough I can still play console games without any problems, they are not the same at all. Perhaps it's just pseudo social aspect, or the feeling while playing WoW that you are forced to grind (e.g. it's out of your control). An interesting thing that will probably be studied by psychologists for years to come.
I don't understand these studies about addictive gamers who are depressed, lonely, blah blah blah. Gaming, like watching tv dramas or sports or news, or listening to the radio or ipod, is simply a way to pass the time. Why gaming would make someone depressed makes zero sense to me.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
35, Fat, and Bummed? Or something close?
I think you could probably replace gamer with "person" and still be accurate.
At least in the developed world, where age distribution tends to bulge out at around 35-40. Waistlines bulge out at around the same time, just in time for a mid-life crisis.
Well, that _some_ people will play it as some great escape from a shitty reality, is I suppose true of anything else. Equally I know someone who' a workaholic to escape the rest of reality, and pretty much because work is the only place where he's appreciated. Other people go fishing to escape reality, or spend hours tuning their car, or whatever else.
On the other hand, I only need to look at my parents who took to WoW like to cocaine. And, you know, they're a lot over 35 and not exactly the stereotypical image of the lonely gamer or slashdotter either. You know, what with one of them being a woman, and both of them having gotten laid before (or I wouldn't be here.)
The other die-hard gamers I know, most are married, the majority are of average weight, and one is pencil-thin. Only one was obese, but the key word is "was." (Suspiciously, he started exercising after someone sent around a link to a study saying that the obese and smokers cost the health insurance less because they die a lot earlier;)
So I just have to wonder. Maybe they just saw that the average gamer was fat and depressed because the average person wherever the study was done was fat and depressed?
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I guess most people didn't catch the significance of Andrews University...
Two of the study's coauthours (Wendi Kannenberg, Gary L. Hopkins) are from Andrews University Institute for Prevention of Addictions. Andrews is a Christian university run by a denomination which doesn't accept evolution. I've spoken to a prof from their biology department, apparently it's a bastion of the Intelligent Design movement. (Here's a book published by Andrews University Press).
I'm not saying that proponents of intelligent design and those around them are incapable of doing serious scientific research. I'm thinking this might partially explain what feels like an anti-gamer bias.
The joys of crowdsourcing...
The opinons expressed are those of the voices in the author's head and are not necessarily those of the author.
In order to self-identify as a gamer, you've got to have a certain mindset to begin with. "I play video games, and that's the most important thing in my life".
Negative.
I self-identify as a gamer, but not because playing video games is the most important think in my life. In fact, video games are a fairly small portion of the gaming I do. I also play plenty of pen & paper RPGs, tabletop games, CCGs...
I also self-identify as a reader - because I like reading, not because it is the most important thing in my life.
I also self-identify as a computer geek or computer nerd - again, because that is a part of my life, not the most important thing.
I could keep going, but there isn't much point. If I were to self-identify as only the thing that I feel is most important in my life, I would only self-identify as a husband. But that doesn't really tell you a whole heck of a lot about me, does it?
When you're a teenager that's fine, since most teens don't exactly have the resources to go out and have a real life
I have to disagree again here. Since when do resources dictate what's the most important thing in your life? Maybe your most common diversion... Most readily available entertainment... But most important thing?
I'd suggest that many (most?) teenagers find their friendships more important than their video games. Or maybe they're preoccupied with learning to drive and getting a car. Or maybe they're looking for their first job. Maybe they just want to pass a class.
Sure, lots of teens play lots of games. But I doubt if many of them would identify that as the most important thing in their lives.
but when you're 35, you should be at the point where your other dreams are coming true.
Maybe. Depending on what those dreams are. Depending on what life throws at you.
I play video games, a lot. I've spent hundreds of dollars on them this year and spent hundreds of hours in them. However, I don't self-identify as a gamer as such, because it's not the central tenet of my lifestyle, nor a major frame of reference for my personality.
No?
Do you know who Gordon Freeman is? Is the cake a lie? Would you chuckle at a shirt that read "iddqd"? Do you know who Shodan is? Or Cortana? Do you recognize the Mario theme music? Or the Zelda got-a-cool-item sound?
These are all references that non-gamers don't understand, and gamers do. They do influence your personality whether you like it or not.
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
Actually, sad to break this to you, but just about everything you do in your free time is simply "passing time." Whether it's watching TV, playing a game, chatting at the pub, going mountaineering, tuning your car, reading a book, going to the theatre, or whatever else. There's a reason it's called a "passtime". Get it? "Pass" and "time"? Ring a bell yet?
So, yes, unless you spend every waking moment _working_ on something, then yes, you too are just "passing time" a lot.
And by "work", I mean as in you actually expect to sell it or otherwise get a tangible return on investment, and primarily for that return on investment. If it's just one of the intangible and impossible to measure benefits used as excuses for why your hobby is better than his, sad to break it to you, but it's still just a hobby. You're still doing it to pass the time.
So get off the high horse, drop the snotty self-importance, and realize that yes you too pass the time. Waiting to die or something? Then why do you try to project that idiocy on others?
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.