Slashdot Mirror


Video Games Linked To Reckless Driving

An anonymous reader writes "'A new study suggests video games that involve reckless driving may play out in real life. Researchers say their data should not be taken lightly since car accidents are the number one cause of death for teenagers.' Just a case of video games being used as a convenient scapegoat, or could there be some truth to this?"

337 comments

  1. Kudos by Lord+Grey · · Score: 4, Informative
    From the last paragraph of TFA:

    The findings do not directly link playing video games to reckless driving. They only show an association. Researchers say the impact of playing games like "Grand Theft Auto" is minimal.

    Bingo. Driving games could cause reckless driving in real life. Or people who drive recklessly enjoy driving games. Reckless go-kart racing could also be associated with both games and automobile driving, but that wasn't the focus of the study.

    I'm glad TFA admitted that one isn't necessarily the cause of the other, thereby bypassing the whole causation != correlation argument. Kudos for that.

    --
    // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
    1. Re:Kudos by silicondope · · Score: 1

      I started playing TF2 last week and now I'm making it to work in less than 15 minutes. I'm also more likely to look for a taunt button by the wiper controls.

    2. Re:Kudos by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      I gotta admit that I imagine throwing some red shells while driving after playing mario kart, but I can't find the button on the steering wheel so it's "back to reality" and no multi-car pileups for me.

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    3. Re:Kudos by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When I got involved in airplane modeling, I wrecked my first machine. So then I went out and bought an R/C simulator to practice at home, and about two months later I tried again.

      Video gaming taught me how to fly
      .

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    4. Re:Kudos by NewWorldDan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I, for one, remain skeptical. My wife doesn't play driving games of any sort and she's an awful driver. I don't play driving games either, and I'm about as boring of a driver as you'll find outside of rural Iowa. (I've been to rural Iowa, everyone drives exactly 3 miles under the posted speed limit.)

      Can we do a controlled study on this? Subject some non-gamers to a large dose of GTA for 6 months and see how their driving changes with respect to a control group? Can we do actual science instead of bullshit stuides? Also, get off my lawn.

    5. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you got that backwards. Causation = correlation.

      Correclation != causation.

      Anyway, can we please stop using that overused faggot expression. I reminds me of Billy Joel's Piano Man. Great tune but, I'm just so fucking tired of hearing it.

    6. Re:Kudos by SirLestat · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see a study on how much can a game improve someones skill in real life? Does playing some mostly realistic racing game help you drive in everyday life (I'm talking about regular day to day driving, not racing or speeding). Pilots trains on simulators. Ok there is training involved and their "game" is pretty close to reality. I'd think a good game should help at least a little?

    7. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correlation still isn't causation, you insensitive clod!

    8. Re: Kudos by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      The findings do not directly link playing video games to reckless driving. They only show an association. Researchers say the impact of playing games like "Grand Theft Auto" is minimal.

      I'm glad TFA admitted that one isn't necessarily the cause of the other, thereby bypassing the whole causation != correlation argument. Kudos for that.

      Funny, the very last thing I did before bringing up this story was skim a newsletter from my alma mater, which included a story "Study shows teens wired to engage in risky behavior".

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    9. Re:Kudos by Uttles · · Score: 1

      It's much more likely that younger drivers like playing video games, and younger drivers are shown to be more reckless. But then again maybe not. Either way, correlation is all we have here.

      --

      ~ now you know
    10. Re:Kudos by Suki+I · · Score: 1

      Bingo. Driving games could cause reckless driving in real life. Or people who drive recklessly enjoy driving games. Reckless go-kart racing could also be associated with both games and automobile driving, but that wasn't the focus of the study.

      I'm glad TFA admitted that one isn't necessarily the cause of the other, thereby bypassing the whole causation != correlation argument. Kudos for that.

      My thoughts exactly. [shakes fist] you got to it before me!

    11. Re:Kudos by jayme0227 · · Score: 1

      Normally I would also be one to throw up the correlation != causation flag, but in this case, I'm leaning towards actually believing that there is a causal effect. I know that when I play video online games, the swearing rubs off on me and I curse like crazy for the next day or two (or, when I still played WoW, the next year and a half). I know that after I played Burnout or Need for Speed, I was harder on the accelerator and more likely to change lanes instead of slow down when approaching a car in front of me.

      Of course, this is one person's anecdotal evidence, but when it corroborates the findings of a study, I find it hard to dismiss. This would be relatively easy to actually experiment on, though. Just take a random sample of teenagers who can drive, give them a random task to perform for an hour, including, but not limited to, playing racing games, then put them in the driver's seat on a controlled course. If the ones that played racing games complete the course faster or more recklessly than the ones who played other types of games, then you can demonstrate causation, if not, then you can't.

      --
      But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
    12. Re:Kudos by smitty777 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've done a little bit of research on the transfer of training from video simulations to real life. Research has shown that not everything transfers to real life, but what does transfer is procedural knowledge. If you're practicing on a flight simulator, you will learn the correct order to pull out the carb heat, drop the RPMs, lower flaps and gear. But it's a pretty rich environment up there, and there is no substitute for feeling the bumps of turbulence and engine vibration.

      I've also done some practicing on an RC simulator, and it's a great way to learn without wrecking your kite. Different mental model, as you don't have the "first person" perspective of being in the plane, though.

      --
      "Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
      Albert Einstein
    13. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Driving games could cause reckless driving in real life. Or people who drive recklessly enjoy driving games.

      Also, playing video games while driving can be dangerous. I know, I know, correlation is not causation...

    14. Re:Kudos by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Games with an element of driving differ hugely in how realistic they are. I don't think games like Microsoft CART, Grand Prix Legends, Gran Turismo, and Forza have hurt my driving any. But when I play Burnout with my son, I like to remind him that we both die at least 10 times during every race.

    15. Re:Kudos by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I dunno if it is playing games so much as being 'male'...as far as driving on a more extreme basis (I hate the wreckless word, it implies necessarily unsafe with disregard to current road conditions). I was reading an article the other day in Men's Health that said while women have more wrecks per mile than men do....that men have a greater percentage of fatalities than women.

      I think it comes more from male tendencies to show off, flaunt power, and general aggressiveness that is built into us. Hell, that's generally why we LOVE fast and powerful cars, and they actually mean something to us more than they do with women, in general.

      And, one certainly doesn't buy a Porsche or a Vette to drive at 20mph everywhere.

      Isn't testosterone a wonderful thing??

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    16. Re:Kudos by mshannon78660 · · Score: 1

      I had the same experience once. Spent a couple of hours with a friend at an arcade (back when we still had those) playing a racing game. Driving home afterward, I suddenly realized I was driving way too fast and aggressively. Since then, I just try to be aware of effects like that, and have not had it happen again.

    17. Re:Kudos by hardburn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Does playing some mostly realistic racing game help you drive in everyday life

      There are certain maneuvers it can help you with that apply to regular road driving.

      When cars go into either understeer or oversteer, the natural reaction of most people is to slam on the brakes. This is fine for understeer but only makes oversteer worse. The correct reaction there is to countersteer a bit and apply more throttle. It's not enough to know technically how to do it--you have to be able to do it reflexively when you weren't expecting it to happen. A good sim racing game can train you to do that.

      (Not surprisingly, manufacturers tend to setup cars from the factory in ways that tend to make it understeer, such as putting on oversized tires in back.)

      --
      Not a typewriter
    18. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad TFA admitted that one isn't necessarily the cause of the other, thereby bypassing the whole causation != correlation argument. Kudos for that.

      Also from the article, the very first sentence reads:

      A new study suggests video games that involve reckless driving may play out in real life.

      Since most people do not read the entire article, but just the first few sentences (or sometimes even an entire paragraph or three), they will most likely read the one that seems to suggest causation and not correlation. Also, for the average reader, I don't expect they truly understand what correlation means. As other posters have stated, there are other correlations the study that didn't look at that are equally valid but would never lead to the same outlandish statements of causation being made.

      Its the same nuance as in the following: most abusers of children were abused as a child; however, most abused children do not become abusers. Unfortunately, people hear only the first statement and assume the second is true.

    19. Re:Kudos by Danse · · Score: 1

      Normally I would also be one to throw up the correlation != causation flag, but in this case, I'm leaning towards actually believing that there is a causal effect. I know that when I play video online games, the swearing rubs off on me and I curse like crazy for the next day or two (or, when I still played WoW, the next year and a half). I know that after I played Burnout or Need for Speed, I was harder on the accelerator and more likely to change lanes instead of slow down when approaching a car in front of me.

      Of course, this is one person's anecdotal evidence, but when it corroborates the findings of a study, I find it hard to dismiss. This would be relatively easy to actually experiment on, though. Just take a random sample of teenagers who can drive, give them a random task to perform for an hour, including, but not limited to, playing racing games, then put them in the driver's seat on a controlled course. If the ones that played racing games complete the course faster or more recklessly than the ones who played other types of games, then you can demonstrate causation, if not, then you can't.

      Actually that wouldn't show causation at all, because you've put them on a controlled course where pretty much anyone with an interest in driving would want to experiment. After all, that's what a controlled course is best for!

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    20. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with ya there. Just to mess with the wife I downloaded the Mario kart soundtrack to play in the mini-van. After reading that I've decided to post anonymously.

    21. Re:Kudos by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      I have noticed the same thing after an extended session of GTA, I found myself driving much more aggressively, and at least once I thought "I could pull that guy out of his nice car and be out of here in less than 10 seconds."

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    22. Re:Kudos by daveime · · Score: 1

      Correclation != Correlation.

      FTFY

    23. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac user? Know how to use an ubercharge?

    24. Re:Kudos by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      You can't do a controlled study on this because video gamers are a self-selecting group. If you were to have two groups, one of new gamers and one of not-new, you'd not be gathering anything useful: the people who play games are, quite possibly, the same types who would have drag raced for pink slips in the 1950s.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    25. Re:Kudos by Xsydon · · Score: 1

      From the last paragraph of TFA:

      The findings do not directly link playing video games to reckless horse riding. They only show an association. Researchers say the impact of playing games like "Red Dead Redemption: Grand Theft Pony" is minimal.

      Bingo. Horse riding games could cause reckless horse riding in real life. Or people who ride recklessly enjoy horse riding games. Reckless pony racing could also be associated with both games and horse riding, but that wasn't the focus of the study.

      Fixed.

    26. Re:Kudos by negRo_slim · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I think it comes more from male tendencies to show off, flaunt power, and general aggressiveness that is built into us. Hell, that's generally why we LOVE fast and powerful cars, and they actually mean something to us more than they do with women, in general.

      I pity you and your shallow life.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    27. Re:Kudos by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      How do you feel about the word "reckless"? Because that's the one that applies here. Kids who learn their driving habits in games aren't likely to remain wreckless in real life.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    28. Re:Kudos by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "I think it comes more from male tendencies to show off, flaunt power, and general aggressiveness that is built into us. Hell, that's generally why we LOVE fast and powerful cars, and they actually mean something to us more than they do with women, in general.

      I pity you and your shallow life."

      Hmm..not sure what shows me to have a shallow life because I state that in general men seem to enjoy fast/powerful cars on a level far above what the same type cars mean to women?

      Now, if you misread something in there to the effect that cars mean more to me THAN women, no, I didn't say that.

      I would put forth, however, that while you cannot fuck a car (legally in most states at least), a fine automobile will not cheat on you with another car and won't leave you broken hearted and while at the same time getting a lawyer to take half of your assets.

      But, your mileage may vary...

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    29. Re:Kudos by caluml · · Score: 1

      Why are you attacking the GP?

    30. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      But you can do a controlled study. You get 2 (or more) groups. One is instructed to play no driving games at all. The others are instructed to play GTA, or Forza, or whatever (or mix of whatevers). Perhaps one no driving game, one Mario Kart (for the idea of non-realistic, non-law breaking racing), one GTA (or other "realistic" game involving breaking laws), and one Forza (or other on-track racing game where no actual laws would be broken to drive like that on a closed track). You then have them do this over a two year period, and note the crash rate and fatality rate of your subjects, as well as any encounters with the police for driving activities.

      Not a quick and easy study, but you can do a controlled study of this. Having people self-report whether they play games and what their driving history is may be enough to justify a grant to fund this study, but you are right in that letting them choose for themselves which group they get to be in will prevent it from being a proper controlled study. And you could never make it double-blind, because it's hard to have someone play a game without knowing what it is. At best, you could deceive them about the purpose of the study so they'd have no incentive to try to change driving habits to influence the study.

    31. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or people who like video games also like compulsively texting. Nuff said.

    32. Re:Kudos by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      Tell us what else you pity, negRo_slim. We are all really excited to here about things you look down upon from your Cheeto dust encrusted throne. Women? Alcohol? Parties? Why, the possibilities are endless! Look at all these people doing things like "socializing" and "giving a shit about how they come across to others", what a bunch of conformist tools.

    33. Re:Kudos by severoon · · Score: 1

      I'm not skeptical at all. It makes total sense to me that video games would be most attractive to the teenagers that are already the most reckless behind the wheel. If you already behave a certain way in real life because that kind of behavior is attractive to you, and then someone releases a game that allows you to fully explore that predilection, why wouldn't more of that kind of person play that kind of game?

      It just stands to reason, doesn't it? If they found that reckless driving games didn't attract people that are naturally fond of reckless driving...well, that would be a claim that would require quite a bit of evidence for me to accept.

      Of course, I would be highly skeptical of anyone that claims it's the other way round—that a docile driver goes berserk behind the wheel after playing a video game. That too would require quite a bit of evidence to turn over my assumption (and this is a claim, of course, about which this article has nothing at all to say).

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    34. Re:Kudos by kkwst2 · · Score: 1

      I believe the logical conclusion is that the GP is a woman.

    35. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Subject some non-gamers to a large dose of GTA for 6 months and see how their driving changes with respect to a control group?

      I'd buy some stock in taxi companies first. Trying to go back and play the GTA3 games now just feels tedious because of all the actual driving needed to get across town.

    36. Re:Kudos by bucklesl · · Score: 1

      I have experience with oversteer at VIR. Last time I missed the apex in turns 1-2, probably hit 125 on the straight leading up to it, and didn't brake nearly hard enough. Well my instructor was shouting "You're missing the apex" so I turned in just a touch more... I hadn't had any problems for two days until this very last session. I turned in too much and spun out in my C6 Corvette. Pretty exciting! Everyone should do at least a few days of performance driving and we'd all be safer drivers.

      --
      help fill in hidden movie endings @ End of the Credits
    37. Re:Kudos by thechemic · · Score: 1

      "People who drive recklessly enjoy driving games", is certainly a truth for me. I grew up in a family of lead-foots. Naturally, I learned to drive with the same lead foot. Video games didnt exist in our family in 1987 when I was learning how to drive. I started collecting my tickets at age 22. I now have a 3-ring binder of 83 tickets accumulated over my lifetime. Yes, I lost my license many times. I'm currently 39. I still drive & ride like a nut-ball, recently having ridin 160 mhp on my sport bike on public roads. When games like Grand Theft Auto came out, I fell in love. I fell in love with the virtual excitement that I was already addicted to on the real roads.

      --
      Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
    38. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're practicing on a flight simulator, you will learn the correct order to pull out the carb heat, drop the RPMs, lower flaps and gear. But it's a pretty rich environment up there, and there is no substitute for feeling the bumps of turbulence and engine vibration.

      This is true. A sim-style game will teach some things, but not everything, and perhaps more importantly, it may contribute to the development of bad habits. For example, my flight instructor told me that when Flight Sim players first start flying a real plane, the biggest problem they have is that they fixate on the instruments, and the instructor has to keep reminding them to look out the window.

    39. Re: Kudos by Halborr · · Score: 1

      I'm a teenager...

      They needed a _study_ to figure this out? REALLY?

    40. Re:Kudos by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I think it is your "truthiness" he pities.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    41. Re:Kudos by retchdog · · Score: 1

      You can't fuck a car in public. Laws against sexing non-sex toys, would de facto ban most sex toys since they're labeled for "novelty use only".

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    42. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or people who drive recklessly enjoy driving games. Reckless go-kart racing could also be associated with both games and automobile driving, but that wasn't the focus of the study.

      I would go with this. Driving fast is easy. Just put your foot to the floor. Driving fast and well is another matter and much harder.

    43. Re:Kudos by NekSnappa · · Score: 1

      When I'm playing GT4 I'm the exact kind of race driver that I complain about while watching LMS, or F1 racing. Which is to say "very aggressive."
      While in real life I'm a good driver who can get down the twisties, and hit the apexes pretty well in any vehicle. But haven't have a single accident after 30 years on the road.

      --
      I want to shoot the messenger!
    44. Re:Kudos by severoon · · Score: 1

      I'm in the same boat as you on the real road, but I don't play video games. So, of the available pool of anecdotal evidence of the two of us, there's no reason to think that us type of drivers are more likely or not to play. But if we got hundreds of reckless drivers to weigh in on this...darnit, once again it seems the only way to do this properly would be science.

      :-)

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    45. Re:Kudos by meustrus · · Score: 1

      I actually think this is more plausible than the premise about violent games, particularly shooters. If you just think about it, people are more likely to be driving a car than to be shooting at things. Nearly everyone in America drives. Despite how it seems to most gun owners, though, those that even know how to handle a firearm are in the minority. I find it entirely plausible that playing at reckless driving (say, Burnout) might have a subconscious affect on our habits in real life. Admittedly, I could also find it plausible that shooting at people and practicing head shots might also have a subconscious affect - but only if that person is already handling a gun. It's not going to make you want to pick up a real gun any more than playing Mario Kart will make you want to drive a real car (I picked Mario Kart because it is about as far from reality as most shooting games are from actual shooting for people that aren't soldiers).

      --
      I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.
    46. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More throttle to correct oversteer sounds like the solution for FWD. It would just make RWD oversteer even more.
      Or are you only referring to lift-off oversteer?

    47. Re:Kudos by NekSnappa · · Score: 1

      And one day you'll be a greasy spot on the road. I just hope you don't take anyone out with you.

      --
      I want to shoot the messenger!
    48. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me the big thing is getting off the freeway... if I don't stop first, my brain thinks that regular street speeds are way to slow, and I get more of a "damn sunday drivers" feeling right off the freeway. A stop sign at the end of the ramp solves the problem completely for me. If there isn't one, I know I have to compensate mentally, but the emotional impact is still there.

      Although the big one is finally coming out of a knot of traffic or behind an excessively slow, inattentive driver; that's when I really get the urge to kick it on down and just... go.

    49. Re:Kudos by cain · · Score: 1

      Awful driver != reckless driver. Reckless drivers take needless chances. Awful drivers are unaware they are taking chances. Think of the difference between a little old lady mistakenly running a red light and a teen stepping on the gas when he sees a yellow and running the red on purpose.
       

    50. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://xkcd.com/552/

    51. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think that's bad... try driving after a long Katamari session. "Hey... I could totally roll up that pedestrian Da Doo Doo Da Da Doo Doo Da Da Duhm Duhm Duhm Duhm. Da Doo Doo Da Da Doo... If I rolled up that SMART car I might be able to snag a motorcycle! Da Doo Doo Da Da Doo Doo Da Da Doo Doo Da Da Duhm Duhm Duhm Duhm Duhm Duhm Duhm Duhm..."

    52. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      We could have skipped the entire sensationalized article by skipping to the last sentence: Researchers say the impact of playing games like "Grand Theft Auto" is minimal.

    53. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      ...and note the crash rate and fatality rate of your subjects, as well as any encounters with the police for driving activities.

      This means nothing. You won't get enough of the control group to die to provide a worthy enough sample, crashes (aka accidents) are sometimes not your fault and unavoidable, and racist cops will screw up the last category. You'd have to subject the groups to a pre/post test model where you can compare the change in their driving ability/behavior.

    54. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Especially when people use it to dismiss something they disagree with, but otherwise have no productive counter-argument.

    55. Re:Kudos by spazdor · · Score: 1

      If cars are important to you beyond as a means of getting to B from A, then yes, your comment does reveal some life shallowness.

      I am a man and I don't belong to your informal use of the word "us." I think cars are ridiculous.

      --
      DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
    56. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      If the ones that played racing games complete the course faster or more recklessly than the ones who played other types of games, then you can demonstrate causation, if not, then you can't.

      No, you can demonstration correlation. You said you are normally the one to throw up the correlation != causation flag. If you are, then you should ALWAYS throw up that flag, because it isn't a flag to throw up only when it's convenient to your argument.

    57. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      For me the big thing is getting off the freeway... if I don't stop first, my brain thinks that regular street speeds are way to slow, and I get more of a "damn sunday drivers" feeling right off the freeway.

      That's a normal and well documented phenomenon that has nothing to do with racing games. Try the book, Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us) by Tom Vanderbilt for reference.

    58. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I sort of expect "average" readers to understand correlation. I expect that most people understand 8th grade level concepts like correlation. Maybe my standards are too high?

    59. Re:Kudos by hardburn · · Score: 1

      It's the correct solution in general, though the specifics will change. Of course, you can't think through all the engineering details of what's going on while you sit there. It has to be done intuitively.

      As a rule, oversteer is the result of insufficient speed through a turn, so the solution is more throttle.

      FWD may correct oversteer just using throttle. RWD will often need countersteer in addition to throttle. If your car has enough torque and you can hit it just right, a RWD car can even sustain oversteer into a drift. Theoretically, it can keep going until your tires or gas run down.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    60. Re:Kudos by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "I am a man and I don't belong to your informal use of the word "us." I think cars are ridiculous."

      What's ridiculous is thinking that any given generalization is 100% apt for each and every individual within the nominated group.

      And then, the fact is that cars powered beyond any legal or reasonably speed limits, with ergonomic conditions quite against the very basics of transportation between point A and B, and at a cost wildly above what is needed for such transportation between A and B are sold in large quantities every year all around the world and that they are mainly sold to and used by males.

      You can extract your own conclusions.

    61. Re:Kudos by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "There are certain maneuvers it can help you with that apply to regular road driving."

      "When cars go into either understeer or oversteer"

      When cars go into either understeer or oversteer you are under regular road driving no more.

      There's no regular road driving conditions that would make any car in the market for the last 40 years to either under or oversteer, so your argument is moot.

      "Not surprisingly, manufacturers tend to setup cars from the factory in ways that tend to make it understeer, such as putting on oversized tires in back."

      I think that's the literally the stupidest thing I read in years.

    62. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for explaining. Perhaps my terminology is wrong. My experience has been with too much acceleration when making a turn in the rain, which breaks the rear free. So the solution is a quick counter-steer and lift off the throttle so the rear tires stop spinning and regain traction. This car doesn't have the power required for drifting, but it does have positraction which makes the driving in the rain exciting.

    63. Re:Kudos by spazdor · · Score: 1

      ..cars powered beyond any legal or reasonably speed limits, with ergonomic conditions quite against the very basics of transportation between point A and B, and at a cost wildly above what is needed...

      Like I said. Ridiculous.

      --
      DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
    64. Re:Kudos by hardburn · · Score: 1

      There's no regular road driving conditions that would make any car in the market for the last 40 years to either under or oversteer, so your argument is moot.

      Then you've never driven on ice.

      "Not surprisingly, manufacturers tend to setup cars from the factory in ways that tend to make it understeer, such as putting on oversized tires in back."

      I think that's the literally the stupidest thing I read in years.

      It is stupid, but true.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    65. Re:Kudos by hardburn · · Score: 1

      Right, in that case, the rear tires need traction, so they need to stop spinning so much. The better AWD systems can shift power to the front, but a pure RWD will need to let off, countersteer, then smoothly get back on.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    66. Re:Kudos by Bryansix · · Score: 1

      Not true. Take the corner of Jamboree and Edinger for instance. It was raining (this happens in regular driving from time to time) and another driver was trying to cut in front of me (this also happens in regular driving) and the corner is off-camber (when I find that civil engineer, the talking he's going to get...) and so I beat the car to the corner but subsequently went into the corner too fast. Trigger oversteer (my car usually understeers but not in the rain on an off-camber corner) and so I had to countersteer and slowly apply the throttle to straighten the car or the car would have spun all the way around. So in conclusion, you are wrong and you really should never speak in absolutes unless you are absolutely sure.

    67. Re:Kudos by skids · · Score: 1

      Maybe if GTA put in some missions where you can't violate traffic laws... ...but you can still strafe the sidewalk with small arms fire, of course.

    68. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Not surprisingly, manufacturers tend to setup cars from the factory in ways that tend to make it understeer, such as putting on oversized tires in back.)

      Is that why I see so many BMWs with 'excessive' negative camber on the rear wheels? Particularly the X5 has so much negative camber that I think it would cause uneven tread wear.

    69. Re:Kudos by Mitsoid · · Score: 1

      It is stupid, but true.

      Took a bit, but the only source I could find to verify this was unfortunately wikipedia (whom got their values from what looks like a German magazine)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Understeer

      Due to the technical nature of the information I'd probably accept that it is, in fact, true... Other then this small source of information I was unable to find an article about 'manufacturers designing cars to understeer.' I did notice a lot of people mentioning this fact, part of why I wanted to spend 5-10 minutes to try and find a source.

    70. Re:Kudos by Nyder · · Score: 1

      I, for one, remain skeptical. My wife doesn't play driving games of any sort and she's an awful driver. I don't play driving games either, and I'm about as boring of a driver as you'll find outside of rural Iowa. (I've been to rural Iowa, everyone drives exactly 3 miles under the posted speed limit.)

      Can we do a controlled study on this? Subject some non-gamers to a large dose of GTA for 6 months and see how their driving changes with respect to a control group? Can we do actual science instead of bullshit stuides? Also, get off my lawn.

      Can I do the study? I don't drive in RL but I love driving games on the computer. Mainly Need for Speed games, where you don't take any damage crashing into stuff? I've learned to use that to further my driving skills in the game.

      I'm perfect for this RL test. Put in a car, and show me how to start it, and which button is the gas (I don't need no stinking breaks).

      Make sure it has nitro, 'cause I need that to get away from the cops.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    71. Re:Kudos by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

      Wow, ignorance may be bliss, but this is just stupid ignorance.

      You can understeer and oversteer pretty much at any speed, depending on the corner and the car. Hell, I don't even drive and I know this. To say that a couple of thousand kilos of machine with 150bhp can't over/understeer under normal driving conditions (let's say, 110km/hr, the speed limit here in AU) is just pure ignorance of the laws of physics.

      Do you feel big posting on a nerd/geek site and show your stupidity? I know it's popular to not learn anything these days...

    72. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I hate the whole "video games are causing RL bad behavior" argument, I've gotta confess something here.

      When I was playing Need For Speed: Most Wanted -VERY- heavily for a while, I found that I was driving MUCH faster on my way to work. I didn't feel like I was speeding at first, but I'd see that I was going 20-25 over the limit. It's not uncommon to do 5-10 over on that road, but I found that I was far more aggressive with acceleration and speed, compared to the years before I had been a NFS:MW player.

      That being said, once I noticed it, I corrected the behavior over a period of a week or so. No tickets, no accidents, no problems. However, I must also note that I am an exceptionally good driver in general. 12 years of driving and not one accident, despite quite a few situations with other drivers being careless, and my awareness being the primary preventative factor.

      In fact, the video games may have even given me the skills I needed to prevent a couple accidents. Where drivers see a problem and often overreact, steering too sharply to avoid an accident, thereby losing control of the car, I have always seemed to find that sweet spot where an accident is avoided without causing loss of control. That is something I attribute to driving games, as they can teach a person how to maintain control of a car by balancing speed and directional change to maintain friction.

      There is a degree of quick thinking involved, which some people simply do not seem capable of.

    73. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does having an interest in a tool beyond its primary function make one shallow?

    74. Re:Kudos by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

      I'd say your research is of greater weight than this article.

      The institutes that did this "research" aren't mentioned, the only mention of an organisation is this "Mind Positive Parenting", which a quick search gives only really links back to articles referring to this "research". In fact, the only articles are from CBS.

      I call bullshit on the whole article. This Reg Chapman seems to be just pushing the agenda of some fringe moral group (Mind Positive Parenting) that no doubt has had this article written to support a cause. I've seen this bullshit before with journalists having worked for a newspaper, they do it all the time just to get their 1000 word quota up. Grab someone's press release (whether real or not), move a few things about, sometimes even get the company offering the press release to write the article for them.

      They may get caught out once in a while, but more often than not they'll just get paid.

    75. Re:Kudos by hardburn · · Score: 1

      Another source is Top Gear 01x07, where Jeremy drives the Lotus Elise. Normally, I wouldn't reference Top Gear on an issue of factual correctness, but in this case, the information is coming directly from a Lotus engineer.

      During the road test, Jeremy notes some bad understeer through some corners. Then a Lotus engineer comes out and demonstrates that you can get it to oversteer with the right technique.

      It's hard to make out what he's saying over the tire squeal (Top Gear's production values weren't quite as tight back then), but he does seem to say that they've done this specifically because they wanted to enlarge their market.

      Back in the studio, the engineer also says you can get the front tires matched up with the back to make it stop doing that.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    76. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      I hate the wreckless word, it implies necessarily unsafe with disregard to current road conditions

      I wish teens would drive "wrecklessly".

    77. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Well I think you're a joyless blowhard. Cars are brilliant.

      Not really. People outgrow certain joys and pick up new ones. I wouldn't start judging the worthiness of one source of joy over the other so it is rather ridiculous how certain things (like cars, sports) are actually considered "OK" for grown-up boys (otherwise called men) while certain other things (like comic books, video games) are considered childish and immature. Of course, I'm not talking about the /. audience here but the wider world outside (it was there the last time I looked). It applies the other way as well. Hell, why don't we just stick to the old "whatever gets you hot and bothered" paradigm and call it a day? =p

      To put things in perspective, we live around and use dozens (if not more) of machines everyday. Car enthusiasts are really no different from computing or electronics enthusiasts (and even egg-beater or kitchen blender enthusiasts if such exist).

    78. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      It doesn't. In fact, this can lead to unexpected avenues for enjoyment. Motorized toothbrushes and vacuum cleaners come to mind (though I wish they hadn't).

    79. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      I would put forth, however, that while you cannot fuck a car (legally in most states at least), a fine automobile will not cheat on you with another car and won't leave you broken hearted and while at the same time getting a lawyer to take half of your assets.

      I wonder if they make Transformers[tm] porn? Rule 34 FTL :[

    80. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Bingo. I think what's going on here is that teens (and on the other end of the spectrum, old people) are the worst drivers by age category (and the most dangerous) for more fundamental reasons - lack of experience in the former and lack of cognition in the latter. Video games are just red herrings in this case. Ironic that the same age category that decries the "ebuls of the younger generation" are equally dangerous on the road (but will never be called on it because they are also the voting majority).

    81. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Good point but as far as consequences go, not very relevant is it? I mean, if either of your examples crashed into me, I'd wanna see them prosecuted and punished to the fullest extent irrespective of their intention. Good intentions aren't worth shit where my life is concerned. In fact, the teen's behavior is capable of change but the little old lady is probably in that (hopefully short but) highly dangerous state of denial about her own driving ability and will likely get into an accident before she learns to stop driving.

    82. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Put in a car, and show me how to start it, and which button is the gas (I don't need no stinking breaks).

      NFSMW! Where the brakes are built into the roadsides =]. Gawd I love that game!

    83. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would. The recklessness inherent to driving on a closed course would manifest equally on average across the sample, because neither group has selected for interest in driving (random sample of teenagers, random chance whether their task is playing video games). It may be that there's an upper limit for recklessness and that a reckless video game driver will become no more reckless on a closed circuit. But that's a separate issue, the experiment is still reasonably sound.

    84. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Interesting book. Thanks for the reference.

    85. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So, your solution to confounds is not to correct for them, but to give up and run a completely meaningless study with good controls? The only real way to know is to run it in the wild. Just lab tests of people playing games then driving would be worthless. At least make it interesting, have 100 people come in and have 25 play Mario Kart for 2 hours, 25 play GTA, 25 play Tetris, and 25 play Forza and then measure their average speeds on the way home (plant a GPS system without them knowing or something). Then they won't know you are testing their driving reaction to the game.

    86. Re:Kudos by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "You can understeer and oversteer pretty much at any speed"

      Of course you can. Never I said otherwise.

      "To say that a couple of thousand kilos of machine with 150bhp can't over/understeer under normal driving conditions (let's say, 110km/hr, the speed limit here in AU) is just pure ignorance of the laws of physics."

      No. It's pure common sense and observation. Whenever the tires slide on a road you are well beyond normal driving conditions. There's no way a production car will lose traction at proper speed and proper maneovering on a road. "Ice" is not "road". Taking a corner overspeeded it's not normal driving conditions. Blocking the brakes is not normal driving conditions. Strong wheel movements on wet tarmac is not normal driving conditions.

      Whenever you lose traction you were above the proper speed for the way and its current conditions, made a mistake or it was an emergency. Neither of them should be considered "normal driving conditions".

    87. Re:Kudos by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "but subsequently went into the corner too fast"

      "Too fast" and "normal driving" are clear oposites. "Normal driving" means "at the proper speed for the way and its conditions", not "too fast".

      "you are wrong and you really should never speak in absolutes unless you are absolutely sure."

      I'm so sure I can even say that it can be taken as an operative definiton: the moment the wheels slip is the moment you know you are beyond normal driving conditions.

    88. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      You are mistaken to use average speed as a measurement. That doesn't measure anything other than, well, their average speed. All you'd be able to do is say that drivers who played Game X for X hours drove X faster on the way home. What if they are habitually slow drivers and their new average speed brought them up to the speed limit? What if the speed limits are artificially low and aren't an accurate indicator of dangerous driving?

    89. Re:Kudos by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "Another source is Top Gear 01x07, where Jeremy drives the Lotus Elise [...] During the road test, Jeremy notes some bad understeer through some corners."

      And surely, those that made the Elise to understeer were "normal driving conditions", didn't they?

    90. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm about as boring of a driver as you'll find outside of rural Iowa. (I've been to rural Iowa, everyone drives exactly 3 miles under the posted speed limit.)

      I'm from rural Iowa, and I can matter-of-fact say that we do not drive "exactly 3 miles under the posted speed limit." (in fact, driving even inches under posted speed limit signs has a severe impact on your windshield life expectancy)

      There are exactly two speeds in rural Iowa - 45 MPH, and on-your-ass (regardless of your speed).

    91. Re:Kudos by hardburn · · Score: 1

      There's no way a production car will lose traction at proper speed and proper maneovering on a road.

      By definition, no car will ever over/understeer when you drive it at the proper speed, no matter the age, drive train, suspension type, tires, conditions, or whatever electronic gee-whizzery your car provides. This is not a particularly enlightening statement, since we haven't put any limits on what the "proper speed" really is. It could be 5 mph.

      We would like it very much if:

      1. The car is setup so that it steers neutral in as wide a range of conditions as possible
      2. When it does go outside those bounds, the car behaves predictably so the driver can correct it

      This is just plain good engineering, and has been the way of things ever since live axles disappeared from all production cars for ever and ever (*ahem*). It prevents people from dieing due to simple mistakes, and makes it easier/faster/funner to use on the track.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    92. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What if they are habitually slow drivers and their new average speed brought them up to the speed limit?

      So what? Do you not understand how studies work? I'm not going to teach you statistics. A significant result would indicate a causal relationship between gaming and speeding. That you don't understand statistics doesn't change that.

      If you have a large enough sample size, having the average speeds differ across the groups would be meaningful. The point of tests like this is to look for differences among randomly selected groups. You are trying to break that statistical model by getting some base reading and comparing to that, which is a different type of study. But you take your inability to understand what I'm saying as evidence it is wrong.

      I should just change my sig (and I would, other than I like plugging a friend's web site) to something like: "Your inability to understand the problem doesn't mean that all answers are impossible."

    93. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know from personal experience that Video games can affect your driving. A pedestrian I had not seen earlier stepped to the side of the road. Surprised at his sudden appearance my immediate impulse was to swerve towards him and run him over. I suppressed the impulse. I cut down on BF2 after that! Spending hours driving around squishing people in a jeep DOES affect you, even if it is only a game. I am not a teenager.

    94. Re:Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are the normal conditions for driving a Lotus Elise? You surely won't take a little car like that to Home Depot, and (with access to a more practical car) you probably won't take it to the grocery store. Maybe the normal way to drive an Elise is fast.

      captcha=spinoff. How very apropos.

    95. Re:Kudos by Meski · · Score: 1

      You can't fuck a car in public. Laws against sexing non-sex toys, would de facto ban most sex toys since they're labeled for "novelty use only".

      What happens after the novelty wears off? No, I don't think I really want that answered. Nor do I want to know whether the novelty gets deposited onto the surfaces it was used on.

    96. Re:Kudos by mathew7 · · Score: 1

      Since he is quoting 16-year-olds who start playing games like GTA, I think they should consider the teenager psichology: they always want to show-off. It's a constant competition, and that is the #1 reason of teenage car accidents. I know, I tipped-over a car after 6 month of driving license (18 years). Locky for me my passengers were only bruised.

      PS: I play simulators now. At that time I was a big NFS fan.

    97. Re:Kudos by jandersen · · Score: 1

      ... the whole causation != correlation argument.

      One thing that always bothers me about when people play the "causation != correlation card" is that they then think they have proven that there is no reason to suspect a connection whatsoever. The correct position, when one has found a correlation, is that there certainly is reason to suspect some sort of connection - either A causes B, B causes A or an unknown C causes both A and B.

      Often, also, the correlation in itself is reason enough to start taking some action - such as looking a lot closer at what is going on.

    98. Re:Kudos by spazdor · · Score: 1

      I think anyone who takes an honest look at the first world will conclude that the widespread proliferation of personal cars is a fundamentally antisocial force.

      Suburbs have been designed in ways that will make them economically uninhabitable in an energy shortage. Cities have been quietly rendered unlivable in ways which most people can't even perceive anymore because they're so used to it. Potentially dangerous geoatmospheric effects and exploding incidences of asthma, stemming fromthe emissions of machines which are performing massively redundant work. Major arteries clog daily, jammed from horizon to horizon with people each taking up their own little 12-foot rectangle of ground.

      Think about it; if the entirety of urban and suburban commuter traffic were taken off the road and one fifth of that gas money was spent on a fleet of minibuses, people would get to work faster. There is a point when the net value of each new car produced (the car's usefulness to its owner, minus the detrimental effect on the usefulness everyone else's car due to its presence) becomes negative, and for most of the Slashdot-reading population, that point is way, way behind us.

      --
      DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
    99. Re:Kudos by ultranova · · Score: 1

      I think it comes more from male tendencies to show off, flaunt power, and general aggressiveness that is built into us.

      In my experience, it's just plain old arrogant stupidity that makes people take risks rather than aggression.

      Hell, that's generally why we LOVE fast and powerful cars, and they actually mean something to us more than they do with women, in general.

      I love driving a powerful car because it accelerates faster, making it easier and safer to, say, merge into traffick.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    100. Re:Kudos by ultranova · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they make Transformers[tm] porn? Rule 34 FTL :[

      Of course they do. There's a reason why Megatron keeps Starscream around.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    101. Re:Kudos by ultranova · · Score: 1

      "Too fast" and "normal driving" are clear oposites. "Normal driving" means "at the proper speed for the way and its conditions", not "too fast".

      Humans make mistakes. While it's better to avoid them, being a safe driver requires you to know how to recover from them.

      I'm so sure I can even say that it can be taken as an operative definiton: the moment the wheels slip is the moment you know you are beyond normal driving conditions.

      It follows that it would take near-miraculous luck to stay inside normal driving conditions your whole life. After all, at any moment in a city a pedestrian could decide to jump in front of your car, necessiating the slamming of brakes or evasive action.

      It's impossible to plan for every eventuality, and if something unexpected happens, your tires will likely end up slipping.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    102. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I understand statistics just fine. The problem is in the design of the study, not the statistics.

      Like I said, all you are gathering is an increase of speed, which on it's own is not an indicator of anything other than an increase of speed. You'd have to prove that an increase in speed has some sort of correlation with bad driving/dangerous driving. Your study is weak if you conclude that a slight increase in speed after playing video games equates to "reckless driving".

      Anyway, the whole point of studies is to put it out there for critique. If you don't want to fix your broken design, then fine...nobody will give your study any credence, and nobody will validate it by replicating your findings.

    103. Re:Kudos by cain · · Score: 1

      Good point but as far as consequences go, not very relevant is it?

      It is directly relevant to the parent post. Your post has nothing to do with anything. Given the actual topic, your post is a non sequitur.

    104. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Good point but as far as consequences go, not very relevant [to anything in reality but a trivial scoring point in an obscure /. post] is it?

      It is directly relevant to the parent post. Your post has nothing to do with anything.

      Consider me corrected (in brackets). Look at what I wrote again and you'll see that I agreed with your distinction. I merely went on to say that that distinction is nearly worthless (except perhaps during the sentencing phase).

      Given the actual topic, your post is a non sequitur.

      Cue the Inigo Montoya quote.

    105. Re:Kudos by cain · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to bother explaining why the distinction is important given the context of the discussion. Either you won't understand it or you're a troll, in either case: meh.

       

    106. Re:Kudos by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Troll card? In the second post? I'm hurt. Oh the horror and the blow to my self-esteem! In any case, considering the colossal reading comprehension fail I've had the honor to witness (and I'll be all mysterious too and refuse to explain - nice trick that) your explanation wouldn't be worth shit anyway so I think you did me a huge favor by ending this when you did. Thankee kindly.

    107. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I understand statistics just fine. The problem is in the design of the study, not the statistics.

      So, you are saying that if everyone on the planet were to be in the study, that you'd still find that the results wouldn't be statistically significant? Remember, the one you complained about first was to assign them a game to play to the exclusion of all others, and note things like crashes. The issue of "there aren't enough fatalities" is a statistical problem, not a design one. So are you levying that complaint about the first one you whined about, or the second one?

      Like I said, all you are gathering is an increase of speed, which on it's own is not an indicator of anything other than an increase of speed.

      I don't understand the complaint. Measuring speed accurately and correlating it to gameplay will correlate speed to gameplay. You are apparently complaining, not about the study, but about what people who read the results of the study are likely to summarize the results as. That's not even a complaint about the study itself. So what's the problem with the design? That it leads itself to sensationalist headlines? That's irrelevant.

      Your study is weak if you conclude that a slight increase in speed after playing video games equates to "reckless driving".

      And, since I never made that claim, then you must be asserting that my study is flawless.

      Anyway, the whole point of studies is to put it out there for critique. If you don't want to fix your broken design, then fine...nobody will give your study any credence, and nobody will validate it by replicating your findings.

      Studies of this kind don't find proofs of everything we may want to know. There isn't any you can think up that will. A true double-blind study on this is simply impossible. You can't have someone not know what videogame they are playing. The best you could do is have them play it without knowing why they are playing it. Is there any proof that videogames affect driving at all? If not, then this will at least show there to be some effect on average speeds. That would be groundbreaking and lead to more detailed examinations of the details of the interaction. And if it shows that there's no link to games and speed, then it's very unlikely that somehow it makes people drive aggressively and unsafely while not driving any faster.

    108. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      So, you are saying that if everyone on the planet were to be in the study, that you'd still find that the results wouldn't be statistically significant?

      Yes. The design of the study is more important than the number of participants. Nicely summarized. Statistical significance means nothing without context, and in your example, the context is flawed.

      The issue of "there aren't enough fatalities" is a statistical problem, not a design one.

      No, it's a design problem. Even if you got 200 people to participate (unlikely) the chances of any of them dying during the two years is improbable.

      Like I said, all you are gathering is an increase of speed, which on it's own is not an indicator of anything other than an increase of speed.

      I don't understand the complaint. Measuring speed accurately and correlating it to gameplay will correlate speed to gameplay.

      The article does not say there is a correlation between playing video games and driving speeds. This is why your suggested study does not address the issue in the article. The article makes the claim that people who play video games become more reckless drivers and your proposed study says people who play video games have their driving speed/accident rate/police encounter rate altered to some extent, because of playing the video game.

      The article did not say people who play video games become faster drivers. Faster != reckless, unless you define reckless as "driving faster than what is prudent for the driving condition". Using speed limits and encounters with cops is no indication of "recklessness". Your introduction of the irrelevant intervening variables decreases the validity of your design.

      You are apparently complaining, not about the study, but about what people who read the results of the study are likely to summarize the results as.

      I'm not complaining. I'm offering the insight that your design is inherently flawed because you are using the erroneous conclusion that driving faster makes one a reckless driver. You also overlooked the flaws in the design in that encounters with police and frequency of accidents are also not a reliable indicator of recklessness. If you can come up with a definition of reckless, then measure if drivers really do become more reckless, than you'd have a study. Or, you could change the thesis to something like "playing video games causes people to drive faster". That would be perfectly adequate, and leaves the study open to further discussion and further study--you know, the whole point of research?

        Your study is weak if you conclude that a slight increase in speed after playing video games equates to "reckless driving".

      And, since I never made that claim, then you must be asserting that my study is flawless.

      You didn't? Well damn, what a waste of time then. I could have sworn we were talking about ways to design a study that would support the article's findings of "playing video games leads to reckless driving".

      and then measure their average speeds on the way home

      And if that's not what you meant, you are saying it now...

      Is there any proof that videogames affect driving at all? If not, then this will at least show there to be some effect on average speeds. ... And if it shows that there's no link to games and speed, then it's very unlikely that somehow it makes people drive aggressively and unsafely while not driving any faster.

      Maybe I'm missing something, but in your previous posts, and in the part above, it is clear that you are making an erroneous assumption that driving faster is equivalent to reckless driving.

      I'm beginning to think that you didn't read the TFA, otherwise my points wouldn't seem so cryptic
      in the context of the article.

    109. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Even if you got 200 people to participate (unlikely) the chances of any of them dying during the two years is improbable.

      But you said it would be a problem even if everyone on the plant participated. So it's not an issue with "improbability" of fatalities. So I'm confused why you continue to harp on this point when you've proven it irrelevant. It sounds like you are arguing against yourself, not me.

      The article does not say there is a correlation between playing video games and driving speeds. This is why your suggested study does not address the issue in the article.

      Wait, so my study is conceptually flawed because it doesn't address someone else's study closely enough? What did their study actually study? And, when you state it, compare it to what I proposed. You make it sound like they are conceptually unrelated, and I disagree.

      I'm offering the insight that your design is inherently flawed because you are using the erroneous conclusion that driving faster makes one a reckless driver.

      I never said that. You said that, then asserted, without proof, that it wasn't true. You are winning the argument against yourself without fault. When you want to address what I'm saying, let me know.

      I could have sworn we were talking about ways to design a study that would support the article's findings of "playing video games leads to reckless driving".

      "Leads to" is wording that is inaccurate and misleading. "Causes" is a word that holds meaning. "Correlates to" is what "leads to" usually means, but "leads to" illegitimately implies some causation. So, I was addressing something else. I was addressing whether there was a link between games and driving. And you keep asserting that the article finds "playing video games leads to reckless driving." Yet, I think my proposal would be more likely to actually measure that in a statistically valid manner than the article in question. Not that mine does it, but that the article doesn't. But apparently, you accept the editor's version of the submitter's version of the news article of a summary of a study without question, when you have what seem to be very minor issues with my adjustments.

      I'm beginning to think that you didn't read the TFA, otherwise my points wouldn't seem so cryptic in the context of the article.

      The study was that kids who self-select themselves as gamers (of car games) and examining the number of times they got pulled over and then asserting (if not them, then the people reporting it in the TFA) that video games cause reckless driving.

      I haven't had a chance to see the study, but without mention of anything else, there could be a massive number of confounds, especially since it's a self-selected group. Maybe those that like driving recklessly are drawn to driving games. Maybe those that like driving like driving games and drive twice as safely as those that don't, but get twice the tickets because they travel four times the total miles. And you whine endlessly about asserting that I'm equating speed to recklessness, when tickets (mostly for speeding, if they follow the distribution of tickets normally given) being associated with recklessness is accepted without comment by you. Not that what I've said is beyond reproach, but that most complaints you have raised against me are *worse* in the article, and yet you claim the article's one is the golden standard that my proposals wouldn't even come close to. Are you sure you have read TFA?

    110. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Go back to the beginning and start over.

      You posit three measurements: measuring increase in speed, accident/death rates, and interaction with law enforcement.

      I'm simply saying, with total disregard to TFA, that those are three horrible devices, because none of them equate to recklessness on their own and all have other plausible explanations. 1- increased speed could still be well within reasonable speed, speed limits are artificial revenue generators, etc., 2-accidents are not always your fault, and by definition, are not always avoidable, and you can't use "death" because most likely you won't have any deaths, and if you have one death, that won't provide enough data to be useful, or it will skew your results (not to mention the death may be completely accidental and not the fault of the gamer/driver), and 3-cops can pull you over for any non-reckless driving reason--broken tail light, you look suspicious, they can be racist/sexist/ageist.

      In all three of these instances you'd have to prove that any of these things (accidents, speeding and interaction with cops) means that a video gamer became a more reckless driver (bringing the conversation back to the context of TFA). Well, first you have to prove that video gaming caused the reckless behavior, but YOU can't do that given you can't even prove that what you consider to qualify somebody as being a reckless driver is actually reckless.

      And you can use "Causes" all you want in your study, but that will get your study dismissed faster than BP can make excuses about oil spills.

    111. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You posit three measurements: measuring increase in speed, accident/death rates, and interaction with law enforcement. I'm simply saying, with total disregard to TFA, that those are three horrible devices,

      I'm sorry. With your call for me to read TFA, I assumed you did. They pulled two of those as evidence of reckless driving. I suggested the third as something that's "better" than the other two for being more easily measurable and verifiable, even if all three are flawed for proving recklessness. Perhaps you are confused because I did make mention of them myself, but anyone who had read TFA would have recognized them, and to take my comments about TFA "with total disregard to TFA" is absurd. You are going back to the beginning to start over, well TFA is the beginning. You are going back to my first comments and taking them out of context, while, at the same time, accusing me of not having read TFA.

      You assert that I haven't read TFA, then assault my references to TFA as being wrong. Don't blame me, blame the original study. I'm talking about improving it, and you are just attacking me as being "wrong" when I'm essentially quoting TFA.

      cops can pull you over for any non-reckless driving reason--broken tail light, you look suspicious, they can be racist/sexist/ageist.

      That is *all* TFA used when asserting the link between reckless driving and gaming. And you complain about my use of it, but not the use in TFA.

      I really don't understand what you are posting about. You don't address what I'm saying, you just say "look, lets start back where I first decided you are wrong, and lets continue to talk about how wrong you are for that one and only one post for many many posts to come."

      Critique TFA and let me know if you have any issues with it. Then we'll discuss how to improve it, if there are any flaws. That's what I'm talking about. But you, you are so focused on an Internet proof to prove I'm wrong that you haven't actually addressed any points I've made.

      Go back to the beginning and start over.

      God, how I wish you would. But no, your start doesn't match mine. I'm talking about TFA and improving the study they did, and you are evidently vested in the proof that I'm wrong, which is irrelevant to everything I've ever said (well, not exactly irrelevant, but tangential in an off-topic sense).

    112. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      1) I never said you didn't read the article. I merely said it seems like you didn't, based on your circular logic.

      2) You've confounded the issue so deeply that I can't separate the article from your posts anymore.

      3) Yes, I have issues with the article. More importantly, I have issues with your suggestions about how to improve the article.

      4) YOU are the one not addressing what is being said here. You simply feel your logic is sound, all the while you keep throwing out 8th grade level buzz words about design studies. You make it very clear that you really don't know what you are talking about. But hey, keep throwing "double-blind" out there and keep telling ME that I don't understand statistics. I'm married to a statistician, btw. If you don't want to listen to advice, you'll never get anywhere. My research had to go through a month of peer review and revision based on conversations exactly like this one. Sometimes you have to set aside some of your deepest convictions, because in the long run, all they do is invalidate your study with personal bias.

      And for the LAST time, this is not about YOU or the article being WRONG--it's about identifying weak factors in a design (be it the article or yours) and bringing to light how these weaknesses invalidate the findings. That's the problem with most people on slashdot...you think everything is either right or wrong, and you argue in a big stupid circle until the end of the Earth.

      Now, if you'd like to start over and at least acknowledge that putting a gps in the subjects' cars and measuring the driving speed shows nothing except their driving speed, and that the number of accidents and encounters with police a subject has proves nothing, then we can continue the discussion. Otherwise, I'm tired of hearing you trying to prove that you know something about research design.

    113. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      And for the LAST time, this is not about YOU or the article being WRONG--it's about identifying weak factors in a design (be it the article or yours) and bringing to light how these weaknesses invalidate the findings.

      Then let me be clear. You've stated that my design was wrong, multiple times, and never addressed any weaknesses in the article. You, despite my requests otherwise, have never compared my proposal to the original study. You have never addressed my specific questions about your criticism, other than to claim I don't understand something or some other response irrelevant to my questions.

      I guess I wouldn't do well with peer review. If I proposed something and people said "that's stupid and here's why" and I can point to something else that was done that it's an improvement over, I would expect a comparison between the two. Rather than something devolving into "I'm right because I'm married to a statistician, nah nah nu nah nah."

      Now, if you'd like to start over and at least acknowledge that putting a gps in the subjects' cars and measuring the driving speed shows nothing except their driving speed, and that the number of accidents and encounters with police a subject has proves nothing, then we can continue the discussion.

      No. I'm not playing your little "admit you are wrong and beg forgiveness or I'll keep telling you that you are wrong no matter what you say" game. If you want to reset the conversation, why pick the first point after you think I'm wrong, rather than resetting to the actual beginning, the fucking article? It's because this is a game of "I'm right and you are wrong and I am going to win" rather than a "TFA is stupid, it equates encounters with the police with reckless driving and uses a self-selected group to do so, and is therefore an inherently flawed study that, in addition to the measure that doesn't equate to what they say it will, doesn't even get a statistically valid result for that."

      Oh, and I never said that increase in speed means reckless driving. You are a liar if you say otherwise. You can state that you inferred as much by taking my comments out of context, but I've corrected you multiple times, and "I misunderstood you, so I'm going to stick with my initial misunderstanding, regardless of any future clarifications" strikes me, not as some open minded discussion about the topic as you claim, but as some closed minded person more interested in winning an argument than discussing and article and how the study it's reporting on could be improved.

      Otherwise, I'm tired of hearing you trying to prove that you know something about research design.

      And I'm tired of you asserting that you know what I meant when I've explicitly corrected you multiple times. I never equated reckless driving to average speed. You did. I never equated run ins with cops to be reckless driving. The study did. I never equated fatalities with reckless driving. The fucking article did. But, somehow, you assert my reference to TFA as an endorsement of the ideas therein, even when I've explicitly stated that's not the case. So yes, I'm trying to "reset" the discussion to the initial state, TFA. You have said you don't want to. You want to play games and reset to the first point where you misunderstood me and work from that initial misunderstanding. I want to go back one more than that, to before you started putting words in my mouth regarding reckless driving. But nope, that might lead to you not "winning" the argument. And discussing the flaws in the original study is not going to get you closer to your goal, so you refuse to actually discuss the article, and instead want to focus 100% on a misunderstanding that you have regarding my statements.

      Oh, and so you know, there is no objective measure of "reckless driving." So average speed, tickets, fatalities, etc. are all not exact indicators. "Reckless driving" is a subjective measure that can never be fully represented by objective numbers because it isn't objective.

    114. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      ..there is no objective measure of "reckless driving." So average speed, tickets, fatalities, etc. are all not exact indicators. "Reckless driving" is a subjective measure that can never be fully represented by objective numbers because it isn't objective.

      Thanks. You finally get it. That has been my point from my first post. I'm not sure why you've dragged this (and many other discussion threads, apparently,looking at your user info) into an argument, when I'm merely here for a discussion.

      Now let me address where you explicitly endorse the article's premise that driving faster equates to reckless driving. In your own words:

      You then have them do this over a two year period, and note the crash rate and fatality rate of your subjects, as well as any encounters with the police for driving activities.

      have 100 people come in and have 25 play Mario Kart for 2 hours, 25 play GTA, 25 play Tetris, and 25 play Forza and then measure their average speeds on the way home (plant a GPS system without them knowing or something).

      A significant result would indicate a causal relationship between gaming and speeding.

      Enjoy the rest of your arguments on slashdot. I'm off to other threads that are more productive.

    115. Re:Kudos by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

      For the pure 'just go from A to B in the safest way stopping at semaphores and never crashing' simulators, see here:

      http://www.eurotrucksimulator.com/

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
    116. Re:Kudos by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

      Understeer or oversteer happens because you are driving too fast for taking any given curve. Then the traction wheels lose traction and start sliding.

      If your car is FWD, your car normally understeers when losing traction. If your car is RWD, it normally oversteers when losing traction.

      Actually, the brake balance can help prevent or induce oversteer, in a RWD if the balance is 60% rear wheels, 40% front wheels, then you will probably oversteer by taking a curve very fast and then slamming the brakes.

      'Designing the car to understeer' seems to me just changing the break balance so the front wheels brake more than the rear wheels.

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
    117. Re:Kudos by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

      Then it means that you are part of a very dangerous demographic in terms of video games influence.

      So, we need to sterilize you in order to fix society a little.

      U_U

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
    118. Re:Kudos by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "What are the normal conditions for driving a Lotus Elise?"

      On a public road, Germany Autobahns notwithstanding? Exactly the same as those for a Skoda Fabia.

      An you can be sure that those conditions won't let a Skoda Fabia to lose grip, much less an Elise.

    119. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Thanks. You finally get it. That has been my point from my first post.

      Well, then don't post that I'm wrong and TFA is right when you believe TFA to be wrong. That lead to all the confusion because you defended TFA over my statements, in direct contradiction to your present statement.

      Enjoy the rest of your arguments on slashdot. I'm off to other threads that are more productive.

      Yes, it is as I said, you are a liar and a cheat. You were lying the whole time, trying to get me to "admit" something I never said, calling for recall back to some previous state arbitrarily determined by you to be the easiest way to prove me wrong, while the whole time lying about it. I guess I should have figured out by your contradictory statements and such that you were a liar bent on proving yourself right when I showed you were wrong in your defense of TFA. But that's ok. I'm used to liars. They love the anonymity of the Internet. They never have to have anyone call them on their lies. "Let's reset to start from the beginning" means "I want you to go back to where I first took your statements out of context, just before I made a number of factual errors in regard to TFA, so that I can prove you wrong on something you never actually said in order to hide the fact that I made a number of false statements about TFA, an I'm going to lie repeatedly to you about my goals and motivations, as long as it gets you to eventually say something I can take out of context to defend my ego I put on the line by making those initial incorrect statements."

      Yeah, good job. You won an argument on the Internet by lying. I bet you feel much better.

    120. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      You are sad. I'm at least the third or fourth person you accuse of lying, just looking at your other posts.

      There's nothing to "win" here, I'm not trying to get you to "admit" anything, and all you are doing is showing the world that you have a maturity and intellect problem.

    121. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Stop lying, and people will stop calling you a liar. It's simple. You called for a "reset" to discuss the issues. And you lied.

      Oh, and speeding does indicate reckless driving. Everything else the same, higher speed is less safe. So it's a great measure, better than counting tickets arbitrarily handed out.

      There's nothing to "win" here, I'm not trying to get you to "admit" anything, and all you are doing is showing the world that you have a maturity and intellect problem.

      Then you should have stayed true to your word that you wanted to "reset" to start the discussion again, but that was never your plan, so you lied. I reset the discussion, at your request, and your lying ways took a variety of comments out of context to formulate some inane argument against me, rather than, as you said you would, examine the study. Why did you lie? Why not just tell the truth? Is your word really so worthless that you'd abandon it just so you can "win" an argument?

      And yes, I do call people liars a lot. For one, name a single person you know that has never lied, ever. Don't know one? Me neither. And have no not noticed people who like to engage in rhetorical games? Playing devils advocate is usually done in a lying way because people misrepresent their own opinion in order to deceive others, then say "just kidding" when they are challenged. Or those that engage in hyperbole (white lies) to show their side better.

      But then, it's a side effect of the US justice system (not blaming the justice system just that it's the publicized thing that it seems discussions on the Internet try to be). It's the adversarial system. Where "winning" is more important than the truth. No one cares what the truth is, and no one works toward it. Instead, it's a game of what you can "prove" under the rules allotted. It might make an efficient justice system, but it devolves into people like you who think themselves honorable while lying and selling out their personal ethics to win an argument with some anonymous person. Hypocritical liars out for "wins" rather than actually discussing issues.

      Feel free to prove me wrong. Honor your word and actually discuss what you said you would. But no, that would be expecting too much. To expect you to un-lie is silly. You've already committed to whatever fabricated logic you've picked to justify lying in order to win, and I wouldn't expect someone to actually honor their word once they've already broken it. That would require that they not only admit they were wrong, but wrong twice, and someone who lies to win arguments isn't likely to do the one, let alone do it twice.

    122. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Dude, you are blinded by your fanaticism and general lack of maturity. Nobody is lying and this isn't an argument that is to be won or lost. It's a simple criticism of a glaring flaw in your design. You want to make it an argument that is winnable and I'm just telling you that you need to study research design a little more closely.

      You should start with your flawed causative analysis:

      Oh, and speeding does indicate reckless driving. Everything else the same, higher speed is less safe. So it's a great measure, better than counting tickets arbitrarily handed out.

       

      It is YOUR responsibility as a researcher to show that this is true, otherwise your study is biased. But thanks for FINALLY addressing one of the specific flaws I have identified.

      When you fix that, we can move on to your measurement of outcomes and analysis of results sections. But, like I've said several times now, starting with a flawed causative analysis renders the rest of the design invalid.

      And yes, I do call people liars a lot. For one, name a single person you know that has never lied, ever. Don't know one? Me neither. And have no not noticed people who like to engage in rhetorical games? Playing devils advocate is usually done in a lying way because people misrepresent their own opinion in order to deceive others, then say "just kidding" when they are challenged. Or those that engage in hyperbole (white lies) to show their side better.

      So there we have it...you simply don't understand critical thinking and like a recalcitrant 6-year old, you revert to name-calling.

      But then, it's a side effect of the US justice system (not blaming the justice system just that it's the publicized thing that it seems discussions on the Internet try to be). It's the adversarial system. Where "winning" is more important than the truth. No one cares what the truth is, and no one works toward it. Instead, it's a game of what you can "prove" under the rules allotted. It might make an efficient justice system, but it devolves into people like you who think themselves honorable while lying and selling out their personal ethics to win an argument with some anonymous person. Hypocritical liars out for "wins" rather than actually discussing issues.

      Wow, that's a doozy of a rant. Well played. Sorry I'm not a lawyer, and I don't have your very undeveloped intellect to think this way.

      Feel free to prove me wrong. Honor your word and actually discuss what you said you would. But no, that would be expecting too much. To expect you to un-lie is silly.

      Perhaps I could try to un-lie if, in fact, you could point out where I've lied in the first place?

      You've already committed to whatever fabricated logic you've picked to justify lying in order to win, and I wouldn't expect someone to actually honor their word once they've already broken it. That would require that they not only admit they were wrong, but wrong twice, and someone who lies to win arguments isn't likely to do the one, let alone do it twice.

      Yay! I win by lying! This feels awesome! Wait, what did I win again? I actually feel like I've lost.....a ton of time responding to a ranting idiot.

    123. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You should start with your flawed causative analysis:

      Again, that's not the beginning. Did you or did you not want to go back to the beginning? Since you said you did, and you never have, I can only conclude you are a liar. Feel free to come back when you are willing to do what you said and go back to the beginning.

      So there we have it...you simply don't understand critical thinking and like a recalcitrant 6-year old, you revert to name-calling.

      Arguing through deception is lying. That you think rhetorical games done with the intent to deceive is somehow above the moniker of "lying" is irrelevant of whether an untruth was spoken with the intent to deceive.

      So, lets start at the beginning. Do you think that the study in TFA could have found what it stated it found, and if not why not? What can be done to improve the study in TFA?

      It is YOUR responsibility as a researcher to show that this is true, otherwise your study is biased.

      They did the study, not me. I was proposing adjustments to theirs to make it better, and you defended theirs and attacked mine with arguments that are more applicable to the study you defended than mine. Why? I didn't propose a whole new study, I was talking about how I would have done things differently if I were involved in their study. You never addressed the point that I was proposing things to improve their study. In fact, you seem to argue with me that I didn't mean it that way when I have corrected you multiple times. Why do you cling to your misconception, even when corrected? Do you think you know more what I meant than I did? How can you know what's in my mind and I don't? Your whole line of reasoning seems absurd.

      When you fix that, we can move on to your measurement of outcomes and analysis of results sections.

      I was only ever discussing TFA. When you do the same for TFA that you are doing in regards to my modifications of TFA, then we can "move on" to the next part. You kept asking to go back to the beginning. Do so, as you said. Why won't you honor your word?

    124. Re:Kudos by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Arguing through deception is lying.

      I'M NOT FUCKING ARGUING, YOU DUMBASS. I'm telling you that your assumption that speeding is not a valid measurement of recklessness. That's ALL. There's no lying. There's no misattributing what you said, because I QUOTED you.

      When I say, let's start from the beginning, that means quit confounding the issue with your personal rants and get back to the source of the problem: you think you can simply measure the subjects driving home by affixing a GPS to their car and then make a faulty causative analysis that, because they played video games, their speed increased, which makes them reckless drivers. All you can prove in that model is that indeed, their speeds increased after playing video games.

      It is YOUR responsibility as a researcher to show that this is true, otherwise your study is biased.

      They did the study, not me.

      NO!!!!! You just said:

      Oh, and speeding does indicate reckless driving. Everything else the same, higher speed is less safe. So it's a great measure, better than counting tickets arbitrarily handed out.

      YOU said that. That is YOUR quote. It is YOUR responsibility as the researcher to prove this is true, either through empirical evidence and persuasive persentation. You have done neither.

      I was proposing adjustments to theirs to make it better

      And you made it worse by introducing poor measurements that you refuse to address in the thousands of words you have written so far. You've only posted this so far:

      Oh, and speeding does indicate reckless driving. Everything else the same, higher speed is less safe. So it's a great measure, better than counting tickets arbitrarily handed out.

      Which is wrong. This is not arguable.

      and you defended theirs

      Citation please. Their study sucks. The only good think about the article is the last paragraph that says there's not relationship between video games and reckless driving.

       

      that and attacked mine with arguments that are more applicable to the study you defended than mine.

      Precisely because the exact parts of your post that I quoted, you dismissed as being part of TFA, when indeed they were your OWN words. Again, I quoted YOU, not the TFA.

      You never addressed the point that I was proposing things to improve their study.

      I cited your three faulty premises...like 5 times now. Because you can't stop ranting and see that, you are indeed an idiot. You can't claim on one hand that I didn't even read TFA, and then on the other claim I'm supporting or critiquing TFA (the fact that you've accused me of both at the same time is a good demonstration of your ranting.

      Do you think you know more what I meant than I did?

      Sure don't. That's why I quoted EXACTLY what YOU said and have kept conversation to that. You, on the other hand seem to need your meds to stay on topic.

      How can you know what's in my mind and I don't?

      That's the problem. You don't know what's in your head.

      Why won't you honor your word?

      Because I'm a filthy liar who sets out only to deceive...or, I actually teach research design (there, I did it...appeal to authority logical fallacy) and have had lots of fun using your flawed logic as examples of bad design for future classes.

    125. Re:Kudos by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I'M NOT FUCKING ARGUING, YOU DUMBASS. I'm telling you that your assumption that speeding is not a valid measurement of recklessness. That's ALL.

      Generally, yelling at someone telling them they are wrong and calling them names is considered arguing. Perhaps that's the issue. You don't understand English. You are arguing with me about whether you are arguing with me. If you aren't arguing, why have you been arguing with me for so many posts? And here, it's not an argument, it's you telling me that you are right and I'm wrong, and that "arguing" has nothing to do with it. I'll try that with my wife. "I'm not arguing with you, I'm just telling you that you are wrong." We'll see how that goes.

      YOU said that. That is YOUR quote. It is YOUR responsibility as the researcher to prove this is true, either through empirical evidence and persuasive persentation.

      Then give me $1,000,000 to do the study. Otherwise, fuck off. I'm not doing the research, and if I did I would support it. You are asking me to defend a conclusion to a study that hasn't been done.

      Their study sucks.

      And the only thing I've been doing is talking about ways of doing their better. But, rather than discussing theirs and whether my suggestions are improvements, you've just been a lying prick insulting and whining your way through illogical arguments to bash whatever I say.

      Let's try this: Given identical and normal circumstances, traveling faster will require you to travel farther before stopping, and as such, must, by definition, be less safe than a lower speed. If that's false, please explain how and why.

  2. Ridiculous by MeanMF · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's just nonsense.. Without all those extended training sessions playing Forza, I'd never be able to drive safely on the highway at 90+ mph.

    1. Re:Ridiculous by Amouth · · Score: 1

      Test Drive - taught me how to drive a manual - and the importance of gear ratios :)

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    2. Re:Ridiculous by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      I really wonder how your evading-arrest, hooker-abuse and car-jacking skills have improved since you started playing GTA.

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    3. Re:Ridiculous by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Considering I can't finish a single GRID race, even in last place, without wiping out half a dozen times, maybe I should stay away from cars IRL?

    4. Re:Ridiculous by magarity · · Score: 1

      As for myself, without all those extended training sessions playing Carmageddon I'd never be able to jump from rooftop to rooftop safely.

    5. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you should probably avoid Indy Racing League.

    6. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I like to tell my passengers, I learnt to drive playing Carmegeddon.

    7. Re:Ridiculous by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      evading-arrest * * * *
      hooker-abuse * * * * *
      car-jacking * * *

      I know, I know. I need to practice car-jacking, but I find hooker-abuse is just so much fun.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    8. Re:Ridiculous by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      That's what I was wondering. What if all these teenage boys are really just trying to practice their gaming skills by driving like lunatics? By the way, if you practice your hooker-abuse skills IRL, you'd better be prepared to practice your run-like-hell-cause-that-crazy-bitch-has-a-gun skills, too.

    9. Re:Ridiculous by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1

      Strangely enough, this bothered me too before I started driving (this was back in the early days of NFS). When I did start driving IRL, it was actually much easier since I was usually driving within the recommended speeds for curves and such so that maneuvering was never a problem. Some of the hilly roads in Berkeley do remind me of the harder levels in NFS2 though (a sinking feeling that you're gonna hit the next railing and go over the edge - it passes). So yes, take home message - real life driving is actually much easier than video game driving (and I end up scraping side rails only very rarely IRL).

    10. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering I can't finish a single GRID race, even in last place, without wiping out half a dozen times, maybe I should stay away from cars IRL?

      Quick question, is that the PC or a console version? The controls are screwed unless you're getting 60fps on the PC, massive input lag meaning you end up constantly oversteering.

    11. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe I should stay away from cars IRL

      Not necessarily but, you should probably stay away from 400HP, RWD cars.

    12. Re:Ridiculous by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Quick question, is that the PC or a console version? The controls are screwed unless you're getting 60fps on the PC, massive input lag meaning you end up constantly oversteering.

      Hmm, thanks for the advice! It sometimes dropped below 60. I turned off AA and Vsync, and it handles better now - though that might also be partly because I also decreased the steering deadzone to 15% from default 20%.

    13. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without driving a real car near its limit, I'd never be able yo appreciate racing games. That said, a racing game with all driver aids turned off feels a lot like my Mom's Prius under traction control.

  3. I for one welcome this by AlastairLynn · · Score: 5, Funny

    Frankly, there are too many of these damn kids around anyway.

    1. Re:I for one welcome this by ch-chuck · · Score: 5, Funny

      Get your car off my lawn!

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    2. Re:I for one welcome this by butterflysrage · · Score: 0

      Get your car off my house!

      --
      the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    3. Re:I for one welcome this by Pojut · · Score: 1

      That's not a house; that's my wife, clod!

    4. Re:I for one welcome this by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1

      Get outta my dreams, get into my car!

      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
    5. Re:I for one welcome this by discord5 · · Score: 1

      That's not a house; that's my wife, clod!

      <insert degoratory comment on airbags/bumper here>

    6. Re:I for one welcome this by Pojut · · Score: 1

      She's got proper safety padding where it counts, we'll just leave it at that :-)

    7. Re:I for one welcome this by Danse · · Score: 1

      Since when have teenagers ever NOT done stupid, dangerous things with cars? They talk like this is something new. From the stories I've heard from my dad and my uncles, they did some things 40 years ago that even teens today would probably think were really insane.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    8. Re:I for one welcome this by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      they did some things 40 years ago that even teens today would probably think were really insane.

      And probably did them without seatbelts, too....

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    9. Re:I for one welcome this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In most countries, teenagers (at least those under 18) cannot legally drive a car.

  4. Naw ... by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Funny

    The only time my poor driving skills from video games crosses over into my real driving is when I'm playing a driving game while driving my car.

    1. Re:Naw ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's an app for that!

    2. Re:Naw ... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can't believe you made this joke without using the Yo Dawg Meme.

    3. Re:Naw ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..and 100 and 2 right...tightens..and 50..and 5 left into 3 right - keep right...slippy...

    4. Re:Naw ... by WraithCube · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough just after reading I stumbled upon this article: Driving a Real World Car like a Video Game Car.

    5. Re:Naw ... by TBoon · · Score: 1

      Three comments on that video...

      1. Margin of turn-radius for that hairpin turn. Or was that set up to be exceedingly narrow, or even impossible just to make sure the result wouldn't "work" ?

      2. The angle of the camera seemed a bit low? Been a while since I played much racing games, but it seemed to me that there was a somewhat larger than usual blind zone in front of their truck.

      3. As pointed out in the article, how about steering with a game-controller instead of a steering wheel? I know that when I got a wheel-controller for gaming, I actually had to change the POV to inside in games. Even in games the 3rd person view was annoying when using a steering wheel and pedals!

  5. "NEVER TELL ME THE ODDS!" by starglider29a · · Score: 1

    Video games! HAH! I learned to drive recklessly from Han Solo on the big screen. I didn't need no stinkin' video game! Kiss my asteroids!

  6. New genre of games ? by ProdigyPuNk · · Score: 1

    Perhaps we need a new genre of driving games. Anyone remember Driver, where the cops would leave you alone so long as you stopped at traffic lights and whatnot ? We need that, only if you do get in a high speed chase you almost always lose, and your xbox/playstation/etc is deactivated for the length of your would-be prison sentence. Maybe that'll get through to the kids ;p

    1. Re:New genre of games ? by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      And who would want to play your game, again...?

    2. Re:New genre of games ? by afex · · Score: 2, Funny

      i know you are joking, but the whole point of Driver was to learn how to do terrible things while the cops weren't looking...

    3. Re:New genre of games ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Who cares about who would play it? That's not the point. It's about who would BUY it, namely "concerned" parents who'd "gift" this to their children.

      Who do you think buys all these inane "educational" games?

    4. Re:New genre of games ? by sammyF70 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      see .. you made his point : Video Games teach you how to behave in real life : Do whatever you want, jus don't get caught!

      --
      "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
    5. Re:New genre of games ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say that like it's a bad thing.

    6. Re:New genre of games ? by Itninja · · Score: 1

      God I loved that game! I thought it was cool that all the audio was standard CD music format...so I could drop the CD in my smokin hot Aiwa stereo and kick those 70's disco clone tunes.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    7. Re:New genre of games ? by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I was once stopped for speeding on the highway.

      When the cop came to me I simply did up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, A, B, start and he let me off with a warning.

  7. I found the opposite by localman57 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    About 10 years ago I got really into the game "Midtown Madness" which features races where you race free-form through downtown Chicago picking your own route to hit a number of checkpoints. The game requires you to read traffic patterns, lights, etc far in advance. After playing the game, I found that I was doing the same thing in real traffic. My brain had been trained to observe and anticipate as if I were driving through city traffic at 80MPH rather than 35. I became much more aware of what was happening on cross streets, and in lanes other than mine. It faded back to normal, though, as I moved on to other games.

    I do wonder, however, if being able to crash a car repeatedly with no real consequences has an impact on your subconcious risk-assesment of various manuvers.

    1. Re:I found the opposite by hoggoth · · Score: 5, Funny

      I was really into Marble Madness. After playing the game, I found myself bouncing off walls and dropping into manhole covers.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    2. Re:I found the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do wonder, however, if being able to crash a car repeatedly with no real consequences has an impact on your subconcious risk-assesment of various manuvers.

      It does, but only once.

    3. Re:I found the opposite by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Midtown Madness was really fun. :)

    4. Re:I found the opposite by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I drove like hell long before I bought my commdore 64. I've been playing driving games for almost 30 years now and my driving has greatly improved. I generally go at or near the speed limit and seldom run red lights anymore. I even come to a FULL stop at stop signs. It could be due to the video games or the steady fucking my insurance company gave me for all those tickets I got when I was younger. They made me pay for several accidents in advance which I never had....no refund though, they kept the money to bribe my state legislature with.

    5. Re:I found the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was really really into subspace, and that game requires you to be aware of the entire screen without focusing on one specific part. That did seem to affect my ability to focus in traffic for a while until I weened myself off that game. I can't necessarily determine if it was a positive or negative effect, but it definitely felt different.

    6. Re:I found the opposite by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      About 10 years ago I got really into the game "Midtown Madness" which features races where you race free-form through downtown Chicago picking your own route to hit a number of checkpoints. The game requires you to read traffic patterns, lights, etc far in advance. After playing the game, I found that I was doing the same thing in real traffic. My brain had been trained to observe and anticipate as if I were driving through city traffic at 80MPH rather than 35. I became much more aware of what was happening on cross streets, and in lanes other than mine. It faded back to normal, though, as I moved on to other games.

      I find any heavily repeated experience will likely bleed over into other parts of your life. The question is whether you are weak-minded enough to let it overcome you. That's why I think it's silly to say "World of Warcraft made these kids flunk out of college" or "these professionals lost their jobs!" They have addictive personalities. The game hit on those pleasure centers and addictive behaviors went wild. They could have gotten hooked on gambling at the casino or any other number of things. It's the addictive behavior problem, the particular thing they're addicted to is irrelevant. "Krispy Kremes made me fat!" No. Your uncontrolled binging made you fat. If your particular poison was Krispy Kreme fine, but that's not to say it's their fault. Johnny Walker didn't make me an alcoholic just because it's my favorite brand.

      All that being said, I did start to look at traffic that way after playing GTA3 heavily. I started thinking "You know, I probably could gun it and slide right through there." But I can differentiate between reality and fantasy. Some people really have problems with that. There was some stupid kid obsessed with Pulp Fiction who jumped up in a bank and shouted "Everybody be cool, this is a robbery." He was shot and killed. His parents were trying to blame the movie. No, the problem was with the kid. He could have just as easily gotten obsessed with a book or a John Lennon song or something else. A sad novel can make me sad in turn but it won't make me kill myself; it might be enough to push someone else over the edge.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    7. Re:I found the opposite by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

      I became much more aware of what was happening on cross streets, and in lanes other than mine.

      Being aware of surroundings is so imperative to safe driving. No matter how fast you are going, if you aren't paying attention to your surroundings then you can easily cause an accident even at slow speeds.
      For example, if I see a friend driving by somewhere that I am walking, I'll wave to them or something and it's sad when you can see that they don't even notice you at all. Not recognize me but not even see that a person is walking nearby waving their arms about like a lunatic!
      When I drive I am constantly paying attention to pedestrians, and all cars in the lanes around me. Paying attention to slight motions to anticipate their actions. Always being ready for anything.
      The only thing keeping cars from crashing in to me is a bunch of people not paying attention, so excuse me for not trusting that I can just safely barrel down the highway.

      --
      Balderdash!
    8. Re:I found the opposite by H0p313ss · · Score: 2, Funny

      Driving late at night I find myself dividing my attention between my dragons reigns and the mini map as I search for minerals on a war-torn glacier...

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    9. Re:I found the opposite by Bovius · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid I have to agree with the article in principle, but it depends a lot on the specific racing game you're playing and what behaviors it encourages. As the parent post suggests, some games may actually improve your alertness and reactions.

      On the other hand, after extended periods of playing some racing games, I've had to noticeably resist the urge to speed or make wide left hand turns. The urge did fade away soon after I stopped playing.

    10. Re:I found the opposite by beckett · · Score: 1

      And Frogger taught me to jaywalk.

    11. Re:I found the opposite by Bryansix · · Score: 1

      Well as a corrallary to that I'd say that being able to have impact with no real life consequenses is good for teaching people how to handle crashes. You see by default most people give up and lose control completely upon impact. With training though you learn that impact is not the end of the world. Its how you adjust the impact angle to lessen the impact and then how you control the car after impact that matter the most.

  8. Definitely by SnugglesTheBear · · Score: 1

    I can totally see this. If I drive after about an hour or two playing GTA and I see a cop car, my first instinct is to ram into the cop car, wait for the cop to get out, jump into his car, speed off, find a hooker and sleep with her (killing her promptly after), and repeat.

    --
    Would you hug a bear?
    1. Re:Definitely by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      While that might be funny, I do have an experience similar to that. I was playing GTA Vice City one week (yes, I was on vacation and I finished the game in 4 days). Anyways, after about 32 hours of straight play stopping only for restroom breaks and to grab food or drinks to be consumed while playing, I got a phone call from my mother. Her car broke down on her way home from work. I stopped playing, got into my real car, and started driving to pick her up. I noticed a semi truck up the road attempting to turn into a parking lot that had cars parked in a way he couldn't make the turn. I started breaking and it didn't look like I was slowing down. I checked my speed and I was doing over 120 in a 45 mph zone. I barely stopped before hitting the truck which was blocking the entire road now. I seriously thought I was only doing about 40 or so.

      After that, I noticed myself running a red light. I stopped and thought about it for a minute, I was driving just like I would in Vice City. It took a conscious effort to not drive the same as I would/was in the game. This all seemed to be subconscious actions in which I wasn't intentionally forgetting how I should drive or intentionally driving recklessly. After noticing it, I haven't had an issue like that since. I'm not sure if it was because I was in a hurry to pick up my mother or if it was because I was sleep deprived or what.

      From my experience, I can see someone blurring the lines between fantasy and reality when it comes to driving games.

    2. Re:Definitely by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

      If you did not notice you were doing 120, you should not be driving. Ever.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    3. Re:Definitely by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      At the time, I probably shouldn't have. As I said, I had already been up playing the game for 36 hours (a day and a half). And the 120 mph was after I started slowing down. I'm not sure how fast I was going- I had a 1996 Buick Regal with a hot V6 in it (hot as in it was supposedly souped up by the guy I purchased it from sitting at almost 280hp and 300 ft lbs torque - The Buick regal already had a pretty decent performance coming in stock on the series II 3.8L at 205hp and 230 torque).

      Anyways, I can usually tell when I'm more then 5 mph over the posted speed limit. The entire point was that after playing the game like that and being sleep deprived, excess speed simply didn't register with me. I assumed the environment in the game subconsciously or something. I generally don't go more then 5 mph over the posted speed limit unless it's an emergency or something. I'm a volunteer fire fighter and do drive the trucks from time to time so I know what an emergency is and how to safely speed. Of course it helps with lights and a siren telling others to get out of the way.

  9. "Links" by Reason58 · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the simplest solution is true? People who enjoy driving fast are naturally attracted to games featuring fast driving?

    1. Re:"Links" by Lord+Grey · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the simplest solution is true? People who enjoy driving fast are naturally attracted to games featuring fast driving?

      I think people who enjoy driving (not "cruising") also enjoy driving games. Reckless driving, however, is not defined as only "driving fast." Maneuvers that other drivers are not expecting, or maneuvers that are overly dangerous to yourself, are "reckless."

      I love driving games, with Gran Turismo being my favorite. Speed is (obviously) an essential part of the game, but that part of it doesn't translate a desire for me to shoot down the road at 140mph (often). However, the handling aspects of the game -- proper high-speed cornering techniques, for instance -- do sometimes translate into the real world and can land you into trouble. I'm guilty of sometimes following driving lines while going back and forth to work. If anyone was nearby, I'm sure they'd say that was reckless, if only because they're not expecting it. If we were all on a road course somewhere, those maneuvers would be expected (and praised).

      Anyway, I do think that a love for driving causes people to push the limits on their cars, whether in a game or on the road. The reckless bit starts where common sense leaves off.

      --
      // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
  10. Kids are kids by Krneki · · Score: 1

    Since the dawn of humans, kids were always reckless.

    When I was a young driver the only way I could drive was flat out, no compromises, just pure speed. Now 20 years later I'm calm and polite. I still enjoy a random race on the track, but on the road I have full respect for other drivers.

    And you can see the exact same patter in online racing. Most of the youngster drive like they play a single player game.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:Kids are kids by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Just because *you* were reckless doesn't mean *all kids* are reckless. False generalization. It's not 'since the dawn of time' it's 'since modern American culture started in the 50s'.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Kids are kids by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Um, no, kids were still reckless. Its just before the '50s cars were prohibitively expensive for kids to get so kids generally weren't driving. They just generally were reckless in other ways like with farm machinery, going out and getting themselves killed in wars, etc.

      Not having a car is going to make it hard to be reckless with a car, but it sure didn't cut down on recklessness.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:Kids are kids by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      See? These cultural blinders we don't even know we're wearing. Only in America and related countries is it "traditional" for teenagers to be risk-takers. Decades of MTV have taken effect. I live inside another culture and here, teens are assumed to have other traits, none of which is a fondness for irresponsible behavior. In fact, the very idea of "teenager" doesn't really exist.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re:Kids are kids by Krneki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      See? These cultural blinders we don't even know we're wearing. Only in America and related countries is it "traditional" for teenagers to be risk-takers. Decades of MTV have taken effect. I live inside another culture and here, teens are assumed to have other traits, none of which is a fondness for irresponsible behavior. In fact, the very idea of "teenager" doesn't really exist.

      "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers. Plato

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    5. Re:Kids are kids by Krneki · · Score: 1

      Of course I'm generalizing. Just because I say kid a reckless doesn't imply every is. For crying out loud, do you really need to Troll?

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    6. Re:Kids are kids by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, because it was in the west that life expectancies actually hit a point where you could be pretty sure you'd survive past 40 and be a grandparent and the idea of being a great grandparent wasn't out of the question. In other countries its commonplace to marry at 16 or earlier and start a family. In America and related countries (which I'm assuming you mean Europe and the westernized countries of Asia) waiting until your mid twenties or later to get married and start a family is pretty typical.

      Because in western culture its not typical to get married early, there is a time where teenagers have a time to really decide what they want to do with their life and yes, some of it may involve -gasp- risk taking, but the entire mentality is born out of the fact that life expectancies have increased dramatically.

      I'm sure in all of the other countries there are reckless kids but because they are poor they start families earlier, take more risky jobs, etc. and so its not considered to be "risky" when it really involves a high mortality rate.

      In many other countries in the present and in the past, it used to be that you could die from pretty typical stuff like an infection, common illnesses, etc. since we've conquered most of that in the west with the exception of things like cancer, of course car accidents are going to be the leading cause of death because what else would a western teenager die from? We've thankfully ended the tyrannical practice of having a non-volunteer army so kids aren't being killed in wars, cured the vast majority of sicknesses, need to use very little hard labor for the vast majority of things, etc. so the common causes of death in other countries don't exist in the west for teenagers.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    7. Re:Kids are kids by russotto · · Score: 1

      The idea of "teenager" is relatively new (and must be destroyed, IMO), but the idea of people of that age (particularly young men) being more tolerant of risks goes back at least to Roman times.

    8. Re:Kids are kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's 'since modern American culture started in the 50s'.

      Decades of MTV have taken effect.

      So MTV has some kind of temporal transmitter that let them send broadcasts to a time 30 years before their launch, huh? Neat.

      And no, you weren't generalizing, you really were blaming MTV specifically, because you really are that dumb.

    9. Re:Kids are kids by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Socrates life also marks the end of the Golden Age of Greece.
      More on multi generational trends...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kondratiev_wave

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    10. Re:Kids are kids by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Should be

      Plato's life also marks the end of the Golden Age of Greece.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    11. Re:Kids are kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It wasn't actually Socrates or Plato who said that. It was me.

      http://books.google.com/books?id=2Tu3bScwKKAC&pg=PT67&dq=The+children+now+love+luxury&hl=en&ei=t70XTITKFon9nAea34zNCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-thumbnail&resnum=5&ved=0CEAQ6wEwBA#v=onepage&q=The%20children%20now%20love%20luxury&f=false

    12. Re:Kids are kids by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      What's that supposed to mean? Things have always ever been thus? Negative. The Greece of Plato's time had peaked and in fact was already declining. Plato's is a warning. In addition, it doesn't say anything about risk-taking. I live in a culture that is still going up and this sort of crap isn't tolerated.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Kids are kids by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      I'm sure in all of the other countries there are reckless kids but because they are poor they start families earlier, take more risky jobs, etc. and so its not considered to be "risky" when it really involves a high mortality rate.

      One of the things they do is play with landmines they dug up in the back yard. No, really, they do play with them, because they watch their parents dig landmines up so they can farm safely, so the kids end up playing with them. Here in America they play with BMW's. It's not really that different.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    14. Re:Kids are kids by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I believe the term you are looking for is "youthful indiscretion". It just takes some hindsight to actually understand what that means.

    15. Re:Kids are kids by robot256 · · Score: 1

      Plato was a student of Socrates, so presumably he wrote this around the time of Socrates' death and GP is correct.

    16. Re:Kids are kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you f***g delusional, east had all what you claim west to have accomplished ten times over, before west was living in caves.

    17. Re:Kids are kids by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

      And what culture would that be?

    18. Re:Kids are kids by laddiebuck · · Score: 1

      Straw man. The part about teenager being a social construct, like childhood, is spot-on. Childhood was a very different thing before the Victorians, people in ages before that wouldn't recognise our idea of childhood. Similarly, the teenager is a social construct of the last half of this century (though some say it began in the 20s).

  11. because before the computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    because before the computer, there were never any reckless horse n buggy drivers

  12. Not video games... video game music by Brandee07 · · Score: 1

    Try driving an SUV while listening to the Halo soundtrack. THAT'S dangerous.

    1. Re:Not video games... video game music by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      No, the Guitar Hero Soundtrack... I don't think I want to be near anyone who is listening to "Through the fire and the flames" and driving.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Not video games... video game music by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Cruise control is a necessity whenever random brings up "Truth and Reconciliation Suite". Doesn't matter what sort of vehicle.

    3. Re:Not video games... video game music by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 1

      Cruise control is a necessity. Doesn't matter what sort of vehicle.

      There, fixed that for you.

    4. Re:Not video games... video game music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. It's when your cabbie has green hair and starts playing Offspring music at full blast on CD player after taking your fare. That's when you should start sweating bullets.

  13. Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Back in the days of need of speed 3, I'd feel my sense of distance was a little off if I stopped playing and needed to drive somewhere IRL. Of course, this has no relation whatsoever with the "fast and furious" style of the game or the "omg i'm a gangsta" of GTA. Just the fake 3d screwing up my brain auto-adjustments.

  14. Bunch of idiots by JamesP · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why they don't go and study the effects of videogames in driving on the following subjects:

    - improved reflexes
    - risk control (you know what happens in the vg if you do this, so I'm not trying in real life)
    - steering control (see above)

    Instead they just want to go the "videogames are bad" route

    --
    how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    1. Re:Bunch of idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeaaa .... no.

      1) I buy that.
      2) Wrecking your own and everybody else's car without consequence is teaching you risk control? Hah! Paying 100€ for a minor scratch and the hassle with repair shops and insurance, THAT teaches you risk control.
      3) Hey, I recently played H.A.W.X., I now know how to pilot the latest high-tech combat aircrafts!

    2. Re:Bunch of idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's the cumulative effect of video games, violence in movies and TV, gangsta' rap and even some other genre's of music, and a generation of parents who grew up in a little looser society than their parents. Things we buy are more throwaway than ever, so even our belongings don't mean much anymore.

      Just saying it's not this or that doesn't explain why my old high school, for example, which was pretty much as boring and suburban as you can get, is now filled with gangs and has police patroling it. Same neighborhood, same demographics, and we're talking about silicon valley, not Detroit or some other economically ravaged area. It's been that way for about 20 years now.

      I don't know of anyone ever bringing a gun to that school in the late 70's.

      Something's making kids act out in ways we never did.

      And yeah, I know, I hinted at my age and must be out of touch. Get off my lawn.

    3. Re:Bunch of idiots by Hatta · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There have been a number of studies on how video games can improve skills. For instance, surgeons who play video games are better at laparoscopic surgery than those that don't.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Bunch of idiots by JamesP · · Score: 1

      2) Wrecking your own and everybody else's car without consequence is teaching you risk control? Hah! Paying 100€ for a minor scratch and the hassle with repair shops and insurance, THAT teaches you risk control.

      Yeah, that as well

      What I mean is "you have to brake now if you don't want to hit that wall"

      Curiously, I learned how braking is "different" under rain IRL. Thankfully it didn't cost me anything.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    5. Re:Bunch of idiots by 2obvious4u · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Here is some information for you:

      Top Gear vs Gran Turismo - Possibly the most awesome thing ever posted to /. if I do say so myself.

      wiki reference

      I've seen this done by other gaming mags before with similar results. If someone has those links that would be awesome as well.

    6. Re:Bunch of idiots by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      The risk control comes from knowing how easy it is to lose control and hit something. If a person doesn't understand that hitting something is not consequence free than that is the problem and they would have serious issues with or without video games.

      They do use simulators to train pilots for those high-tech combat aircraft, you know that right? Because flying with crashing having zero consequences is actually a very useful learning experience.

    7. Re:Bunch of idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead they just want to go the "videogames are bad" route

      If you had taken the "RTFA" route, you'd realize that they did no such thing.

    8. Re:Bunch of idiots by cekander · · Score: 1

      indeed. I've noticed my video gaming brethren may drive more aggressively, but I wouldn't describe it as altogether unsafe. They may ride up on your ass and pass with a little less room than your grandma... but I bet they'd fare much better in a 3rd world country or anywhere in southeast asia for instance, where your grandma wouldn't stand a chance.

      Gamers have increased skill and awareness, but with that can come a false sense of security. That said, I would definitely trust my life with the world forza champion behind the wheel.

    9. Re:Bunch of idiots by JamesP · · Score: 1

      Great video, thanks!

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    10. Re:Bunch of idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The risk control comes from knowing how easy it is to lose control and hit something.
      [...]
      They do use simulators to train pilots for those high-tech combat aircraft, you know that right?

      Video games are not simulators. They are games.

      If a game becomes too realistic it stops being fun. Cars can more or less only go in a straight line once you go faster than 100km/h; driving 3-4 hours on a straight highway or max 50km/h in cities isn't entertaining. Realism is not fun.

      You might as well say that video games are dangerous because they "teach" players that driving a car at 150km/h over wet leaves still makes it behave like a train on rails.

      If you "learn" driving from video games (not simulators) you'll severly underestimate how easy it is to lose control.

      Don't get me wrong, I think this "video games are to blame" discussion is retarded but claiming GTA and others make you a better driver doesn't exactly help because that argument works both ways.

    11. Re:Bunch of idiots by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      I never mentioned GTA. Being as you brought it up however I will point out that I don't think anyone who plays that game keeps a car for more than a few minutes because it ends up destroyed from reckless driving.

      There are a slew of games out there designed to be simulators and semi-simulators. Even extremely popular ones like Gran Turismo and Forza. They may not be 100% realistic but they show enough to be useful.

      You may find a realistic game to be not fun. But many people do.

  15. Spy Hunter by Stargoat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    People have been claiming this since Spy Hunter came out. It was bunk then and it is bunk now. It's not video games that make you drive fast, it's the Peter Gunn theme.

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    1. Re:Spy Hunter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spy Hunter taught me how to suck my own dick. I haven't left the house since 1988.

    2. Re:Spy Hunter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I wouldn't give for a functioning oil slick some days.

    3. Re:Spy Hunter by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      People have been claiming this since Spy Hunter came out. It was bunk then and it is bunk now. It's not video games that make you drive fast, it's the Peter Gunn theme.

      Whatever, man... All I know is that when those armored cars come to try and run me off the road, I'd better be prepared to hit back.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    4. Re:Spy Hunter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Initial D's song.
      Then suddenly you want to do drifts with your car.

    5. Re:Spy Hunter by astar · · Score: 1

      Hah, you may be right.

      But here is some uncited history.

      So there are reports, some fairly old, that green US soldiers have issues about firing their weapon during combat. Now the study you could probably find has had some debunking attempts, but you can bet some good studies have been done.

      When I was in basic doing bayonette stuff you were "encouraged" to loudly yell "kill" as you stuck the bayonnette into the dummy's gut.

      I understand the miitary was the initial developer of what we think of as video game tech.

      The early commercial developers came out of the above environment.

      Commercial gaming is going back to DC looking for government contracts.

      I put this together in the following way: People have always the intent that games affect behavior. The effects intended are not always what most would consider socially positive.

      As to reality, I figure the miitary has real good data, but good luck seeing it.

      From a different angle, suppose I was greatly endowed and had nothing I thought better to do so I had sex 40hr/week for a few years. Or just watched porn that much. I doubt there are any good studies, but I suspect it might not be good for me.

  16. oh the irony by rarel · · Score: 3, Funny

    Aptly enough the fortune right now reads "You can get *anywhere* in ten minutes if you drive fast enough." :D

  17. That's not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was too afraid to learn to drive (it looks dangerous!) until I played Crazy Taxi. That got my confidence up enough that I was willing to take driver's training. I still hate driving, but at least I have the confidence that other people will try to get out of my way when I drive on the sidewalk.

    1. Re:That's not surprising by VoidCrow · · Score: 1

      That made me laugh... fanx mate :)

  18. Pfft! by MrTripps · · Score: 1

    Oddly, teenagers died in car accidents before video games existed. Playing Joust on an Atari 2600 didn't suddenly give me an urge to pick up a lance and ride a giant bird. There still is no credible evidence that associates aggressive real life behavior to video games.

    --
    "I'm not a quack, I'm a mad scientist! There's a difference." - Dr. Cockroach
    1. Re:Pfft! by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Heavy video gamer credits gaming for saving his life while driving. Read the whole thread.

      We say condescending, discrediting things only when we have no other argument and someone on the other side appears to be winning. When it's positive everyone jumps all over each other and says video games help develop reflexes, hand-eye coordination, etc.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  19. Very Sad by ADRA · · Score: 1

    Teens found a way of dieing by driving accidents way before video games ever came along. If there's a way to identify higher risk youths then that's all and good I suppose. This just brings me back to my teenage years where there were a few people in my schools who ended up dieing in accidents (usually associated with drinking and driving, but that's another discussion).

    --
    Bye!
  20. I call BS by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

    As long as teens have been driving cars, car accidents have been the leading cause of death among teenagers.

    1. Re:I call BS by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Teens pretty much don't die disease or natural causes. So guns/cars/toxins are of course going to be the leading causes of death.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
  21. I'll believe it. by colmore · · Score: 1

    Teenagers are really really stupid.

    --
    In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    1. Re:I'll believe it. by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Teenagers aren't, as a category, stupid. They're just not able to think things through all the way, because they lack the experience to judge when things will go bad, and how. Unfortunately, the only solution is time.

      I'm no "smarter" at 35 than I was at 15. I am, however, a lot more imaginative about the number of ways in which you can die horribly.

  22. lies by Dionysus · · Score: 1

    Everybody knows that anything I use and/or are interest in, cause no problems at all.

    --
    Je ne parle pas francais.
  23. Some people just like to drive fast. by human-cyborg · · Score: 1

    First off, I'll admit, I recently had my licence reinstated after a six-month suspension.
    Speeding is fun. Video games are fun. Teenagers like to have fun. This also extends to other things like sex, drugs, and (I guess) rock and roll.
    Driving at 170Km/h (105MPH) for over an hour on the 401 was fun.
    If we want kids to be safe drivers, we'd have to teach them that fun is bad.
    Now that I have my licence back, fun is over. Time for video games I guess.

    1. Re:Some people just like to drive fast. by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      If we want kids to be safe drivers, we'd have to teach them that fun is bad.

      Careful there. Fun really isn't necessarily bad, though they do correlate at times*. Fun just isn't always the ideal goal when making one's decisions and kids simply have a harder time overcoming the desire for fun.

      * moreso the more conservative one's authority figures. This also suggests that they're both subjective and don't necessarily work on the same value scale either. E.g. While others do, I don't find knitting fun, but nobody would call it a bad thing.

    2. Re:Some people just like to drive fast. by Mr+Thinly+Sliced · · Score: 1

      If you enjoy it why not do track days?

      There are plenty of road circuits (even smaller club tracks) where you can pay to have that thrill in the relative safety of an environment made for it! And it's legal!

      Your other option is to go the route of one of the hyper real simulators (iRacing etc).

      I'm sure you've already had the pep talk so I leave it here :-)

    3. Re:Some people just like to drive fast. by russotto · · Score: 1

      If you enjoy it why not do track days?

      There are plenty of road circuits (even smaller club tracks) where you can pay to have that thrill in the relative safety of an environment made for it! And it's legal!

      Open track days are few and far between and the requirements they place on you and your car put it out of reach for those of us without a lot of spare time and money.

    4. Re:Some people just like to drive fast. by neurovish · · Score: 1

      If you enjoy it why not do track days?

      There are plenty of road circuits (even smaller club tracks) where you can pay to have that thrill in the relative safety of an environment made for it! And it's legal!

      Open track days are few and far between and the requirements they place on you and your car put it out of reach for those of us without a lot of spare time and money.

      In that case, you and your car probably shouldn't hoon around on the street either.

    5. Re:Some people just like to drive fast. by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Agreed - most SCCA events around here have tons of folks rolling around in their beaters.

      --
      +1 Disagree
    6. Re:Some people just like to drive fast. by triffid_98 · · Score: 1
      I believe the OP was referring to high speed driving, which generally involve some sort of safety equipment as well as track fees. SCCA events are all about tight cone courses and handling. What SCCA events have you averaged more than 40mph in?

      Agreed - most SCCA events around here have tons of folks rolling around in their beaters.

    7. Re:Some people just like to drive fast. by russotto · · Score: 1

      In that case, you and your car probably shouldn't hoon around on the street either.

      Eh, whatever. When fuckhead killjoys point to an unattainable ideal ("take it to the track") as the alternative to whatever activity they are objecting to, and feel satisfied in the fact that they haven't actually gone so far as to provide Hobson's choice ("the horse nearest the door, or no horse at all" -- or in modern terms, "My way or the highway"), you shouldn't be too surprised when those they wish to control reject their ideal and continue with their original activity.

  24. I just want be prepared... by PFritz21 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So, this is my fault for making sure I'm properly prepared for my road trip by packing plenty of turtle shells, banana peels, and mushrooms? Unbelieveable...

  25. I'd say definitely "yes"! by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    I've gotten big into sim racing e.g. GTR 2 and I noticed that my driving habits changed in a negative way. I found myself following "the line" on roads, cutting corners, accelerating faster, and breaking harder. This wasn't intentional at all since I've always been a cautious driver to the point of paranoia. It wasn't until blew past a slower truck (in the mindset of a slower GT2 class car in my way) half on a median and half in his lane that I realized how bad I had gotten. I'm now very conscious about what I'm doing, but I still catch myself following the best line on turns (which isn't safe and totally pointless at traffic speeds).

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:I'd say definitely "yes"! by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      I agree, after entering a corner at a little too high a speed for my not race tuned car, I learned to give myself a little cool down time from GTR/Forza before driving.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    2. Re:I'd say definitely "yes"! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Following the best line on turns is plenty safe if you're smart about it. And it's not pointless at traffic speeds, either. You reduce wear on your tires, and if you routinely follow the proper line over a long period of time, you'll find that you're slowing down less and subequently accelerating less when entering and leaving the turn, following a path of least resistance. Reduced resistance over time yields lower overall maintenance costs, reduced fuel consumption, and reduced driver fatigue (especially when referring to very long road trips.)

      Following the "race line" is only stupid when you're crossing over two/three lanes of traffic to do it.

    3. Re:I'd say definitely "yes"! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to agree, I found that during the months following my purchase of Mario Kart Wii, I found freeway driving dangerous. I had this terrible urge to 'bump' the guy in the next lane.

      I wish I was joking; obviously I didn't give into the urge, but it was there, especially when getting on from the entrance ramps.

    4. Re:I'd say definitely "yes"! by neurovish · · Score: 1

      I've gotten big into sim racing e.g. GTR 2 and I noticed that my driving habits changed in a negative way. I found myself following "the line" on roads, cutting corners, accelerating faster, and breaking harder. This wasn't intentional at all since I've always been a cautious driver to the point of paranoia. It wasn't until blew past a slower truck (in the mindset of a slower GT2 class car in my way) half on a median and half in his lane that I realized how bad I had gotten. I'm now very conscious about what I'm doing, but I still catch myself following the best line on turns (which isn't safe and totally pointless at traffic speeds).

      No way, taking the best line through turns is the most energy efficient. You're saving gas by not wasting all of that moment by slowing down too much, and then accelerating back to your previous speed. When making a right hand turn from one 50mph road to another 50mph road, it is only logical that you want to take the run at 50mph, so you adjust the line you take through the corner accordingly.

      It does tend to really throw things off when you pick up a rental car that can barely take the corner at 40mph though :(

  26. Play GTA 4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    then try pulling up to a toll bridge. You'll feel the urge to tear right through it!

    1. Re:Play GTA 4 by sleeping143 · · Score: 1

      What if I've always felt that urge?

  27. True story by jeffblevins · · Score: 1

    I find that I'm more reckless on my horse after playing Red Dead Redemption.

    1. Re:True story by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      What's a horse? Can I get one for my iPhone?

      --
      +1 Disagree
  28. Kids suck at driving, and mostly play games by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    You can't say that just because kids play video games and also drive poorly there's any relation. Kids always have driven badly - it's just that the worst drivers are also attracted to playing games. Violent driving games are not a cause, they are an indication of the interests of the average testosterone filled youth.

    The best thing you can do for a teenage driver is to give them cars with great handling but not too much engine. Something like a mini cooper (not the S), or otehr car that handles well but will not let the kid get into speed related trouble too quickly and give them a chance at getting out of a situation without crashing.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Kids suck at driving, and mostly play games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also a great thing to do because driving a slow car too fast is FAR more fun than driving a fast car too slow. In a fast car you tend to speed up because driving within its limits is boring, and its limits are quite high. In a slow car you can drive close to its limits without having to reach ludicrous speed! Everybody wins!

  29. alleiviates organ donor shortage by peter303 · · Score: 1

    What would the medical industry do without all these reckless gamers?

  30. Parallels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds really similar to the situation race car drivers get into. They have problems slowing down.

    I guess it's a testament to the increasing realism and immersion factors in today's games.

    That said, no one ever accused race car drivers of being the sharpest knives in the drawer. Just because you want to/feel like going fast doesn't mean you should. Brains people....use em.

  31. Overconfidence by smitty777 · · Score: 1

    While the study assumes that the gamers learn bad habits like tailgating and driving over curbs from GTA, overconfidence may be another factor (assuming causation = correlation here, which I'm not completely convinced). How many teens have spent hours driving around in virtual worlds and think it will be a piece of cake when they get behind the wheel of a car made out of atoms instead of bits/bytes.

    My daughter is an expert driver in Ralley GT, but she came within 3 feet of taking out our fence the other day by mistaking the gas pedal for the brake. The pucker factor was pretty high.

    --
    "Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
    Albert Einstein
  32. Na naa na na na nana na na by r00tyroot · · Score: 1

    Sounds familiar. I've had this propensity to roll things up into a giant ball, since about 2006 or so. Katamari!!!!

  33. Simulations can have unexpected impacts by BlankStare · · Score: 1

    During the late 70's to mid-80's it was a common practice during U.S.N. flight simulator sessions for the flight instructor to pause a simulation in mid-flight, then give feedback and instruction to the student. Then they began having pilots "freeze" under similar conditions during actual flight-time. Policy was ammended to ban the interruption of any simulation training scenario and debriefs were performed at the end of the session. The incidents of "freezing pilot" began to decline. You most likely WILL fight the way you train.

  34. The plural of "anecdote" is "data", right? by Divide+By+Zero · · Score: 1
    I was a victim of this. I'd been playing about four hours straight of Gran Turismo or Forza or one of those sim-style racers, and immediately after finishing I had to head out to an appointment. I floored it, maintained a nice outside-inside-out line around the first curve, then realized I was doing 50mph in a residential zone. Stopped at the first (well, second, I blew the first) stop sign, took a breath, made a conscious effort to recalibrate myself back to Reality, and carried on to wherever it was I had to go in a more "civilian" style and pace.

    These games have made me a better driver on every other day, more cognizant of the weight distribution on my tires, available friction to turn/accelerate/brake and the like, so it's been a positive thing on the whole, but for that minute or so, I wouldn't've wanted to be out there with me.

    --
    Dare to Hope. Prepare to be Disappointed.
  35. This happened to me. by Overunderrated · · Score: 1

    I had been playing a Need For Speed open-world type game for hours, which IIRC had full stop signs and lights and stuff that you'd generally ignore. Then I had to make a real life trip to the grocery store. I ran a stop sign without even thinking about it and even after seeing it clearly, something I never ever do. Not making any judgments here, just throwing out a personal experience.

  36. News Flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PLAYING Video games - increases teenage preganancies ... oh sorry it dosnt.

  37. Define reckless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By my definition, being a reckless driver causes a high incidence of also being a police officer.

  38. Or it could just be a common cause by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

    It could just be that the kind of reckless idiot who drives dangerously also likes to drive dangerously in his video games. The link isn't between the video game and the reckless driving, it's between the basic recklessness and the behavior in both games and driving.

  39. Probably so by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    If it is true, then it is probably caused by subconscious programming. Just like kata "programs" the body and mind to respond without thought, aggressive driving games probably program aggressive driving behavior. It probably doesn't effect everyone and those it effects are probably effected to varying degrees.

    Some of it will come from one confusing one's ability in video games with one's abilities in real life.
    Some will come from believing that video game physics are the same as real world physics.
    Some will come from, as other's have said, the "fast is fun" mentality.

    Really, this is not going to be a case of A causing B, just A exacerbating the pre-existing tendency towards B.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  40. Grand Turismo... by Temkin · · Score: 1

    About 8 or more years ago I spent a saturday morning playing GT on the PS/2. I was working on unlocking the various license classes, and was really into it for 2 or 3 hours. The wife asked me to run to the store to pick up something. About a mile from my house I realized I was driving like a complete maniac...

  41. Games!??? What about music. by Aceticon · · Score: 1

    I don't know about you guys, but with myself I noticed that when my car radio is playing an "agressive" (for example, heavy metal) or fast beat kind of music my driving gets a lot more reckless than after I've just had a session of playing GTA.

    In fact, interestingly enough, while playing GTA I find myself tunning the in-game car radio for that kind of tunes much more than slower/placid ones.

    1. Re:Games!??? What about music. by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      I have a CD in my car titled "Songs to make your right foot heavy."
      Works every time. Guaranteed speeding ticket by track 5.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
  42. Mario Kart by AthleteMusicianNerd · · Score: 1

    I once tried to power-slide around a curve after playing it. It didn't work.

  43. More effect than cause by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Yeah because none of us that were teenagers before games consoles were invented ever drove fast. NOT.

  44. Latest study released! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Study claims some people react poorly to some things! World stunned! Slashdot enraged! Members engorged! Politicians scandalized! Pointless and boring film at 11 between the police blotter and the taped report from the orchid festival!

    Why am I elbow deep in 1000-pin parts and ruing my eyesight scanning 600 page user manuals for the one poorly documented "gotcha" that could ruin my whole multimillion dollar R&D? Why do I live with this stress? Where do I send my resume so I can spend my work days doing *Important* *Studies* like this?

  45. Race Drivin' by MattW · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When I was 15, Race Drivin' (the sequel to Hard Drivin') was out; it was a sit-down racing simulator with amazingly realistic wheel feedback/physics. Unlike basically every other game I've played, the car you were driving behaved much like a real car. (ie, you could fish tail, and if you steered with the slide you could recover)

    The first time I ever accidentally fishtailed my car in real life, I instinctively steered with the slide and recovered. I've heard that people without training tend to turn against the slide and exacerbate the problem. I have always thought that without my really extensive Race Drivin' playing, I wouldn't have reacted that way. (And when I say extensive, I mean it - I got to the point where I could gain time on laps and once played for an entire hour and stood up with the "remaining time" at the cap.)

    1. Re:Race Drivin' by rwa2 · · Score: 2

      Heh, slide recovery was actually one of the plot points from the Pixar "Cars" movie.

      I enjoy playing the racing sims (Race Drivin', Ferrari F350, GT4, Live 4 Speed, with the FF wheel and clutch and everything) more than the arcade racers (which, to me, are indistinguishable from sliding down a tube... though I do like the Burnout series for making crash-cars fun like back in our Hotwheels die-cast car days).

      I learned a lot of interesting techniques, esp. from GT4. It made driving our car (a boring 2001 Mazda 626 sedan) fun again... I had been driving it like an econobox Toyota, and it would just lurch and never seem to shift when I wanted it to... then I realized that it was simply tuned for more, uh, aggressive handling. Unfortunately, driving it closer to its limit most of the time took its toll.... I eventually spun out while having to hit the brakes on an exit ramp in the rain and struck a rain gutter in the curb... knocking one of the front wheels of its axle and pretty much totaling it. But at least no other cars were involved but me.

      Ended up getting a smaller compact... with ABS... I can still drive it hard, but not quite so close to its limit between controlled and uncontrolled handling :-P But yeah, I partly blame my video games ... well, simulator experience... for giving me a false sense of confidence that I'd be able to handle the vehicle near its limit better :P

      I've had a pretty spotless record for the rest of the 10+ years... more from following the things they teach you in driver's ed... keeping plenty of buffer distance between you and other cars, avoiding driving in blind spots or right next to other traffic, scanning far ahead, and particularly spotting aggressive or inattentive drivers and keeping a good distance from them. The point is to preemptively avoid the situations where you'd need to exercise 133+ driving skills to get out of danger.

    2. Re:Race Drivin' by neurovish · · Score: 1

      When I was 15, Race Drivin' (the sequel to Hard Drivin') was out; it was a sit-down racing simulator with amazingly realistic wheel feedback/physics. Unlike basically every other game I've played, the car you were driving behaved much like a real car. (ie, you could fish tail, and if you steered with the slide you could recover)

      The first time I ever accidentally fishtailed my car in real life, I instinctively steered with the slide and recovered. I've heard that people without training tend to turn against the slide and exacerbate the problem. I have always thought that without my really extensive Race Drivin' playing, I wouldn't have reacted that way. (And when I say extensive, I mean it - I got to the point where I could gain time on laps and once played for an entire hour and stood up with the "remaining time" at the cap.)

      Is this something people really do? Aside from never seeing anybody actually do that, it sound completely illogical to me. Before I started driving, I recall hearing the whole "steer into the slide" thing, but it never really made any sense to me since "in" to me always meant the apex of the corner. The first time I was driving and the rear end got loose around a corner, it was more of a "hey, I'm turning to the right way too much...I need to turn to the left more". It wasn't a conscious thought, it was just a quick reaction to counter what the car was trying to do. I bit later I figured out that people are just talking backwards.

    3. Re:Race Drivin' by tweak13 · · Score: 3, Informative

      People aren't talking backwards, you've just never been in a situation where it is not natural to steer into the skid. I'm guessing from your description you were doing something like turning at an intersection where speeds are low and so is the distance covered. Take a right turn from a stop sign for example. In that situation, the perception is more that your car has turned too far, and you're now pointed at the curb instead of down the street. So you naturally turn left to point yourself back down the street.

      Now imagine a snowy rural highway with a 90 degree curve to the right. It's a fairly broad curve, and banked a bit so you can maintain 55 through it. You hit an icy patch and start to slide. Yes, your car will be pointed too far to the right, but since you were going 55 mph this time your rear wheels aren't just going to rotate around the front. Your vehicle is going to slide up into the opposite lane. As you see yourself moving into the wrong lane, the natural reaction is to steer to the right even more to get back into the right lane. It can be pretty damn hard to do the correct thing and steer left, especially if the shoulder is coming up at you quickly.

    4. Re:Race Drivin' by stewbacca · · Score: 2, Informative

      Knowing your car's limit is the best thing anyone can do to become a better driver.

    5. Re:Race Drivin' by stewbacca · · Score: 3, Informative

      If the back end of your car loses traction and wants to come around the front end, you can do a couple of things. Steering into the slide AND applying the throttle (for rear-wheel drive) will set the rear end and cause the tires to gain traction, which stops the slide. Force yourself to watch an entire NASCAR event, and you'll see this 100 times per race.

      In any case, a lot of things about driving well are counter-intuitive, which explains why there are so many bad drivers. A small example would be the number of people in this thread who talk about how video games taught them to steer with the wheel better. But in real performance driving, you drive more with the throttle input and braking than you do with the steering wheel.

    6. Re:Race Drivin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now imagine a snowy rural highway with a 90 degree curve to the right. It's a fairly broad curve, and banked a bit so you can maintain 55 through it. You hit an icy patch and start to slide. Yes, your car will be pointed too far to the right, but since you were going 55 mph this time your rear wheels aren't just going to rotate around the front. Your vehicle is going to slide up into the opposite lane. As you see yourself moving into the wrong lane, the natural reaction is to steer to the right even more to get back into the right lane. It can be pretty damn hard to do the correct thing and steer left, especially if the shoulder is coming up at you quickly.

      I think the problem is that it is often presented as, "don't do what your instinct tells you to do". By happenstance, knowledge, or training, some of us have an instinct to make the right correction. This makes the advice unproductive.

      See the pdf from 1914 (!) on the subject: "It is instict to turn the wheels in the opposite direction. Really? Says who? Where is the study? Maybe among people who drove a horse, this is what you did when the hooves skid or something. Now a days, discussing "instinct" and driving is just foolish. We will have different "instincts" to this most unnatural situation (not being on a horse).

    7. Re:Race Drivin' by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Testing them again and again is the one of best things anyone can do to become an assassin.

    8. Re:Race Drivin' by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Provided you learn those limits in a safe environment rather than in traffic.

      --
      +1 Disagree
    9. Re:Race Drivin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod me down if I'm wrong, but even though you'll avoid spinning out, you'll still slide into the other lane (and almost certainly if you are on ice!). If another car is coming, you are equally screwed either way.

      lol, captcha is: reactive

    10. Re:Race Drivin' by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

      ^_^ You made me think of the Initial D anime, for which, I thank you.

    11. Re:Race Drivin' by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I have no idea what that means, but you're welcome? :-)

    12. Re:Race Drivin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice, I remember that one. I used to play every lunchhour every weekday. I remember being able to write sentences in the high-score table*. Also, I could, in the final race against the phantom car, run the course backwards and beat the phantom car. IIRC, this was one of the first games with force feedback. I remeber it fondly,

      * and every night the arcade manager would reset the high-scores because no-one (at the time) could beat me.

  46. May be true. Still no scapegoat for common sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People talk about having positive role models for children. This is because we, as humans, look towards those we admire and emulate them. Race car drivers, whether real, in a video game, on a movie screen are "cool" in a lot of people's eyes. What they do is cool. Their lives are cool. We envy the thrills for which they get paid.

    I remember several years ago I had some sneak preview tickets for The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift. Let me just say that I waited 30 minutes after the end of that movie before everyone who had just seen it had finished peeling out of the parking lot and speeding away recklessly. And these were normal people, from a wide range of age groups. Maybe the young ARE more impressionable, but that doesn't allow one to place the blame solely on the medium. Any example of alternate behavior lends itself to emulation. Whether that takes the form of a "copycat" killer or holding the door open for someone isn't necessarily the result of exposure, but merely the impulsiveness and decision-making skills of the one exposed. Whether you agree or disagree on the merits, this is why we have ratings systems for video games. And for film. To limit the exposure from those whose decision-making skills haven't completely matured, albeit deciding who is limited in an arbitrary manner.

    This isn't meant to advance a viewpoint one way or the other - it's merely an observation.

  47. I'm very old by VojakSvejk · · Score: 1

    I think it's true, but it's not just driving games. I for one, am always thinking Mattel Electronic Football when I drive.

  48. Burnout by DanCentury · · Score: 2, Informative

    I used to play an excessive amount of Burnout on the PlayStation. In that game you get points for side-swiping other cars. I found myself targeting and aiming for cars in real life. I stopped playing the game because of that.

  49. look I love Katamari, but by Phizzle · · Score: 1

    I dont go around rolling up cats and stuff when I am driving...

    --
    I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
  50. Kids with Karts by Bork · · Score: 1

    I wounder how they would class the kids who learned to drive by racing Karts. Biggest problem with them though is when they get a real drivers license that they are not allowed to nerf cars on the freeways.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68Cht811yNY

    If you think karts as in things with the lawn mower engine that was driven around your home - here is a upper-level kart race clip.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2o--m0wsu0

  51. A generation gap joke re: driving by Delusion_ · · Score: 1

    While driving, an amusing point and counterpoint occurred to me many years ago:

    [young person] It terrifies me to think that I’m sharing the road with people who grew up before the era of videogame sensory overload.

    [old person] It terrifies me to think that I’m sharing the road with people who learned to drive in an environment where they’re used to having three lives.

    1. Re:A generation gap joke re: driving by neurovish · · Score: 1

      While driving, an amusing point and counterpoint occurred to me many years ago:

      [young person] It terrifies me to think that I’m sharing the road with people who grew up before the era of videogame sensory overload.

      [old person] It terrifies me to think that I’m sharing the road with people who learned to drive in an environment where they’re used to having three lives.

      [me] It terrifies me to think that I am surrounded by people who are terrified of driving!

      I especially love the "slow down there is an intersection ahead with a green ligh...oh crap, it just turned yellow! Floor it!" people.

  52. Southern California Kids by Favonius+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Out here we have real a-hole drivers that drive around like they are in some sort of Grand Prix, when in reality they're just grand pricks. They are ALWAYS young guys, many of them young asian guys in souped up rice rockets with spoilers and noise manchine mufflers. I think the connection is fair.

    --
    "Men willingly believe what they wish." - Julius Caesar
    1. Re:Southern California Kids by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I call those "fart cannons". Make your car sound fast, but actually screws up the carefully engineered back pressure, making your car perform even worse.

    2. Re:Southern California Kids by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      A minor nit... Though you're right about a poorly designed wide open exhaust hurting performance, nobody tunes for backpressure (except maybe acoustical engineers...). It is always bad in a four stroke engine. However you do want to maintain the exhaust gas velocity which necessitates a particular pipe diameter (somewhere considerably smaller than the grapefruit you can shove down the average California Civic CRX tailpipe).

      That, and it doesn't make your car sound fast. It makes the driver sound like a teenager :P

      Just remember boys and girls, the whistle tips go WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

      --
      +1 Disagree
  53. Catholic Priests by tekrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    See, I knew they'd find the cause of all this reckless driving. Now if they could only unearth what videogame causes all those Catholic Priests to become pedophiles. And which videogame turns ordinary muslims into suicide bombers. Then we'd have all the world's problems solved.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:Catholic Priests by baubo · · Score: 1

      And the oil spill video game as well as the one that rewards you for your wide stance! Curses! Why do I never have mod points for posts like the parent!

    2. Re:Catholic Priests by Pandur77 · · Score: 1

      We can blame Worms for the suicide bombers!

  54. Expressed as a Manatee joke by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

    You think that's bad...? What about the time I went driving with the radio on right after my all-night Amplitude gaming session?

    Radio Announcer: Next up, Cherry Lips by Garbage!
    Me: Da-da da-da da-da da-da, Da-da da-da da-da da-da
    (the car suddenly swerves into the next lane, crashing into another person doing the same thing.)

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.
  55. I guess this explains things... by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

    I've always wondered my driving was so reckless... and why I felt compelled to throw turtle shells out my window.

  56. Gaming & Driving by tgibbs · · Score: 2, Funny

    I would no more drive a car immediately after playing a racing game than I would drive a car after having a couple of drinks.

    1. Re:Gaming & Driving by russotto · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would no more drive a car immediately after playing a racing game than I would drive a car after having a couple of drinks.

      But if you drink while playing the racing game and then drive, it's OK, it all cancels out.

    2. Re:Gaming & Driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HELL YES! I used to do that at Dave & Buster's in Marietta. Get off of work at 5, D&B at 6, trashed at 7, racing to begin at 7:30, drive until sober, then drive my 94 Mustang GT back to Norcross in 17 minutes.....ah, the good old days.

  57. Don't do the Mario!!! by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    How many more blue turtle shell massacres must there be before lawmakers learn?!?

  58. Males play more video games and drive worse by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1
    I wonder if they corrected for the gender of the driver in these studies? From http://www.car-accidents.com/teen-car-accidents.html

    The car accident death rate for teen male drivers and passengers is more than one and a half times female teen driver (19.4 killed per 100,000 male drivers compared with 11.1 killed per 100,000 female drivers.

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
  59. I was a better tennis player after Pong came out. by bregmata · · Score: 1

    blip... blip... blip.... bzzzzt.

  60. Street racer types by toucci · · Score: 1

    Pretty clear sequence of events here: teens play "Initial D" in arcade, fail to drift & crash:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUd6Z1rWGLc

    Although I would blame the game not for its content but its simplistic physics

  61. what it really sounds like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It really sounds like video games are convenient scapegoats for convenient scapegoat ideas.

    Video games should stop having scapegoat-like qualities, and start actually doing these things instead.

  62. Obviously true by canoeberry · · Score: 1

    During slow periods (or "important research") at my last job, we spent hours playing Grand Theft Auto in the office. On the way home from work I had to resist the temptation to side-swipe a cop in downtown Palo Alto, and even more amazing was I didn't feel the need to hit the breaks going around the corner, and I squealed the whole way around the corner. And I was already a 20 year driving veteran who is getting more cautious as time goes by. I cannot imagine what a teenager would be like under the same circumstances. I am sure they would be playing a lot more than I, as well.

  63. bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how many other links between harmless and harmful behaviors can be discovered due to them sharing the same demographic.

    Maybe law enforcement should start monitoring the behavior of certain character actors; just in case they decide to turn homicidal off stage.

  64. I drive recklessly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am now 29 yrs old and learned to drive like an asshole by playing Gran Turismo, GRID and other semi-realistic "driving simulation" video games. I recently purchased a new EVO and I drive much like I learned to in video games. I expect to die someday in a terrific car crash.

  65. not just teens by pedrop357 · · Score: 1

    Car crashes are the number one cause of death of people in/around 4-26. Some years it is 5-27, others 4-24, etc.

    Either way, the leading cause of death for all people of school age-from pre-school all the way to college is car crashes.

    Turning it into a teen thing is, at best, sloppy reporting; at worst, it's bigoted.

    1. Re:not just teens by mavasplode · · Score: 1

      Car crashes are the number one cause of death of people in/around 4-26.

      That's just people aged 4-26. That is not driver's aged 4-26. What's to say it's not all middle aged soccer mums with cars full of kids getting written off and bringing down the average? I agree with you. Sloppy.

      --
      ACTUAL SIZE!!!
  66. Reflexes by Moradeth · · Score: 1

    Didnt an article just come out a couple of days ago where video gamers have the reflexes of a fighter pilot? Apparently this study didn't take better reflexes into account... Frankly it's probably a case of poor decision making from inexperience, as with all teenage drivers. This is why Driver's Ed exist, to give them some experience so they aren't so stupid... I'd also like to point out I played a driving video game in Driver's Ed and I'm such a reckless driver that I'm actually dead! /sarcasm off Correlation != Causation

  67. Accidents are #1 cause of death because by comrade.putin · · Score: 1

    Other factors relevant in later age groups, such as cancers, are almost non-existent for that age group
    I found some studies a while back. Can't find the link now

  68. Some truth to it... by Androclese · · Score: 1

    ...at least personally.

    I remember after playing Need for Speed for a few hours with my friends (the original one that came out on the 3DO) we would go out to get something eat and found that our reflexes were still reacting to the game while the driving the real car. We found it amusing that our brain was telling us to take the turn at full-speed and cut the guy next to us off, but that was about it.

  69. Wait, I thought correlation *was* causation... by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

    Hands up everyone here who thought, before reading this or the tags, that correlation was the same as causation. Anybody?

    OK, so now hands up everyone who thinks we need to tag every story about a study with "correlationisnotcausation"?

    --
    You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
  70. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  71. Make sense .... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Actually, I've read other studies about driving games and their effects on real driving - and the one correlation they were able to find was a very temporary one. (EG. If you *just* finished an hour of playing an action-packed high-speed driving game, and proceeded to get in the car and go to the store? You were more likely to drive above the speed limit, make quick lane changes, etc. than if you didn't.) But the effect very quickly faded, too.

    I don't really think the fact you can "crash repeatedly with no consequences" in a game affects your risk-assessment skills though. At least, it really shouldn't in a typical person. I think most of us see a pretty big distinction, even at a subconscious level, between sitting in front of a TV or monitor screen, driving a computer-generated vehicle using a game controller (or even plastic driving wheel and pedals), and getting in a real car and driving it. Perhaps if people were playing with full-fledged "driving simulators" where they felt all the same forces they'd feel in a real car as they went into a sharp turn, slammed on the brakes, etc. etc. -- and if the whole experience promised it was an "accurate simulation" vs. a make-believe game scenario, it would be different.....

  72. Tetris proved this... by jafo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Tetris is singlehandedly responsible for a dramatic increase in sudden lane-changes as you approach a stop-light.

    Sean

    1. Re:Tetris proved this... by Fatalv · · Score: 1

      Tetris is also responsible for people doing donuts. It's the easiest way to "flip" your car in the right direction.

  73. Grade: Fail. Reason: Sources not listed. by jbezorg · · Score: 1

    Dear Mr. Reg Chapman.

    How can someone call themselves a professional journalist when my eighth grade history teacher would give me a failing grade because I didn't list my sources. Honestly...

    "A new study"? Really? By whom?

    I would really like to vet this information you presented but I have only the names of the people in your article. We have: Zack Stewart, video game player and Dr. David Walsh, founder Mind Positive Parenting. I guess it's the second guy but is he really the guy who did this "new study"? Or some guy you called up and asked about this "new study"? Are you attempting to attach more credibility due to this mystery study by omitting the source and attaching Dr. David Walsh to it via his quotes?

    Sorry Mr. Reg Chapman, you may have had something very important to say, I may even agree with some of what you point out, but without following the basic rule of citing your source you don't lend yourself much credibility. I looked up Dr. David Walsh, went to some of the websites listed in his Wiki entry but didn't find a study that even resembled what you've cited. My obligation to believe what you have to say ends there.

    --
    I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
  74. Speaking for my self .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking for myself, I can confirm that my car sucks when driving it immediately after either playing Grand Turismo or going go-kart racing (of any kind). That doesn't mean I don't attempt to drive it with a heavy food immediately after, just that the true acceleration in it is very disappointing compared to the perceived acceleration in the games or cornering of the go-karts.

    Para mi, I need a good 30 minutes of non-racing activity before I should get behind the wheel of a real vehicle and be a safe driver again.

    And I'm not some 20-something kid - 45 yr old here.

  75. Sleep gives you cancer by rainmouse · · Score: 1

    Everyone who has cancer also sleeps, therefore sleep must give you cancer.

  76. Mario kart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can relate to this, driving is a scary prospect after a mario kart marathon... especially when you drive past a fruit stall

  77. Saved My Life by splinterBR · · Score: 1

    Videogames definitely help. My roommate and I played one of the burnouts for x-box for a few hours one night. Early the next morning while driving to work, I lost control of my jeep during a rainstorm while driving on an overpass. Thanks to my sweet drifting burnout skills, my instant response was to tap the brake, swing the rear end of my jeep into the wall to bounce off and straighten out. It worked like a charm. Had I not played for hours the night before, I think I would've wrecked, having never faced a loss of control on rain-slick pavement at 80 mph in real life.

    --
    Rooting for the yankees is like rooting for herpes.
  78. Damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see what the problem is, just turn damage off before you get in the car.

  79. I had this happen to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Years ago, in 1995, after several hours of play in one of those sit-down competitive racing games at Dave & Buster's, on the way home I caught myself about to sideswipe the car next to me on the highway. And this was with very outdated graphics ...

  80. I can believe it by Tsu-na-mi · · Score: 1

    I once put my car in a ditch on the snowy access road of the industrial park I used to work. It hadn't been plowed yet, and had 6 inches or so worth of sloppy, driven-on snow. I'd been playing a lot of Gran Turismo lately (GT3?), especially Rally courses, so I was having fun sliding sideways down the road. It was great until the road bent downhill, and the driveway into the lot had an upward slope. I just slid into the ditch at the bottom of that "V" as I took the turn too fast. Had to climb out of the sun roof on my BMW since the car was on its side. Luckily the foot of snow in the ditch kept the passenger side from taking too much damage.

    So yes, I am an idiot in that statistic.

    --
    I've built up so much character I have an alter-ego
    1. Re:I can believe it by ^_^x · · Score: 1

      Ditto... I drifted across some slush, but when I snapped the car straight, it was so greasy out it snapped past straight and right into the outside of the turn... crashed into a tree at a brisk walking pace. That was a costly mistake.

      Still, my choice of car and bike and liking both was influenced by video games, and I drive them hard and have also been saved by techniques I learned in sims. I do drive more aggressively than I probably would without having played games. It's not exactly GTA or Gran Turismo though! Even if someone's playing with me and racing, I let them go in the long run because I'll always check and signal before changing lanes, and follow pretty well all the road rules except the speed limit on non-residential main streets and highways.

  81. Old news by marqs · · Score: 1

    Not only GTA is to blame. I bet these people spent to much time playing Frogger back in the day.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLxTZRlz0j4

  82. Yeah it happens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to work for a software gaming company, and we received the development contract for Motoracer 2 by DSL. So I ended up playing that game for hours and hours every day. Never thought much of it until I was driving home from work on night after a 40 something hour work day (yeah, we would pull those kinds of shifts towards the end of a project), and I was driving through the Caldecott Tunnel in the Bay Area of California when I started thinking: "If I accelerate now, bounce off that car on the left, hit the wall on the right, I could probably end up in front of this group of cars that seems to be slowing me down." And I almost did it. Then suddenly I realized, crap, this isn't a game!

  83. Hey guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dont hate the game. Hate the player.