The article mentioned that addictions form when a person has/chooses a single method of coping with all their problems. Note that addictions often involve coping behavior, not just doing something one enjoys to excess. This might be interpreted as removing all other methods of dealing with life, ultimately rendering oneself unable to live without this one constant coping behavior.
The author made many assertions of the form "we ought to do this" and "we should do that", but the reason is largely missing. Why should we? Does a hard game make for fun? A recent counter-example that comes to mind is Donkey Konga: Jungle Beat. I played through this entertaining game, unlocking everything, and don't remember ever "dying" in a single one of the levels. But did I have fun? It was an absolute blast playing from start to finish. I definitely felt satisfied playing this game. Making it more challenging wouldn't have increased my satisfaction level.
More fundamentally, there's a reason why games today are less challenging. It's more than just catering to casual gamers -- the reason is that games like Pac Man and Asteroids were about introducing novel game play mechanics while games today are often about exploring a world. After playing a single level of a game from 20-30 years ago, you've already experienced practically everything the game has to offer. However, I perceive that game authors love creating new and wonderful worlds for gamers to experience. I'm betting that, having sufficient resources, game authors thirty years ago would have made worlds to experience just like game authors of today. Game creators want the player to *experience* their world, not slough through it. It's trivial to tweak a game's stats to make the play harder. But that doesn't give the player anything new to experience, so there's little motivation.
Yeah, reminds me of the Crusades...or the Spanish Inquisition. (Bet you didn't expect it in WoW, eh?) Look how much more civilized the article says mankind's zealots have become -- instead of really killing each other for having different beliefs, now they have progressed to the point where they just do it virtually!
It's not Sony's fault that they make a compelling product, or that Phillip Morris' is wrong for making cigarettes that are addictive.
Right. It's your decision whether you want to use it or not. If you know you're better off without it, just don't even touch it....Knowing you have a weakness, why would you?
I think it's easy to get addicted to the sense of accomplishment you feel as you play some of these games. Someone posted: there's never a turn where there's nothing to do, always something else to achieve. IMO, wanting to accomplish something useful in your lifetime is a genuine human desire. A very noble desire.
But the sad thing is that these virtual accomplishments are worthless. When you end a session, nothing in the world has actually changed. Just a few bits twiddled somewhere. Nothing changed.
But it IS hard to break addictions, even when you know the harm they can cause. Maybe someone can do some research into how a gaming addiction can be broken. I think countless people can be benefitted by such a study. And I'm certain that, having successfully left gaming, not one person will regret this achievement.
Slashdot Mirror
...I thought this was posted for the obligatory September Fools joke.
The article mentioned that addictions form when a person has/chooses a single method of coping with all their problems. Note that addictions often involve coping behavior, not just doing something one enjoys to excess. This might be interpreted as removing all other methods of dealing with life, ultimately rendering oneself unable to live without this one constant coping behavior.
The author made many assertions of the form "we ought to do this" and "we should do that", but the reason is largely missing. Why should we? Does a hard game make for fun? A recent counter-example that comes to mind is Donkey Konga: Jungle Beat. I played through this entertaining game, unlocking everything, and don't remember ever "dying" in a single one of the levels. But did I have fun? It was an absolute blast playing from start to finish. I definitely felt satisfied playing this game. Making it more challenging wouldn't have increased my satisfaction level.
More fundamentally, there's a reason why games today are less challenging. It's more than just catering to casual gamers -- the reason is that games like Pac Man and Asteroids were about introducing novel game play mechanics while games today are often about exploring a world. After playing a single level of a game from 20-30 years ago, you've already experienced practically everything the game has to offer. However, I perceive that game authors love creating new and wonderful worlds for gamers to experience. I'm betting that, having sufficient resources, game authors thirty years ago would have made worlds to experience just like game authors of today. Game creators want the player to *experience* their world, not slough through it. It's trivial to tweak a game's stats to make the play harder. But that doesn't give the player anything new to experience, so there's little motivation.
Yeah, reminds me of the Crusades...or the Spanish Inquisition. (Bet you didn't expect it in WoW, eh?) Look how much more civilized the article says mankind's zealots have become -- instead of really killing each other for having different beliefs, now they have progressed to the point where they just do it virtually!
DROD (Deadly Rooms of Death) is a fun puzzle-dungeon crawler with really unique gameplay that I've been enjoying for a long time.
It's not Sony's fault that they make a compelling product, or that Phillip Morris' is wrong for making cigarettes that are addictive. Right. It's your decision whether you want to use it or not. If you know you're better off without it, just don't even touch it. ...Knowing you have a weakness, why would you?
I think it's easy to get addicted to the sense of accomplishment you feel as you play some of these games. Someone posted: there's never a turn where there's nothing to do, always something else to achieve. IMO, wanting to accomplish something useful in your lifetime is a genuine human desire. A very noble desire.
But the sad thing is that these virtual accomplishments are worthless. When you end a session, nothing in the world has actually changed. Just a few bits twiddled somewhere. Nothing changed.
But it IS hard to break addictions, even when you know the harm they can cause. Maybe someone can do some research into how a gaming addiction can be broken. I think countless people can be benefitted by such a study. And I'm certain that, having successfully left gaming, not one person will regret this achievement.