Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Playing Games Seen as Brainless Hobby?

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:17 PM
from the coming-into-its-own dept.
Richard Goodness writes "Recently I watched Simon Bysshe's film Modern Day Gamer. The film is a natural springboard for some talk of the shared experience of videogames and the legitimization of gaming as a form of entertainment. Therefore, in '2 Legit 2 Save and Quit,' I come to some conclusions." A good article, with some excellent points. I took this to heart, but I see a weekly D&D session with friends as being akin to a weekly poker game but with less financial repercussions, unless one counts all the books needed.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Even then, D&D books don't cost that much. I've seen decent used copies in book stores for less than $5 a peice, and I've also seen them in PDF form on the Internet.
    • Re:D&D Books by rich3929 (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @07:06AM
      • Re:D&D Books by majestyk2000 (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @04:44PM
        • Re:D&D Books by rich3929 (Score:1) Saturday March 20 2004, @08:29AM
      • Re:D&D Books by rich3929 (Score:1) Saturday March 20 2004, @08:35AM
        • Re:D&D Books by Minna Kirai (Score:2) Saturday March 20 2004, @12:44PM
          • Re:D&D Books by rich3929 (Score:1) Sunday March 21 2004, @12:38PM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Brainless? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by elasticwings (758452) on Thursday March 18 2004, @11:25PM (#8606728)
    Brainless??? I play Ragnarok Online. You know how much thought has to go into being a merchant. It's like the stock market or something. You gotta price low enough to undercut competition yet sell high enough to make money.
    • Re:Brainless? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by lightspawn (155347) on Thursday March 18 2004, @11:51PM (#8606865)
      (http://domain.broken...registrar.joker.com/)
      I play Ragnarok Online. You know how much thought has to go into being a merchant. It's like the stock market or something.

      Excuse my presumption, but have you ever thought of playing the actual stock market?

      If age or income are an issue, you could still 'play' it - as a game that will teach you more than most other games, and that many people can relate to - and who knows, maybe some day your knowledge will prove useful.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Brainless? by CashCarSTAR (Score:3) Friday March 19 2004, @12:05AM
        • Re:Brainless? by AT (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @01:51PM
          • Re:Brainless? by CashCarSTAR (Score:2) Saturday March 20 2004, @04:08PM
        • Re:Brainless? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @03:18AM
        • Re:Brainless? by ziggy_zero (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @03:58AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Brainless? by danila (Score:2) Sunday March 21 2004, @01:30PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by Yolegoman (762615) on Thursday March 18 2004, @11:29PM (#8606754)
    (http://www.yolegoman.com/)
    Should be used in moderation. Is eating chocolate bad? No. Is eating a pound of chocolate a day bad? Yes. What I'm trying to say is that there is nothing wrong with video games, or tv, for that matter, if used in moderation. But if you watch, or play, videogames/tv for 3 hours straight, I can't necessarily say that's good for you. I do think, though, that online games have more "interaction" then any other form of digitalized entertainment. And they are a great way to unwind at the end of the day.
  • Not as Brainless as TV (Score:5, Insightful)

    by leadfoot2004 (751188) on Thursday March 18 2004, @11:49PM (#8606855)
    If we are talking about brainless hobby, watching TV is much more brainless than playing games. How many people have fallen asleep playing a computer game (we are not talking about extreme circumstances where gamers have stayed up 72 consecutive hours playing an RPG). I have countless times falling asleep casually in front of the TV -- I must have not used the brain very much to achieve that. Afterall, slightly more intellectual games (adventure games, puzzle games, and even flight simulators) requires sound judgment and quick thinking.
  • by ObligatoryUserName (126027) on Thursday March 18 2004, @11:56PM (#8606899)
    (Last Journal: Sunday August 21 2005, @02:38AM)
    The fact that people who 1)grew up before video games went mainstream 2)are socially closed to games and 3)have never played games - don't like games shouldn't matter to people as much as this article proves it does.

    Look at your culture, man! The fact that we're embracing interactive entertainment instead of passive narrative is something to be proud of. The people who tell you your feelings are not valid, the people who tell you that you are wasting your time, the people who don't view video games as a form of artistic expression DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. Literally, honestly, they wouldn't know Grand Theft Auto from Super Mario Brothers. Stop worrying about it, and talk to your peers, not the establishment.

  • Silly (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mark_MF-WN (678030) on Friday March 19 2004, @12:10AM (#8606958)
    Every form of entertainment gets critized by "respectable" people. It's NEVER stopped the open-minded from lining up around the block to enjoy it.

    People who disparage video games are simply painting an unflattering picture of themselves in the books in tomorrow.

    • Re:Silly by Ayaress (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @09:55AM
  • Warning! Link should be removed (Score:5, Informative)

    by cgenman (325138) on Friday March 19 2004, @01:02AM (#8607210)
    (http://www.chriscanfield.net/)
    Warning! The link to the 2 legit article above attempts to install something from IE Plugin LTD [ieplugin.com], a spyware program which, amongst other things, tracks your surfing habits, pops up advertisements, and opens a backdoor for future program updates. Their terms can be found here. [ieplugin.com]

    If this is not just a fluke page served up by allrpg's advertising company, please remove the above article. Such behavior is not acceptable in a public forum. Companies should not abuse Slashdot as a way of sliming spyware onto people's computers.

    Now I need to give this computer a bath.

  • Is only anti-social when... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Neo-Rio-101 (700494) on Friday March 19 2004, @01:22AM (#8607297)
    I'm inclinded to think that it's women who are the most vocal about games being "anti-social"... at least, that's how it's been in my life.

    My girlfriend doesn't like it either... because it takes time away from HER... and she's much happier being passive and watching TV like a mindless sheep, rather than having to use her brain to play a game!

    When she wants to though, she can play a mean game of Mario Kart.... but before long it bores her.... so...
    • Ironic... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Mark_MF-WN (678030) on Friday March 19 2004, @02:29AM (#8607529)
      It's ironic that women are the first ones to criticize video games. Conventional forms of entertainment (film, TV, literature, music, etc) don't allow any kind of social interaction -- something women are unusually fond of. Video games, on the other hand, do. Most games support multiplayer, in-game chat, emoticons, etc. Why aren't girls all over this? I'm surprised they aren't the primary consumers of video games.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Ironic... by Neo-Rio-101 (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @03:17AM
      • Re:Ironic... by scabb (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @01:14PM
      • Re:Ironic... by Sparks23 (Score:2) Friday March 26 2004, @02:46PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Is only anti-social when... by jafuser (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @10:12AM
    • From a woman's point of view by Unknown Kadath (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @11:07AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by Nice2Cats (557310) on Friday March 19 2004, @01:42AM (#8607376)
    Anybody who things that computer games are brainless hasn't watched the face on somebody who has never played Civilization or Call to Power before and is having the rules explained to them. Yeah, its just a simple little game, sort of like Scrabble...

  • I think that anyone who would say "video games are mindless entertainment" obviously does not understand enough about games to make such a judgment. That said, games run the whole spectrum from purely mindless entertainment to extremely though provoking.
    Lets start out with an example, two games that I play alot are Kolf and KBounce, both are relativily simple and quite mindless games. These are games that I play during commercials on TV if i'm watching a show, during a lul in the conversation when i'm on the phone, while i'm waiting for a huge file to compile, or any other time when I just want some small distraction while I wait on something. These games are really mindless.
    Lets look at another game that I play quite a bit. Soul Caliber II. This is a game that combines quick reflexes with strategy to defeat an opponent. It's not chess but it will keep you thinking, especially when you are playing against a human opponent, who's tactics are not quite as predictable as the computers.
    Now for a third game, Neverwinter Nights. Since it's hard for my friends and I to get together and play D&D like we used too, usually a couple nights a week we will fire up Neverwinter Nights and play a DMed quest. This game definitly involves heavy thinking. Not only are there puzzles to be solved and tactics to be developed, but you must also manage inventory, remember to play in character, keep track of your health, spells/special abilities, the status of your party. If you are the DM for that particular game things get even more complicated as you have to have interesting and realistic in character text for NPCs, keep the flow of the story going etc.
    Now, lets look at what non-gamers see when the look at each of these games:
    Kolf and KBounce - a bunch of clicking
    Soul Caliber II - pressing buttons and beating eachother up.
    Neverwinter Nights - clicking on monsters and IMing your friends (remeber to someone who has never played D&D there is no challenge to playing in character, in fact few of them probably even realise there is such a thing as in character)
    The thing is, most people have played solitaire (pretty brainless), or have played those brainless games on Pogo or the click the box game [stupid.com] or whatever. Those are brainless games for (mostly) brainless people. When these people look at other games being played, they do not realize the though requied and associate the difficult level as being the same as the games they play. One has to realize that it is difficult to "see" thinking.
  • Honestly (Score:2)

    by mandalayx (674042) <ralphs@@@gmail...com> on Friday March 19 2004, @02:10AM (#8607468)
    (Last Journal: Wednesday November 23 2005, @12:22AM)
    I have been playing games since elementary school but became quite hardcore by high school. And honestly I do think that through playing games, I lost many chances to become better and grow personally. In a sense, I'd say that I became dumber by playing games.

    I don't know about you, but for me playing games is a relatively brainless activity in the sense that the same decisions are made over and over again; and I've excelled, from Counter-strike to poker to Civilization to Simcity to Star Wars Galaxies (made over 25 million creds as a merchant). Yet since my interest is business I should be spending my time developing my curiosity and to think about what is possible than the critical thinking that serves me so well in games.

    I wish I wouldn't have started on games, especially when I see my 12-year old brother becoming addicted. Yes, I'm dumber because of games, but I had my fun.
    • And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Mark_MF-WN (678030) on Friday March 19 2004, @02:22AM (#8607505)
      And yet I doubt you would see anything wrong with watching uneducational fiction like Casablanca, or reading novels for entertainment. And what about symphonies and operas? They teach nothing, they don't better you. They're pure entertainment. That's time you could have spent learning things! Or bettering yourself!

      People who criticize video games are hypocrites -- every single one of them. They would never DARE to level a complaint against any of the other trite, meaningless forms of entertainment.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:And yet... by Louis Guerin (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @03:12AM
      • Re:And yet... by mandalayx (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @11:46AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Honestly by Incoherent07 (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @02:39AM
      • Re:Honestly by eliza_effect (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @03:02AM
      • Re:Honestly by Ziffy (Score:3) Friday March 19 2004, @03:55AM
      • Wrong by Mark_MF-WN (Score:3) Friday March 19 2004, @04:18AM
        • Re:Wrong by Louis Guerin (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @04:47AM
    • Re:Honestly by ReyTFox (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @05:38AM
      • Re:Honestly by mandalayx (Score:2) Friday March 19 2004, @11:48AM
    • Re:Honestly by Reapy (Score:1) Friday March 19 2004, @01:57PM
  • by Louis Guerin (728805) <{guerin} {at} {gmx.net}> on Friday March 19 2004, @03:25AM (#8607701)
    The criticism of games as mindless time-wasters, that is. Sure, there will always be those games, but for several decades now games, computer and otherwise, have differed from other forms of cultural expression only in their format and to a lesser degree in that they tend to reflect a much more heterogeneous pool of authorship.

    The fact is that in its first decades (turn of the C19th until about 1920), moving pictures were broadly considered to be the inferior cousins of theatre performances or opera. Just as with the explosion of colour film and synch sound following the late 1920s, and the rise of the Hollywood studios, we will see a phenomenal rise in the ubiquity of computer games in hand with rising levels of technological knowhow, cheapening hardware and bandwidth, and peoples' increasing desire to define their own worldview and pastimes.

    Where there is demand, so there will be supply. Uptake of interactive games has never been higher; the quality and complexity and scope of games has never been greater. Games are the way of the future.

    (Speaking as a film geek, old-skool DnD geek, and RPG game designer :)

    L
  • Have you ever watched someone playing Everquest after 8 hours straight? I can tell you, this guy *really* looks dumb, and *is* getting dumber as he clicks and clicks and clicks like a mindless zombie to get his XPs. In my case, it was UO, and I think that intensively playing it for 2 years didn't make me any good (but it still is better than EQ :) ). However, I would not say that games like civ3 gets you dumber. On the other side, I remember having looked at myself in the mirror once, after having played civ3 the whole day... and I felt dumb :) That's the same thing with TV and books and everything. Not all TV programs or books have the same intellectual value. Watch reality shows all day, and I guarantee you that you'll feel (and will be) dumber.
  • Playing Games (Score:1, Redundant)

    I'm still downloading the Modern Day Gamer video, so I can't comment on that yet, but here's a basic summary of the article:

    Video Games are not seen as a legitimate hobby, while other activities that may or may not be as brainless or antisocial (watching tv, reading books) do get respected as legitimate hobbies.

    The author makes the point that video games actually do foster a community, both in the sense that MMORPGS are played with other real people with whom you can communicate, and because even single player games can develop an online community with forums where players share tips, tricks, and strategies. Furthermore, video games also provide players with levels of shared experience, from watching the same intro clips to beating the same bosses. These shared experience can form a foundation for social interaction.

    The author concludes with observation that like other media, there exist both bad and good video games. However, people seem to be judging video games based on the lowest common denominator, games like Grand Theft Auto, instead of the games that have a more obvious social and intellectual value.
  • by Knetzar (698216) on Friday March 19 2004, @12:42PM (#8611770)
    Seeing as how me and my buddies use StarCraft sayings while playing cards, drinking, or at the gym, I personally have to agree that video games are social. I even helped my friend improve his bowling by telling him to be like the battlecruiser, "Take it slow." :)
  • by gilmet (601408) on Friday March 19 2004, @12:46PM (#8611826)
    (http://www.flurry.com/)
    If a gamer plays a game brainlessly, that's his/her fault, not the game's. Games are goal-oriented, and consciously trying to achieve a goal (especially when the goal is motivated by competition) is anything but brainless. If anything a game is exactly the opposite. Please, as an example, show me a game that doesn't require the player to engage in some sort of decision making. Next, try and show me a game where brainful playing loses to brainless playing. Any activity is brainless if you do it brainlessly - some activities just provide more oppurtunity for thinking than others. Gaming is definitely an activity that provides the oppurtunity for thinking.

    Let's take pong for example, since it might just be the least brainful game there is. You might say the decision making necessary to excel at this game is minimal. You might instantly conclude that the best strategy is to just keep the paddle vertically aligned with the ball at all times. You then might think that the best way to learn this strategy is nothing more than a matter of rotely training your motor-muscle skills - practice. But if your a good gamer, you won't stop thinking there... you'll then think... well what's the best way to rotely train my muscles to do this? Maybe I can devise a better grip on the paddle - one that will give me faster, more accurate paddle movement? In fact, I would say the best gamers never stop asking themselves these kinds of questions.

    People who don't use their minds are brainless.
  • damn the HATERS! (Score:1)

    by jmarr (733717) on Friday March 19 2004, @05:43PM (#8615879)
    Chess is considered a mind-building game, so if Chess is converted to the Video Game medium, is it then, by default, a brainless activity? This obviously proves that brainless activity rests within the activity (and therefore the activator). TV is the same way, I could watch a brainless reality show (although these do sometimes provide insight into human behaviors) or an informative documentary about science or a scientist. Video Games ARE artistic expression, well most of them anyway. The expressive part comes from the developers though, not the gamers. A LAN party playing CS wouldn't be an artisitic expression, but the artists, coders and designers of CS have created something from nothing while incorporating many different artistic skills in the process - the total is almost always more than the sum of it's parts. playing a game/watching tv for 3 hours straight is overdoing it? bah! The Return of the King got 11 Academy Awards for making most of america losers then! c'mon man, losen up! Almost every Old School game would require much more time to complete than your average 3D adventure today, there's just more of them available. Why can't people just accept Video Games as a legitimate diversion? I don't care to watch sports games on TV, but most of America can be found on the couch for several hours every Sunday. I find this diversion to be more brainless than making decisions concerning your own virtual fate.
  • I agree with much of what has been said so far; I love games and I think the best ones are far better and more involving than most mindless, pop entertainment.

    But I too have had the experience of looking at myself in the mirror at six in the morning, during finals week, after an entire night of [insert your favorite drug here] Tekken 3, and saying, what is all this for? When I can't think of an answer, I need to quit cold turkey for a while.

    I also question whether all games should be included in the article's good graces. I am not one of those nuts who can't see the stunning value of the Grand Theft Autos; I've been playing them since the original. But some games are trash, and some are mindless, and some, of course, are so deeply flawed that they are barely games at all. That doesn't make me judgmental; it just means I'm exercising judgment.

    As gamers, there is always a chance to judge what is great about games (realistic graphics, responsive worlds, involving stories, real community, for examples) and vote with our pocketbook. But there is another need to judge what is poor about games: what do they turn us into?

    Again, I'm not trying to harp on media violence or blame Columbine on games. I think that is ludicrous. But a look in the mirror says everything about the influence of games. Games are addictive; they turn you into a gamer. By contrast, pick up a good book and read it through; what does it turn you into? If you are lucky, it turns you into a new human being.

    This, finally, is what games are not providing enough of: the affective experience of what it means to be human. It is far too rare and precious in gaming (maybe the MMOs are onto something here). When we grow up as a community, that's what we'll demand.

  • *laughs heartily* (Score:2)

    by metroid composite (710698) on Saturday March 20 2004, @05:34PM (#8623210)
    (http://www.rpgdl.com/ | Last Journal: Sunday December 19 2004, @11:35PM)
    I fully agree with the article. As a Graduate Student in Math, I have to say that gaming is one of the most intellectual things I do.

    Recording stats [rpgdl.com] and Calculating damage [fftactics.net] are really only the beginning. The real strategy comes in the positioning and equipment/move choices.

    I will now try to reconstruct one of the most interesting battles I had a couple years ago in Paper Mario (That's right Paper Mario; I was restricting a few things so it was actually kind of hard, and due to low randomness levels strategy is the way out).

    Jr. Troopa 3 (end of Chapter 3)(HP: 40, Def 1, Atk. 5, flying)

    Mario (Base HP: 10, Base FP: 5, Base BP: 9)

    To explain the battle system:

    -Mario's party goes first, then they alternate
    -Mario has one partner out at a time
    -Mario and his partner can take turns in any order
    -Either Mario or partner can use their turn to swap to a different partner
    -They both use the same HP and FP reserves. When Mario's HP is zero it's game over.

    Relevant Partners:
    Goombario:
    Headbonk (deals 2 damage to JR (1 damage twice))
    Charge 1FP(Power plus 2. Means next use of Headbonk does more damage (a total bonus of 4) after which power goes back to normal. Multiple charges stack).
    Parakarry:
    Sky Dive (deals 2 damage)
    Shell Shot 3FP (deals 5 damage)
    Bow:
    Outta Sight 2FP(makes Mario take 0 damage this turn, but partner is unusable next turn (otherwise you could be cheap and just chain these)).

    Mario
    Jump (deals 2 damage (1 damage twice))
    Power Jump 1BP; 2FP (deals 5 damage)

    Action commands let him reduce JR's attacks by 1 (so 4 damage instead of 5).

    Badges (like FF9 system)
    HP Plus 3BP (HP+5) (There's two of these)
    FP Plus 3BP (FP+5) (There's two of these)
    Power Jump 1BP (lets mario Power Jump)
    Damage Dodge 3BP (lets him block an additional 1 damage, so 3 damage if he blocks and 5 if he doesn't)
    Mega Rush 1BP (When Mario is at 1HP, his attack power goes up by 4 (boosting his regular attack by 8 and his Power Jump by 4))

    ---

    Now, just to build up the suspense a bit, and to give you an idea of how these combine together, I'll post a couple of the strategies I tried first that failed...

    HP Plus, HP Plus, Damage Dodge
    Partner: Goombario

    Assuming you block each time (and JR is easy to block) you take 3 damage per round and have 20 HP, thus you get 7 attacks (since you go first). Goombario spends the first 5 rounds charging, running the party out of FP, then does 22 damage with his attack on round 6, and 2 damage on round 7. Mario, attacks every round doing 7*2=14 damage.
    Total=38

    HP Plus, HP Plus, Mega Rush, Power Jump
    Partner: Goombario

    20 HP, 4 damage per round if you block. As long as you block at least once that's 5 rounds. In fact, you want to deliberately fail all blocks but one so that you end at 1 HP (for Mega Rush). Goombario Charges for the first 3 turns, then does 14 damage with his attack, then attacks again for 2 (total: 16). Mario attacks on the first 3 turns doing 2 damage each time, then Power Jumps for 5, then on the last round he attacks with the Mega Rush bonus for 10 damage (total: 21).
    Total: 37

    HP Plus, FP Plus, Mega Rush, Power Jump
    Partner: Parakarry

    15 HP, you can survive 4 turns, and once again deliberately fail some blocks to end up at 1HP. Parakarry Shell Shots twice (10, using 6FP) and sky dives twice (4). Mario Power Jumps twice (10, using 4FP), jumps once at regular damage (2), and jumps once at 1HP for Mega Rush (10).
    Total: 36

    ---

    Now, there's actually a strategy to deal 41 damage, but for the fun of it I'll drive the mathematically inclined insane by not explaining it. In the mean time, here's a couple strategies that just barely win at 40 damage:

    HP Plus
    HP Plus
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.