The Social Impact of Gaming 465
"The Bart, The" writes "The Economist weekly is carrying a well considered special report on the current debate regarding morality and gaming." From the article: "Like rock and roll in the 1950s, games have been accepted by the young and largely rejected by the old. Once the young are old, and the old are dead, games will be regarded as just another medium and the debate will have moved on. Critics of gaming do not just have the facts against them; they have history against them, too."
So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:3, Interesting)
Disclaimer: I'm an "old-fart" - had my 40th birthday [komar.org] two years ago ... ;-)
Re:So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:2)
Re:So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:2)
After all, this site is dedicated to technology, science, and legal and political matters relating to them. The younger generations that have grown up more exposed to technology will certainly be more interested in news about it than some of the older generations.
On the flip side, however, young people tend to like to do things differently. They like to do something new that defines th
Re:So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:2)
Happens all the time. (Score:2, Interesting)
As a gross generalization, slashdot has people belonging to two crowds that frequently overlap: 1) technically proficient (relatively), and 2) young, very "liberal", a
Re:So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:2)
Rather than this being about young versus old, isn't this about two groups of people who don't really want to listen to each other? I reject the distinction between young and old; they may as well have simply said "cool versus uncool." If the debate continues to be framed by the "cool" in this way, the bickering isn't clearing.
Re:So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:2)
In the next few decades we'll be hearing about how only old people in South Korea read slashdot.
SiO2
Re:So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:2)
Games are like everything else, some are good, some are suitable for young kids, some for adults. As long as the game is properly marked without any surprises (porn in San Andreas is not considered a surprise in this type of game IMHO).
Games are not all evil, the problem is more related people spending too much time on games than on other activities that I see as a bigger problem, combine it with obesity to top it off!
Re:An observation (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd be more worried about what kinds of people a kid might come into contact with while playing the game. I joined a clan while playing Lineage 2- one of the members was 12 or 13- seemed like a nice kid. Several others (much older) acted like complete dipshits most of the time, setting an oh-so-wonderful example for any younger members. Over time, I began to notice this kid picking up the same kinds of behavior. It was unfortunate, to say the least, and is a strong indication that parents need to keep a clo
Re:So does Slashdot have the same issue? (Score:2)
Not the way to incite debate (Score:5, Insightful)
End of discussion.
Re:Not the way to incite debate (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not the way to incite debate (Score:2)
That tasted like liquid fire!
What do you want to wield? [- car or *] c
You wield a blessed rustproof +5 dwarvish lamborghini.
You hit the nurse.
The nurse is killed!
You hit the orderly.
The orderly is killed!
You hit the city's top surgeon.
The lamborghini goes snicker-snack!
The city's top surgeon is killed!
You hit the woman with three young children.
The woman with three young children is killed!
An alarm sounds!
The Keystone cops are after you!
Re:Not the way to incite debate (Score:2)
This inside joke has been brought to you by the letters 'N', 'O', and 'G'.
Re:Not the way to incite debate (Score:2)
Does this mean civilization will ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Does this mean civilization will ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:take over the positions of power (Score:3, Insightful)
What gets made law is whatever benefits the lawmakers financially or increases their power. Politicians at that level have no ideals beyond selfishness, nor can they achieve that level without ridding themselves of such ideals.
Re:take over the positions of power (Score:5, Insightful)
We no longer accept a government that descriminates based on skin color, for example. We didn't round up all the muslims in America and stick them concentration camps for the duration of the War on Terror, an action which clear would have been acceptable a few generations ago.
All of the Evil our govewrnment routinely avoids isn't exactly newsworthy, but you don't have to look back very far to see the government doing things they'd never even try today. And not because the poloticians have suddenly grown ideals beyond selfishness, but becuase the line they don't dare cross has moved. And that line moves because a new generation, with a different sense of acceptability, has taken over.
Re:Does this mean civilization will ... (Score:2)
Society has accepted rap "music", so the only possible answer to your question is "yes".
Gaming is benificial (Score:5, Insightful)
Modern video games require the player to learn highly complex control sets, multi button combo commands, mission prioritization, teamwork (sometimes), and all sorts of other things that are applicable to the real world. (ever need to learn how to use a new peice of software in a few days for a job? Video games make that easier because you're used to learning new complex systems)
Furthermore, we have multiple studies proving that video games increases visual accuity, reaction time and hand eye coordination.
Just because spending hours killing aliens in a video game isn't constructive, doesn't mean that the skills you learn to do it cannot be used elsewhere in a constructive manner.
As a society, we will accept anything that we consider not detrimental to society at large. If video games make people happy, it's benificial to the society, is it not? Video games also provide many people, myself included with much needed outlets for destructive energy.
When given the choice between fantasy violence and real violence, perhaps not everyone will choose the fantasy, but it's better to have the option there for those who, without the option of fantasy violence, would opt for the real thing.
Re:Does this mean civilization will ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Prior to that, it was jazz music, extra-marital sex, alcohol, and so on.
Now it's rap, games, and homosexuality. It's the same story over and over and over again. Trust me, your kids and grandkids aren't likely to see what the big deal is.
That's not to say there's a unidirectional element here. Things can happen to turn a society more conservative (usually some calamity). The depression, Second World War, and Cold Wor accomplished an interesting trifecta of pushing back on the more liberal attitudes that had started to emerge about sex, women, alcohol/drugs, and culture in the 20s in North America. 9/11 effectively brought religion back into the field, reversing a rather secular trend.
In the early 70s you had women wearing jeans studying engineering in Afghanistan. The country became ravaged by war and poverty, and...well...you know how that turned out.
I'm using very recent examples here, you can study this stuff WAY back.
I think the overal direction is that when society feels threatened, less will be tolerated, and there will be more conservative pressures. When the society thrives and is prosperous, though, it becomes more liberal.
Your second question; will society accept things that are not beneficial because youth do? Part of that depends on what you consider "not beneficial" (ie. harmful). If you still hold that rock is harmful, then the answer is yes.
If you have (sorry to say it) less of an agenda to push, then the answer is no, not really. Drugs never became culturally acceptable just because the youth accepted them. Drugs can be harmful, and so were rejected. Some drugs that were not so obviously detrimental (ie. marijuana) are still the subject of debate.
You'd never know it to look at them, but people can be remarkably sane, given enough opportunity.
What answer were you looking for? (Score:2)
Yes. Hell, most of the middle schoolers around here are half way to being potheads. Often, with age, one realizes that it isn't all that great wasting your hard earned money on something that will progressively slow your mind. Still, I know plenty of parents who don't care and even occasionally get high with their kids. Kind of sad, really.
Re:What answer were you looking for? (Score:2)
Re:What answer were you looking for? (Score:2)
Let everyone over age 65 grow pot. Hell, most old people like to garden anyway, so why not let them grow a highly profitable cash crop. It lets them generate a decent income stream, so they can buy their own medicines and health care. We'll also find that their grandchildren suddenly have a renewed interest in hanging around them. If we let them control distribution, it also lets the old
Re:What answer were you looking for? (Score:2)
Similar studies, maybe, but not similar results. Inhaling burning organic material is simply never going to be good for you. That particular material is also full of all sorts of bad-for-your-neurons compounds, of course, so it's not like you're sitting around a smoky campfire - it's intended to impact your nervous system, which it does.
So does alcohol. Moderation on that front, though, is a good thing. Moderation in how much smoke you inh
Re:What answer were you looking for? (Score:2)
Re:What answer were you looking for? (Score:2)
That people still say it's "proven" to cause all sorts of stuff that isn't proven. It's easier to get cocaine (because it is STILL obtainable as a pharmaceutical substance) to test on than marijuana, combined with "you must end up reaching our conclusion if we allow you to test it," resulting in very few (if any) reliable studies.
Re:Does this mean civilization will ... (Score:2)
Re:Does this mean civilization will ... (Score:2)
I'm not a linguist, and I'm totally talking out of my ass there. I know it's a misspell
Games bridge the generation gap (Score:2)
Latest in the series of manufactured menaces (Score:5, Insightful)
And it works, generation after generation.
Re:Latest in the series of manufactured menaces (Score:5, Insightful)
There are actual problems to deal with (i.e. lousy parents who don't know what their kids are doing), but there's a problem with this new crop of games. When I was a kid, a video game was having a little round guy eat dots and avoid ghosts. Most of the games I see advertised today have a bunch of guys driving around stealing cars and shooting people.
I about flipped out when the neighbor 10 year old wanted my seven year old daughter to come over and play Grand Theft Auto. Yes, it's a parent problem, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. Luckily, my daughter knew that game wasn't appropriate.
Regardless of your age, something is wrong when your primary entertainment becomes a game centered around crime.
Re:Latest in the series of manufactured menaces (Score:2)
One of the big problems is that every time the local news talks about a video game what screenshots do they show? GTA of course. There are tons of games out there that are no more violent than Chess but they get no airtime on the news when some loner goth kid shoots another kid. As a result people get the impression that all video games are violent bloodfests.
There's nothing new here either. The same thing happened with Comic books, Cartoons, Books, TV, D&D,
Re:Latest in the series of manufactured menaces (Score:5, Insightful)
You're too modest. That's what parenting is supposed to be, teaching your children right from wrong. If your child knows it's wrong, it's because you taught her well. Congratulations, you have a healthy kid!
Re:Latest in the series of manufactured menaces (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, at home - where the line belongs.
Max
Re:Latest in the series of manufactured menaces (Score:3, Insightful)
Although, keep in mind that a lot of things are cyclical. Developed societies tend to swing back in forth, as a whole, between liberalism and conservatism. It is just the way it is... Whether you see the bible as the word of God, or just a historical book with myth and allegory, there was certainly immorality (Jezebel, babylon etc
Right now its considered bad. (Score:2)
At other times it was a catalog.
Ostracism, literally scribing a name on an yoster shell, was one way it was handled in Greece.
Excommunication was the way to do it in the Catholic lands.
In ninth century Iceland, they had a legal system called outlawry wherein you could be declared an outlaw. That meant you were outside the rule of law. You made yourself fair game by doing unto somebody else. That meant that if anything happened to you, you were o
I finally have an identity! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I finally have an identity! (Score:2)
Hell, one of the requirements for my honeymoon was GPRS connectivity. So even on vacation I'm a native!
Woot.
Youth violence at an all time low (Score:5, Interesting)
The correlation that the "think of the children" groups talk about is that...it just runs the opposite way.
Absolutely (Score:5, Insightful)
These kids now have an alternate form of entertainment and something to do with their free time other than join a gang or wander the streets causing or looking for trouble.
Another aspect is that some games can serve as a stress release valve for people. If I'm feeling really stressed out to the point that I almost want to choke someone I can pop in my copy of GTA and take it out some virtual people or property. I honestly believe that I've become a less violent person after playing through the GTA games because I had a virtual world where I could release my anger and agression that wouldn't result in any harm to real people.
For every stupid person who comits a crime and blames GTA or some video game, just think of how many crimes that same video game might have prevented.
Re:Youth violence at an all time low (Score:5, Insightful)
On one hand you have violent crime going "down". On the other, you have money going "up". But what does this money represent? Money spent on violent games, or all games? Are violent games going for a higher or lower price relative to other games? Are violent games now 1%, 10%, 50% or 90% of the game market? Or look at the other side: prison sentences for violent crimes were increased in the 90s, so there are fewer repeat offenders on the streets. There are way too many variables to draw any meaning from that statement.
And that's only if you could: this is mere correlation, not causality. This is in no way evidence of video games causing (or not causing) violence. It's just two unrelated charts pasted together invalidly in an attempt to swing the reader's viewpoint to that of the author.
Re:Youth violence at an all time low (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Youth violence at an all time low (Score:3, Insightful)
However, you can make the following statement: "Either videogames reduce youth violence or the effect of videogames on youth violence is small in comparison to other social and demographic factors"
Since neither possibility supports regulation of videogames, the conclusion is clear.
Re:Youth violence at an all time low (Score:3, Insightful)
Not Again! (Score:2)
but... (Score:5, Interesting)
John Carmack will never, ever be regaurded the same way that John Lennon is.
Games, while becoming more acceptable socially, are never going to be regaurded as "cool" like rock.
Re:but... (Score:2)
Re:but... (Score:2)
Re:but... (Score:2)
On the other hand, some entities/games/people in the game industry do approach the celebrity status of rockers. Sid meier, Valve, final fantasy - not too hard to find people who know what they are, or have heard those names. In a way, they have become legendary, just like Lennon.
"Gamer culture" is on the grow, and its not all that unlikely that as an entertainment medium it might on
Re:but... (Score:2)
Lennon did not invent rock and roll. Many came before him, many pioneers that languish in obscurity.
There will be many who come after Carmack.
Re:but... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:but... (Score:2)
But... (Score:3, Interesting)
Evidently (Score:2)
Re:But... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to agree with you, but I just can't. When I was 6 and 7 (better than 40 years ago) we'd play outside all day from morning until the street light came on. Our moms never looked for us, or wondered if we were safe, if someone had kidnapped or killed us. Adam (and John) Walsh changed that for everybody. I seriously doubt that you tell your kids to go outside and play until it gets dark.
social bong (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hmm? (Score:2)
Re:Hmm? (Score:2)
Every advance in entertainment is labeled as being the reason society will fall.
Rock and Roll
Elvis
Comic Books
Radio
Television
Movies
D&D
Rap Music
Skateboarding
Long hair
All of these things were at one point the thing to blame for all ills in society. They all supposedly caused/encouraged immoral behavior.
THAT is the history we're dealing with.
Active v Passive (Score:5, Insightful)
The advantage to gaming's participatory nature is that kids and parents can play games together. PLaying games with my stepsons has actually helped to make our bond stronger. It is, after all, something that you can do for either long or short periods of time, is fun, and is shared.
At the end of the day I think that that is gaming's greatest boon.
Re:Active v Passive (Score:2)
It is my thought that the persons that are affected the way you are implying are the same people who have problems and tendencies that would otherwise be brought to light by other mediums such as violent movies, certain music, etc... In other words, the problem, while certainly influenced by the generic medium is a problem that existed prior to exposure to
Just my 2 c
Re:Active v Passive (Score:2)
...is a problem that existed prior to exposure to generic medium
Re:Active v Passive (Score:2)
something other than rejection (Score:3, Insightful)
The important parts from the article (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a problem that I think comes up every 20-40 years: something new that changes society, and those too old to "get it".
10 years ago listening to rap music and heavy metal would get you into jail because you'd go kill people. Crime rates drop.
20 years ago playing Dungeons and Dragons would turn you into a Satan worshipper, you'd kill your parents and commit suicide. Amazingly, 99.9% of all players survived, and those who did kill themselves were in the statistical group who would have anyway.
20 years before, watching Elvis dance would turn you into a sexual deviant. Somehow, those same parents who watched Elvis's hips were able to complain about Britney Spears and her kinderslut outfits.
Reading comic books would turn you into a criminal, since it was the preferred activity of juvenile delinquents. (Or, at least the three that were studied.)
20 years before, and listening to rock and roll in general would cause kids to become pregnant just by being in the room, boys would go on rape sprees, and society would enter total decay.
20 years before that, and Glenn Miller was dangerous.
Keep going back, and every era will have something new that the older generation didn't get. The question with gaming is:
Will it follow the model of comic books, where a heavy handed fist comes down to regulate it into "kid safe"-ness, until decades later where it starts to spring again (mainly thanks to an underground movement and the explosion of interest in manga and anime)? Or will it follow rock and roll, and already be so entrenched that the Jack Thompsons and Hilary Clintons and Leibermans of the world will rage, and ten years later people will wonder what the big deal about was?
My bet is on the latter - but only if people take the time to educate each other on it. I've sat down with people who came to my office to ask me about the whole Grand Theft Auto games (they know I used to run a web site, now turned into a wiki [gamerspress.com]), and I've explained the rating system, the arguments, what "Hot Coffee" is all about. And 99% of the time, they go "Oh, ok, that makes sense." The 1% of the time they're just looking to steal some of my Triscuits.
Write to your congressman. We should, in the same fashion as those who set up a web site to protest the broadcast flag, set up a similiar Political Action Committee who's whole goal is to educate politicians on the issue and send them notices when they go for "hearings" and "new laws".
If we don't, then I can see an age where the gaming industry is regulated like the comic book industry was. And that would be a huge blow to what could be a fascinating new artistic medium.
Of course, this is just my opinion - I could be wrong.
Re:The important parts from the article (Score:2)
Re:The important parts from the article (Score:2)
... not much said, really ... (Score:2)
However, this article did not say much, and maybe that was the point. It pretty much amounted to "Games are neither good nor bad." Not so thought-provoking, really.
What the article may achieve, partly by being so unopinionated, is a moderation of the hype we get from Hilary (I think she's making shameless use the Tipper playbook here, btw) and other "experts" about games and the way they affect players. Given that the typical reader of The Economist is not a ga
Assumption is false (Score:2)
Re:Assumption is false (Score:2)
No doubt in 30 years GTA and the like will be thought of as quaint, and the teenagers will be playing something that scares the crap out of today's gamers.
It's a mindset, not an age (Score:2, Insightful)
I know a few folks in their 60's that play MMOs.
My father is over 75. He helped design the original hardware and software for the AWACS aircraft. He played a major role in the setting up and turning on of the first dedicated network on the Eastern side of the US. He's seriously old-school computers, the kind of guy that had a subscription to IEEE and actua
time out (Score:5, Insightful)
When you get to the point in your life where your time is more valuable than the entertainment/social value you get from the game, you stop playing. That's why young people play games and old people do not: the older you get the less time you have to waste.
Social impact, no...Health impact, yes (Score:2)
G4TV profitibility? (Score:3, Funny)
So, does this mean that for G4TV to finally become profitable, it'll take the death of the entire baby boomer generation? Great, that's obviously an easier challenge for them to face than the death of all the viewers who demand style and substance from their television programming! Quick, buy some Comcast shares because the money will be rolling in within the next 10-20 years...
Re:G4TV profitibility? (Score:2)
I agree with this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I agree with this... (Score:5, Funny)
Social Evolution (Score:3, Interesting)
Isn't this like how our generation was labelled X, yet we got some leftover values of the more conservative (not in a political sense) previous generation by reflection, parenting, education and what a certain society considers acceptable. (peer influence; you always adjust to your environment or get in an isolated position. Not all are as determined to remain the isolated position or just don't realize they're flocking as it's a normal process)
Yet, limits are constantly pushed. Remember the 'Rock and Roll' in the 50s,'60s,... It has affected how our society looks, as that yought has grown to be now the 'controlers of this society' (being parents, politicians, artists, idols, lawyers, directors, writers, as anyone else who is part of a society)
It seems that each generations' concept of which is considered normal, acceptable its limits are being pushed and people get numbed down for what previously was.
Now I do wonder wherever this is a good thing, as I see the kids these day walking around and idealizing the whole ghetto culture, reflecting of f the media which tries to profit and does so with drawing people to them with "shock value" and probes how far it can go. (turns out.. each time you can go a bit further once people are used to it)
Yet, each generations' conceptions of what is acceptable will be challenged when they grow older and look behind who's going to follow them up.
Some perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
The world is passing through troublous times. The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint. They talk as if they knew everything, and what passes for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for the girls, they are forward, immodest and unladylike in speech, behavior and dress. Peter the Hermit, A.D. 1274
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. -- Socrates
Some things never change...
Re:Some perspective (Score:2)
Weird.
Re:Some perspective (Score:3, Insightful)
Grr. (Score:2)
Comparing apples with apples and oranges with (Score:2)
If violent video games created a more violent society, then internet pronography would create a more sexual society, no?
Yet look how prudish the US society has become since the 60s and early 70s.
Ancient Roman gladiators (Score:2)
What was that Douglas Adams quote? (Score:2)
My own paraphrase since I have a shoddy memory:
Anything invented when you're 18 or younger is ordinary and natural.
Anything invented when you're 19 to 40 is new and exciting.
Anything invented when you're over 40 is evil and a crime against nature.
Sorry for mangling your quote Douglas.
Article's Definition of "Gaming"? (Score:2)
Is the article discussing "gaming" as in board games, role playing games, video games, or as in the euphemism for gambling?
Games can cause problems (Score:2)
That's not to say they would have suceeded any way. I saw a number of other kids fail out due to drinking and drugs or just sheer laziness.
I've known more than once I'd be playing a game and look up and it was 6 hours later and I had stuff to do.
From caus
Translation: The issue is overblown and irrelevant (Score:2)
40 or under? Of course! (Score:3, Interesting)
This rings true for me. I'll be 39 this year, and what makes that significant dates all the way back to high school. During my last year or so in HS in 1983/1984, computers were finally introduced to the students (Radio Shack Model III's, Atari 800's and a couple of Apple II's).
If I were a year older and went to school a year earlier I never would have been exposed to computers. The school at that time had them readily available to play with and my folks would never buy such an expensive "toy". I would have went on through life doing something else.
So I can easily see why the "over 40" crowd would not understand. That group would have had to wait until college for an opportunity to see a computer and probably only would if they were in the appropriate majors.
Those couple years were also the years that brought out the home computer revolution. The people who used them extensively were the kids at the time and they used them for games. Those kids would be 40 or under now.
Re:Uh... (Score:5, Funny)
I take it you don't live in Arkansas?
Re:generations (Score:2)
Re:generations (Score:2)
I have higher hopes for keeping up with technology itself, but who knows? I've already missed the boat on things like text messaging. My phone can do it, I just don't use the feature.
Re:Violence... (Score:5, Insightful)
I watched it, and then I thought how stupid Michael Moore was for naming his movie after an alleged event that did not happen (that the boys bowled before the event happened).
That and the fact that the boys wanted to blow up the school with explosives, but Moore chose to focus upon the impact of guns in our society. Had he focused on what actually impacted the two boys into their violent behavior - being picked on for years by their peers - and not on their love of games like Doom, he would've had a decent movie. Instead, he used the tragedy as a platform to rail against guns, the NRA, and Heston.
Video games did not cause Adolph Hitler nor the followers of the Nazi Party. Video games did not create Stalin. And video games did not cause the Trail of Tears. Some people are good, some people are bad. Blaming video games for criminal behavior is the new version of blaming inexcusable human behavior on Satan instead of fessing up to personal responsibility.
The two boys were ultimately responsible for their actions, but it was how they were treated by their peers that influenced them, not video games. Guns were the tools of choice they used for their terror. Although homemade explosives could've been far more effective a tool than their firearms.
Re:Violence... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Violence... (Score:3, Insightful)
Bowling for the Point (Score:3, Insightful)
A theme in "Bowling for Columbine" is that people seeking answ
Re:Once the young are old... (Score:2)
A lot of hippies grew up to become a bunch of scared, reactionary parents
Right on. Hippies in Volvos or Saabs -- all we need is love -- but the money doesn't hurt does it? Hippie-yuppy hipocrites. Just my rant.
Re:What a quote! (Score:2)
Clearly, since old is a relative term, he's telling all the young people to use their violent skills learned from years of gaming and rise up and kill the old people. This way, we can rush in the era when games are accepted!!!!