Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

EverQuest - Not Just For Geeks? 221

Posted by Hemos from the changing-game-theories-(pun-intended) dept.
DJPenguin writes "In this article at the BBC, a respected psychologist has co-authored a study into people who play games online, which breaks some of the stereotype of online gamers." This is similar in the results as the survey data we did of open source developers. The stereotypes and realities are often *very* different.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EverQuest - Not Just For Geeks? More

EverQuest - Not Just For Geeks?

Comments Filter:

  • Re: Respected (Score:3, Funny)

    by iconian ( 222724 ) <layertwothree@NoSpam.gmail.com> on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:02AM (#5726862) Journal
    In this article at the BBC, a respected psychologist has co-authored a study into people who play games online, which breaks some of the stereotype of online gamers.

    Respected no more.
    • I play EverQuest and if I am representative of the online community the psychologist is pretty much wrong.

      Geeks and nerds, man ... geeks and nerds.

    • Re: Respected (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Vexar ( 664860 )
      Agreed. I'm trying to imagine the parents of this respected psychologist saying "darn that kid, he should get outside and play with other kids." I have no respect for any psychologist who finds it acceptable for someone to sink 40 hours a week into a single video game. There's so much more to life than what comes on a 15-21 inch glowing screen with stereo speakers. I wonder whether the guy would say it is healthy for people to spend 40 hours a week having sex? I mean, "it's not an addiction, they just

      • Re: Respected (Score:3, Insightful)

        by bluesangria ( 140909 )
        How about 40 hours a week reading? Or 40 hours a week painting? Why are these activities - which are arguably LESS social - seen as better than 40 hours a week chatting with friends. That's basically what online RPG's amount to.
        If you are going to argue that 40 hours a week at BLAH is too much, then please start lobbying for those 25 hour work weeks. After all, I can't think of anything that interferes with my life more than those blasted 40 hours/week at work. :P

        blue

    • Words of Wisdom with Dr Eternal (Score:4, Funny)

      by nounderscores ( 246517 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @10:18AM (#5728155)
      GET REAL GET SMART GET A BREASTPLATE OF THE VOID

      We now return to the tavern where respected psychologist Dr Bloom Eternal helps everquest players through their personal difficulties:

      TODAY'S SHOW: When having your pants stolen by your friends after you're dead hurts.

      Dr Bloom Eternal: ...And you have to come to a point where you can say "I steal pants because I am too lazy to buy them on e-bay."

      Gorak_munchkin: I'm sorry Regolath! You were dead and I needed your pants. I couldn't just buy some because I only earn a pittance an hour at Chuck-e Cheese. I can't believe it's come to this. Me, over 19 and playing everquest for more than 50 hours a week as a woman even though I'm male and I still can't earn enough pp to get pants of my own! Bwahhaaaa!

      Regolath_the_third: I accept that you need pants. You could have just asked for them. After all we were going on that quest to find Baldric Slezaf, or kill Baldric Slezaf or something so that you could get some platinum to cover your bare behind. I mean, waiting till I got killed by a barnacle bones was pretty low.

      Dr Bloom Eternal: So you feel you're a victim?

      Regolath_the_third: I HAD MY PANTS STOLEN!

      Gorak_munchkin: If only I could kill some monsters. You'd think that after sacrificing so much simpsons watching time I'd be ok at combat.

      Regolath_the_third: I should have stuck to progressquest [progressquest.com]

      Dr Bloom Eternal: Now we're getting somewhere!

      Gorak_munchkin: The bottom line is I just suck.

      Dr Bloom Eternal: You do need to step up you guys need to negotiate. Obviously you're a good guy....I think you're just lazy, and you like to do things that feel good... I wouldn't care if you had 50,000 hours behind you if you could actually stay alive long enough to start the first part of a quest and you were taking care of your responsibilities as a party member. Isn't that the issue?

      Regolath_the_third: Damn straight.

      Gorak_munchkin: Hey! I resent the lazy tag. I'm not going to wear it.

      Dr Bloom Eternal: In summary - it's not about the pants. It's about why are you not being any good.

      BUY Dr BLOOM'S BOOKS AND TAPES: :CHARACTER MATTERS
      Change your life with Dr Bloom's step by step advice.

      Next Week:

      Party dynamics: Could your party makeup be affecting your questing life? Maybe you shouldn't be entirely composed of bards.

    • Re: Respected (Score:2, Funny)

      by PD ( 9577 )
      I heard he has a vorpal couch.
    • They discovered that playing EQ doesnt cause people to have no social life or stop bathing for days at a time. Apparently, EQ just tends to attract people who are already predisposed to such behavior.

  • Debunking popular myths (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dtolton ( 162216 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:02AM (#5726864) Homepage
    It's good to see a study that debunks the myths being propagated in
    the media. Those of us who play online games know that the vast
    majority of the player base are not teenagers, rather they tend to be
    older, in their mid-twenties and up. I've known a few teen-age kids
    that played, however they usually weren't very successful and didn't
    stick with it long. Although not all teen-agers are this way, many
    of the ones that I've seen play were very impatient, they just wanted
    to level really fast and get all the "uber" weapons so they would
    have an "uber" character.

    Most of the MMORG's that I've played require a significant amount of
    patience, diligence and some amount of strategy in order to develop a
    highly successful character. The few teenagers I saw playing these
    games didn't seem to excercise those traits in abundance.

    I'd like to see them extend this study to "computer" games in
    general, and maybe compare those results to the demographics of
    people who play console based games. I suspect that console based
    games have a significatly higher population of teenagers than
    computer or desktop based games.

    • Re:Debunking popular myths (Score:5, Interesting)

      by madgeorge ( 632496 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:38AM (#5727016)
      I have to disagree with you. True, the image that every MMORPG addict is a pimple-faced, immature brat needs to be addressed because it's just not accurate. I have a lot of friends my age (32) and older that I play with, but I also play with the teenagers. And some of them are quite mature. You recognize the teenagers who give themselves away as little turds, but the ones you don't know are the mature players who really know how to play and enjoy the game. What's more, I have more friends (my age) that own an Xbox than own any MMORPG. If there is any difference between player base it will be based on subscription based games versus games that are only a one-time hit on the pocketbook. But with game cards available for most subscription based games, credit cards aren't a barrier any longer. As long as your allowance or job at the mall gives you $10/month, you can play EQ.

      Now, whether gamers are geeks or not, I think it's tautologous. Geeks are people who, among other interests, enjoy video (PC, console, etc) games. All of us have a little geek in us. If not, want one? :)

      --madgeorge (little geek)

      • Just because someone is immature, doesn't mean they are young.

        For work, I would "hang around" on a mobile adhoc network mailing list - not really the sort of place where you would expect to get kids. But the emails of people asking for information etc were sometimes unbelievable - rude, demanding, ignorant - often all at once. And I don't mean foreigners with just a poor grip on english.
        I honestly cannot picture the kind of person that sends such emails..
        • I've found that the jackasses who quickly come and go tend to be the young ones. They get bored and move on, or wise up and actually get along for a bit, and then still move on. Most likely because they're young and always looking for new experiences.

          The persistent jackasses that everyone accuses of being a kid though, the ones I've known have turned out to be in their 20s or early thirties more often than not. Some are venting from their over conservative jobs, some are just dicks, but generally the novel

  • what a coincidence... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DeadSea ( 69598 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:04AM (#5726870) Homepage Journal
    • About 85% of players were male.
    • A "significant minority" (15%) adopt a character gender opposite to their own.
    Could it be that the 15% of female players take on guys names?

    My college roommate played one of these games as a female for a while. He got hit on so much that he said he didn't see how anybody could play as a female.

    • My college roommate played one of these games as a female for a while. He got hit on so much that he said he didn't see how anybody could play as a female.

      How sad. This truism doesn't do much to support the good doctor's research now, does it? - Ois

      • I think the problem is that there are so many people playing. If there are 100 people in a particular zone (discrete area of the world of Norrath in EQ) then according to the study 40 of those players will be under 19. Just as significant would be the fact that older players are going to tend to stick with their primary character longer, thus an even higher percentage of players in a low-level area will be kids - boom, you've got a breeding ground for sexual harassment.

        Of course, even if the study is wa

        • Thus, you can have rather long 'ignore' lists, that simply filter out whatever they say..
          Plus, you can always go somewhere else as a newbie... Irritating, but not the end of the earth...
    • Actually, come to think of it, I usually played Diablo II as the chick with the bow. The long range weapon really suit my style of play.

      If you dropped the bow so you weren't carrying a weapon, the default attack for this character is the high kick. I ran into some bug where the rendering engine woudn't know you were carrying a weapon but you still could shoot arrows. You'd do a high kick and a arrow would shoot out your crotch.

      • Diablo was/is a little different from more traditional online RPGs, though, in that your choice of "class" brought with it a particular gender. There wasn't really a gender choice.

        The net effect was that very early on I learned to disassociate assumptions of gender from the character being played. It quickly became apparent that others did the same, and often we would all use the pronoun "he" when referring to players (as opposed to characters) regardless of the on-screen gender used.

    • I have played both male and female characters, and I never noticed much of a difference in other people's attitudes towards me. There was some difference but not a lot. I guess it all depends on the crowd you hang out with.

      I do know a case of a female playing a male character. I was rather surprised when I met her in real life, expecting a 'him' instead.
    • * About 85% of players were male.
      * A "significant minority" (15%) adopt a character gender opposite to their own.

      Could it be that the 15% of female players take on guys names?

      Which means, of course, that there are no female characters in EQ.

      I stopped playing EQ over a year ago, but from my experience there are fewer women playing as men then men playing as women (shock). Some do so just for the heck of it, some do it because they know they'll get more free stuff, some do it for a laugh, some fo

  • But, what is a geek? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by villain170 ( 664238 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:04AM (#5726871) Homepage

    I admit, I agree with the article that it's not just "pimply-faced teenagers." However, this does not reconcile the geekiness factor of the players. Last year, I had a CS professor who always talked about playing this game and I have to admit, he was a loser -- great teacher, but loser nonetheless.

    Just because a lot of people are taking part doesn't mean it's not just all the geeks. In fact, the world probably has more geeks in it than non-geeks.

    • Are you saying that all losers are geeks, or all geeks are losers?

      Here's the dictionary definition:

      A person regarded as foolish, inept, or clumsy.

      A person who is single-minded or accomplished in scientific or technical pursuits but is felt to be socially inept.

      So those are pretty wide definitions, and likely somewhat describes most of the /. community, as well as everquest, and any online activity/community that serves as an escape from society at large due to being seen as inferior, despite their prowe

      • I'm saying that the article tried to make it out to be that the only geeks who would play Everquest are pimply-faced teenagers. Just because someone is a "professional" does not make them less of a geek.

        Here's two excerpts from the article that I'm pointing to:

        • The findings dismiss the stereotype of a pimple-faced teenager locked in his bedroom.
        • Instead, today's player is just as likely to be a well-paid professional - male or female - aged in their 40s.

        Just doesn't seem like enough to declare Eve

  • Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tyreth ( 523822 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:04AM (#5726873)
    I may be the odd one out, but I never considered EverQuest players to be largely geeks.

    I imagined them to be ordinary people who use computers in their spare time, not those who make a career out of it.

  • Geeks, Normal People, and MMORPGs (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Vodak ( 119225 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:05AM (#5726875)
    I would have thought that the sale figures of Everquest subscriptions would have broken the geek myth, The numbers should have shown by now that there aren't that many geeks in the world so normal people have to be playing MMORPGs.
    • It's pretty easy to separate the geeks from the 'normal players'.

      The normal players have 1 account with maybe 3 or 4 characters.

      The geeks have multiple accounts with multiple characters, which they use to help each other out. This requires the use of multiple computers, but hey, what geek doesn't have that?

  • EverQuest is for everybody! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Rylfaeth ( 138910 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:08AM (#5726883)
    Haven't you all seen the commercial for the PS2 port of EverQuest? The players appear to all be friends from different racial backgrounds, know martial arts in real life and like to strike dynamic poses when making affirmative statements such as 'Let's do this!'

    It all seems to work out too:

    The white guy plays the archetypal white male barbarian character.

    The asian girl plays the underdressed yet powerful female wizard character.

    The black guy plays the dirty green ogre barbarian character.

    Everybody has their place! LET'S DO THIS!!

    -Rylfaeth

  • Money? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CptSkydrop ( 577286 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:09AM (#5726885) Homepage
    I may be horribly wrong but I beleive everquest costs money to play, you have to pay a subscription to the game?

    If so I think everquest maybe a little miss-representative of the set of people that this research found less of.

    why? money... People under 18 don't have credit cards, which is a big barrier in getting money out of them and younger members of society generally have less income, or none at all (intermitent at best).

    Therefore, no regular flow of money, no everquest?
    Take a game you pick up off the shelf and pay once for, the games that teenagers can afford...

    I don't mean to troll, just pointing out an observation

    • Re:Money? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Rylfaeth ( 138910 )
      Young members of society generally have less income but tend to spend far more on entertainment products than older members of society. This article [mcommercetimes.com] (mcommercetimes.com), for instance, "predicts that five-to-24-year-olds will spend 13.4 billion euros ($14.24 billion) on mobile data services this year, and more than 20 billion euros ($21.26 billion) in 2006."

      Lack of credit card is almost a thing of the past with new types of cards aimed specifically at young people that require parental cosign or are fixed

    • Re:Money? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Babbster ( 107076 )
      Actually, Everquest doesn't even require a credit card anymore. You can pick up a three-month pre-paid game card at a computer store for $40. Obviously, it still costs more to play that, say, Civilization, but there's no banking barrier to entry anymore.

    • Re:Money? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Casca ( 4032 )
      Eh, I don't know. When I was in high school, I usually had more money that I realistically knew what to do with. I just worked weekends at a video store to earn it. I imagine I could have come up with the 12$ a month EQ costs.

      Credit card? Who says a teen can't get a credit card these days? The way credit companies are handing them out these days I'm not sure you even need a pulse to get one. EQ will even let you buy a gamecard, commonly sold at computer game stores in malls, which you can then use to enabl
    • Yeah it may cost money for subscription of the game, but I also know a lot of people who trade/sell their characters, armours, and other items for money. In fact, they are making quite a bit of money from selling their goodies. Keep in mind, teenagers have lots of time to play. The more you pay, the more items you end up collecting. The more you sell, the more you make. I know some people turned to play EQ as a "part time job" because it is an entertaining source of income.
    • You are correct, Everquest is subscription based. Normally, you'd use a credit card and have a recurring charge. However, whereever Everquest boxed CDs are sold, 90-day prepaid cards are also sold. You buy the card, input the card number in your EQ client, and your account is credited +3 months. In this way, you can pay for EQ with cash.

      Perhaps EQ's subscription system keeps younger folks from playing, but I don't think it has that great of an effect. I know plenty of EQers who are 15-18.

      As a player mysel
    • Not trolling at all, that's a very valid explanation of why pay to play games are hardly indicative of online gamers in general.

      Change the game to diablo, or counter-strike or something, and look at the numbers there. There's some of us 30 somethings still doing it, but just as well there are 12-18 year old players in droves.

      I know a lot of these type of gamers, and most say repeatedly, they'd never pay to play a game (subscription, etc). To some of them, money is VERY hard to come by, they have no apprec

  • Could time be a factor? (Score:3, Funny)

    by ewanrg ( 446949 ) <ewan DOT grantham AT gmail DOT com> on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:12AM (#5726899) Homepage
    Perhaps the reason the game extends far beyond the "geek" community is that "real" geeks don't have that much time to devote to playing games?
    Or perhaps I'm just showing my age again... :-)
    • "real" geeks don't have that much time to devote to playing games

      Yet somehow, there's always time for Slashdot...

    • Re:Could time be a factor? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by simong_oz ( 321118 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:24AM (#5727266) Journal
      ... Or perhaps I'm just showing my age again... :-)

      It's all right - I'll join you. :-)

      I used to play computer games all the time when I was 15-21. I could actually pick up one of those rpg games and play the entire game the whole way through and discover everything there was to discover ... all in a week (or less). Now, quite a few years later, I find I just don't have that sort of time to devote to games - either to learning the controls (I used to love my flight sims and micro-managing turn-based strategy games) or just in getting anywhere in the game.

      I'm not trying to say gaming is not having a life, but I just can't fathom how people find the time to play these games that require a lot of time devoted to them. I spend most of my work day looking at a computer screen of some description or other - I can't think of anything worse than going home after work and sitting down in front of a computer. Much less spending my weekend doing it as well.

      yeh, I think I'm just getting old ...
  • I was just wondering where these steriotypes come from? Are they based on real people which are extapolated to include the masses?

    In my opinion, steriotypes are a way to visualize the unknown. It give you the false impression that you know everything about something you have never seen before, thereby removing the fear of the unknown.

    (I'm throwing a ball here, please feel free to reply :) )

  • that's interesting... (Score:4, Funny)

    by chillax137 ( 612431 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:12AM (#5726901) Homepage
    I always thought that stereotypes were accurate. It's kind of a shock to find out that they are different from the truth.
    • Stereotypes, at some point, are accurate. That's how they get to be stereotypes. This doesn't become a problem until you imply cause and effect to your stereotype in order to perpetuate it long after it is no longer accurate.

      What I mean is, "Knives are sharp" is a good stereotype, and one you'd better heed if you want to learn to juggle. All you are doing is assuming because something is a knife, it is most likely sharp. Knives are a fairly static entity design wise, and most likely will remain largely

  • not geeks? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jason Mark ( 623951 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:12AM (#5726902)
    I don't know... how do his findings prove the Everquest gamers aren't geeks (see snip below).

    And did you see this guy's picture. You just have to look glance at him to know that he's a gamer geek. I can safely say this b/c I'm a computer/gaming geek with a goatee.

    The gist of this article is
    "According to Dr Mark (who's a single guy that plays video games over 40 hours a week), all the single guys who play video games 40 hours a week weren't geeks."

    I guess he figures he can get plenty of support on slashdot. Maybe a sort of revenge of the nerds type thing???

    ---snip---
    Its key findings included:
    * Over 60% of players were older than 19.
    * About 85% of players were male.
    * Fifteen percent of people play for more than 50 hours a week.
    * A "significant minority" (15%) adopt a character gender opposite to their own.

    Professor Griffiths said: "There is an image that people who play online games excessively are nerdy and geeky... This is not the case."
    ---/snip---
    • I always defined "geek" as someone that is obsessive about something. It has nothing to do with how you dress or if you wear thick glasses - that defines nerdiness. Geekyness is something else entirely.

      We have sports geeks, car geeks, and of course, computer and gaming geeks.

      Anyone that plays Everquest for 50 hours per week is a hardcore EQ geek by my definition.

      I'm a hardcore gamer (I spend a few hundred CAD$ every month on games) but even I don't spend 50 hours per week on games. As far as I am concern
    • I guess he figures he can get plenty of support on slashdot. Maybe a sort of revenge of the nerds type thing???


      I doubt he's even heard of slashdot - I saw this article on the BBC and submitted it even though I have nothing to do with it. Hell, I've never even played EQ and am not likely to!


      I think multiplayer Duke / Quake / whatever is much more fun.

  • We needed a study why? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Chris_Stankowitz ( 612232 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:15AM (#5726914)
    From the article:

    "The findings dismiss the stereotype of a pimple-faced teenager locked in his bedroom.

    Instead, today's player is just as likely to be a well-paid professional - male or female - aged in their 40s.

    OK, so we all knew that those pimple faced kids that played D&D in their basements grew up and got good jobs. We didn't need a study for that. The sterotype still holds true, its just that the first generation of "Geeks" are all grown up now. And Still geeks.

    The Geek Shall inherit the earth....of Norath that is. This is

  • and sometimes they're not that different at all. (Score:4, Funny)

    by goldcd ( 587052 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:16AM (#5726923) Homepage
    MMORG are mainly played by men. A significant number of whom can quite happily spend a significant amount of time playing, without anybody missing their social input into civilisation.
    (Oh and that attractive elfish maiden you've been chasing after IS probably a 43yr old oracle dba - you should listen to those little voices of doubt in future).

  • I wonder why the myths happen... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Vodak ( 119225 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:22AM (#5726940)
    Why would the media be creating such myths saying that geeks are the only ones spending their countless hours on the internet playing games?

    Let us take the great folks at CBS/Viacom/Infinity for our example. This is the same company that brings you Howard Stern, MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon. Why would they want people to be on the internet? Young kids should be watching Rocket Power, teenagers should be watching TRL and everyone else should be watching I love the 80s. That is unless you have work, then damnit you should be listening to Stern.

  • It's not just for geeks (Score:5, Funny)

    by esanbock ( 513790 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:25AM (#5726958)
    It's for nerds and dorks, too.

  • Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sielwolf ( 246764 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:30AM (#5726975) Homepage Journal
    Am I the only one who saw no collelation between the stats in the article and the "its just not geeks" results?

    The first was that it was overwhelmingly male. Um, isn't that a classic "geek" stereotype? Maybe if the numbers were more 50/50 (like I assume The Sims are) I'd be a little more swayed.

    Secondly is the predominance of "19 and older". Well gee, what do a lot of people do when they turn 18? Go to college and live with a fat broadband connection. I'd be more impressed if it said the mean age was 32 or something. But then age has nothing to do with geekiness.

    In truth I can't think of a statistic off of the top of my head that could prove the geekiness of a gaming community. Probably the only one would be if the statistics were more normal (more ethnic, gender, income diversity, instead of being primarily white, primarily male, primarily middle class like most things geeky). It wasn't like this guy bugged a High School football lockerroom and heard them talk on and on about their 40th level elf sorcerers.

  • these games are the devil. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:31AM (#5726980)
    Seriously, these games deserve fda regulation more than say crack cocaine. I recently managed to break free and sell my account for dark age of camelot (www.darkageofcamelot.com). Finall tally? 142 DAYS played. (3408 hours). In this time i could've gotten a phd in nuclear phisics, or made 25 thousand dollars working at mcdonalds for minimum wage!

    Friends don't let friends play these games....
    • > Finall tally? 142 DAYS played. (3408 hours). In this time i could've gotten a phd in nuclear phisics, or made 25 thousand dollars working at mcdonalds for minimum wage!

      Perhaps the PhD would need to wait until you took a course in remedial math. 3,408 hours is not nearly enough time for a doctorate, even if you count only classroom time. Also, assuming $7.00 an hour, which is far above minimum wage, you'd have cleared $23,800 before taxes, or about $20,000 net.

      Besides, if you do nothing for leisu

  • Glad he doesn't think that it's a problem (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    with 15% of the respondents playing for more than 50 hours a week, and around 40% playing for 40 or more hours a week. When does it become a problem? When it hits 60 hours a week? 70?

    • > with 15% of the respondents playing for more than 50 hours a week, and around 40% playing for 40 or more hours a week. When does it become a problem? When it hits 60 hours a week? 70?

      This question points up the real problem with the general public's view of the phenomenon. There's no set time for when it's a problem, despite what anyone wants to say. It becomes a problem when it starts to overarch the parts of one's life that cannot suffer the infringement. While one person can handle playing 50

  • Gaming: Also for strippers! (Score:5, Funny)

    by CTD ( 615278 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:37AM (#5727011) Homepage
    Boy do I not feel vindicated. Ok, so all gamerrs are not geeks. How much did this guy get paid for this "study"? Sheesh.

    Simple logic tells you this. Look at the console explosion. Over the years more and more people brought games into their homes. Usually through consoles. Not all of these people are "geeks". Some are too stupid to deserve that honor.

    Still, we've had gaming in the household for over a generation now, it's plainly obvious that it's not just for geeks anymore. In fact, I know a stripper who plays MMOG's. Whenever I see her character online I can't decide if I should see if she wants to hunt loot, or if I should start masturbating and giving her all of my loot, but I digress...

    Games make as much money as the movies, we are beyond the saturation point, and this is not news to anyone save for geeks and nerds who are certain that nobody understands them.

    I'm a geek. I get a nice paycheck. Women are shallow. They like money. Come on guys, simple logic. Go score some snapper!
  • Hmm. People locking themselves away from human contact for hours at a time, day after day after day. Yeah, that really dispells the geek stereotype of videogamers.

    Any other game, please! Average Joes play their Playstations these days, Sims sold more copies than I think there are pocket protectors on the planet, but...

    Everquest? Is this guy nuts?

  • NO!! (Score:2, Funny)

    by nege ( 263655 )
    Please don't take away my comfortable sterotype! I will have to live to a higher social standard if jocks start to play EQ.

    *cry* ;-)

  • 3 to 4 hours of TV per night? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by handy_vandal ( 606174 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:42AM (#5727043) Homepage Journal
    From the article:
    A quarter of those questioned said they played for more than 41 hours a week.

    But Dr Davies does not think this is unhealthy.

    He said: "Most people I know spend about 3-4 hours a night watching TV... so in many cases it is just a substitution of entertainment rather than some unfortunate development in their lifestyle."
    Most people he knows watch three to four hours of TV per night? Sheesh! Get a social group!

    Three to four hours of TV per night will turn your brain to cheese, people!
    • Most people he knows watch three to four hours of TV per night? Sheesh! Get a social group!

      Not to mention that 3-4 hours of TV a night equals 21-28 hours of TV a week, which is still significantly less than the 41+ hours a week the researcher quotes of people playing EverQuest.

      In my not humble opinion, of course, either example is probably too much.
      • Everyone (myself included) loves to denigrate someone else's vices.

        Me, I play a fair bit of Unreal Tournament ... I suppose that's every bit as brain-rotting as TV (except without the commercials) ....

        Further confessions: everyone who has kicked a vice loves to denigrate those who still indulge. Me, I'm a former TV-holic ....
      • Don't forget weekends, put in an additional 5-6 hours each weekend day, and you easily have the 41+ hours. Even then the 41+ hours is high, the only people I know who do that are college students, or thoses out of work.
        Now if you compare that to a sports junky, then you probably have significantly less time of them playing games instead of watching people play games.

  • Everquest (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Quill_28 ( 553921 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:47AM (#5727063) Journal
    Is anyone starting to see EQ as a problem?

    I don't/won't play EQ because I know I could easily spend way too much time playing this game.

    I don't many people who play EQ(I am married with children) But I do know a few, and from them and what I can tell

    Are people getting serious addicted to EQ like a drug? I know people joke and call it EverCrack but
    how big of a problem is it?

    Are marriages, grades, family lives failing because of this game?

    • Selective Addiction (Score:3, Insightful)

      by GeekDork ( 194851 )

      The single most important thing that - IMHO - makes EverQuest and other MMORPGs differ from chemical drugs is that it's far more selective. You really have to be inclined towards that type of game for it to become a problem. Me and others I know started playing some of those games, be it Ultima Online, Everquest, Dark Age of Camelot or whatever and then just quit it after some time because we just didn't find the fun part in it in spite of being the exact stereotype (male single "nerds" with too much time o


  • Well, I think this report is skewed.

    This is trying to tell the world that online gamers are not geeks... when everyone knows that no matter who you are, the moment you get out on the net and start playing Everquest, well...

    YOU HAVE JUST BECOME A GEEK. There are no normal people that have gone that far. Normal is waiting all week to see what happens on the next episode of Friends.

    Everquest just ain't normal. Here's your membership card.

  • Age (Score:2, Funny)

    by EpsCylonB ( 307640 )
    Instead, today's player is just as likely to be a well-paid professional - male or female - aged in their 40s

    This shouldn't come as a surprise, geekiness doesn't have an age limit and it makes sense that the people that play subscription based games regularly actually have jobs and make decent money.

    There isn't really anything surprising about the demographic that play these games. It also sounds like the guy who carried out the survey is trying to justify the his own "excessive" use of everquest (And h

  • Ho-hum (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dark Lord Seth ( 584963 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:53AM (#5727095) Journal
    The stereotypes and realities are often *very* different.

    Someone give Hemos a medal for this one.

    Seriously, what's this all about? Someone just proved that EQ doesn't only spawn 16 y/o with a record of sexual harassment. Of course EQ has sane people, normal players and a whole wad of "John Doe"s running around, having fun (or not) in a non-offensive way. Same thing with CS. A bunch of people I know IRL play CS and lo and behold: They aren't complete idiots. One of them is probably one of the coolest and calmest people I've met thus far. Yet I myself still do associate CS with 14 year olds struggling for online acceptance by being creative with the english language and various symbols and numbers, while EQ still is a stereotypic hunting ground for 16 y/o kids suffering from pure hormone rage. It's not because things are like that; it's just because of the vocal majority of a game/community or the bad part which has been highlighted by others.

    There's a difference between making fun of/using stereotypes and actually believing them.

  • Similar studies (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14, 2003 @07:55AM (#5727102)
    here [nickyee.com].

  • The thing is (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Apreche ( 239272 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:01AM (#5727139) Homepage Journal
    As others have pointed out the reason only older people play Everquest is because younger people don't have credit cards. If its pay to play you needs dough and a job.

    Also, of course it's not only nerds playing. Video gaming has been mainstream since the NES. People from all walks of life have been playing video games since the 80s. That's not news. Tell me when non-nerds are using linux and I'll be shocked.

    Lastly, Everquest does indeed suck.

    this [slashdot.org] old slashdot article tells it like it is. End of story.

    The problem with MMO games is that social factors directly influence gameplay. The people who make games only know how to deal with technological and game design problems. I strongly believe that there are no technological solutions to social problems.
  • Professor Griffiths said: "There is an image that people who play online games excessively are nerdy and geeky... This is not the case."

    Says the beardy nerdy geek guy with nothing better to do of an evening that play on his computer!

  • I meet more married couples than teenagers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by greyfeld ( 521548 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @08:44AM (#5727397) Journal
    On the Everquest server where I play, I tend to meet more adults than teenagers. Most of the the people I have made aquaintance with are over 30, many are single, but some, like myself are married with children. I tend to find more instances of single over 25 adults, married couples playing or parents and children (yes that includes mother's and sons) than I do lone teenagers.

    Many of us are geeky, sure. But we lead real, productive lives where we are IT security admins, high-end speaker designers, reps for Coca-Cola, nurses, health food store owners, etc. To dismiss us as geeks because we play Everquest fails to get to the heart of the matter. We live in disparate places, yet have come together from across the world to PLAY.

    That's what we are doing, playing. That's it. When you are playing Everquest, you get a sense of accomplishment, companionship, even friendship that many times is lacking in real life. Now, many of you will say, why aren't you out doing things to help society and other such drivel; get your feeling of accomplishment from that. I can't speak for anyone else, but I have my hands and mind full all day from saving my own little corner of the world. Let me enjoy my freetime a little, okay.

  • The subject says it all.

  • Healthy, Normal (Score:3, Interesting)

    by barryfandango ( 627554 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @09:17AM (#5727640)

    "Most people I know spend about 3-4 hours a night watching TV... so in many cases it is just a substitution of entertainment rather than some unfortunate development in their lifestyle."

    I'd say 3-4 hours of TV/Everquest a night is certainly an unfortunate development in anybody's lifestyle. My God! I would have to break up my band, dump my girlfriend, stop riding my bike and sever ties with my family to make this much time.

  • Stupid (Score:3, Interesting)

    by PyroX_Pro ( 579695 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @09:37AM (#5727826) Journal
    I know many adults, teens, and kids that come home and watch TV straight away after work, school or whatever. They eat, fold laundry, ect in front of the TV, at 6 hours per day on average.

    So if I think that there is nothing good on TV and decide to play everquest instead, an online game which actually allows me to interact with other people for 40 - 50 hours a week, this is a problem?

    I do not think that the majority are geeks playing either. Last week I played with an 11 year old, and he was actually keeping up with our group of 23 year olds. I have also played with several 30+ players.

    The point is you cannot just apply a general label and age class to anything in life without actual raw data. If sony would give you their demographic information, THEN you can make an argument on that data. I am not talking about the article I am talking about all you "non geek" slashdot readers, ( isn't that an oxy moron ) , that thing that geeks / dorks / virgins are the only ones playing games a lot, ( you forgot crank addicts, they game 280 hours a week ) .

  • I've never heard of anyone but geeks playing it. And how does one define "geek".

    These guys seem like a bunch of geeks to me. [circleoflegends.org]

  • my take (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DenOfEarth ( 162699 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @09:57AM (#5727998) Homepage
    I used to play video games quite a lot, while I was growing up. It was just a way to pass the time, and I thought the technology was cool enough that I was interested in whatever new stuff came out.

    the game playing continued until I went to grad school, where a significant amount of my time is now spent at my computer terminal (my thesis is computer focused). Now I find that when I go home I don't want to sit in front of a screen, even if the games graphics are nice and shiny and all.

    I wonder if anyone else is like me and thinks that those people who spend more time on computers during their work-day are less interested in sitting at the computer when they come home, or if it is just the opposite?

    • You put it beautifully! When I get home from work I don't wanna look at my computer. I always work on it during the weekends, and just play around, otherwise, I'd rather just relax and be without many machines.

      Then again, the last time I played a game it was on SNES console!

    • I wonder if anyone else is like me and thinks that those people who spend more time on computers during their work-day are less interested in sitting at the computer when they come home, or if it is just the opposite?

      Oh, you bet. I'm no longer in the computer field but I had quite a number of internships at Silicon Graphics some years ago. When I got home the *last* thing I wanted to do was spend time on a computer. And that wasn't because their computers were so much nicer, either. I really didn't want

  • Broot! Warning! Geek objectivity in question. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ianscot ( 591483 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @09:57AM (#5728003)

    Excuse me, doesn't it seem like the author of this "study," by playing the game himself, calls his findings (which read pretty much like simple opinions here) into question? If they'd done a story about a Zoloft study, do you think they might have asked some serious questions about the fact that the head scientist was taking Zoloft himself? Okay, so this is just a fluff story, but still, it's weird -- what stereotype is this debunking, anyway?

    Let's see, what did the study find?

    1. "today's player is just as likely to be a well-paid professional - male or female - aged in their 40s"
    2. "some players are spending a great deal of time on the pastime" (a quarter said more than 41 hours a week)
    3. "if you are married with three children, it probably will not go down so well and could cause immense problems... But it is okay for someone who is not in a relationship and does not have other responsibilities"
    4. 85% of players were male
    5. A significant minority (15%) adopt a character gender opposite to their own.

    Is the big "shattered" stereotype that this person is supposed to be a "pimply teenager"? If you met a 40-something man without a significant other who spent 42 hours a week playing a female character online -- he's a Gnome illusionist who wears fetching custom chain mail ensembles -- what would you think? Would you think he wasn't a "geek" or a "nerd" because of his age and income?

    (The BBC science staff seems to reprint press releases and call them reporting pretty often. I once told them a story about the anniversary of Prozac was uninformed, and they said "thanks" and promptly reworded the story -- as if they'd never heard of any other antidepressants until I mentioned it. On the one hand, they're responsive, but it makes you wonder about their editors...)

  • mmoRPG = role playing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BobRooney ( 602821 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @10:25AM (#5728237) Homepage
    The reason a lot of "geeks" like MMORPGs is the ability to be someone else; anyone else. While good role-playing isnt always easy to find online, there are a significant number of mature rpg fans that actually portray a character, not themselves. There are some "powergamers" that run around and just want to be the biggest and the baddest, but there are a substantial number of Dungeons and Dragons converts that value a well role-played [ read "acted"] scenario. Good role-playing is acting. Moreover its an creative and psycological outlet where you can express yourself through a persona you adopt, no strings attached. While some of the kiddies that like the MMORPGs will run around being 1337 Ub3r d00ds you'll find a more substantial community that value the social interaction, and even some combat with other mature role-players with distinctive characters.
  • And I'm a recovering EverQuest addict.

    I've got 4 months now. And I'm finally getting my life back together.

    ( BWAHAHAHAHAHAH.... Sad but true ).

  • What IS a geek anymore? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dledeaux ( 174743 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @11:28AM (#5728772) Homepage Journal
    What is the definition of a geek anymore? I consider myself to be somewhat of a geek. I love technology, I'm always jackin with software, hardware, phones, PDAs, etc.

    Are geeks pasty faced teenagers, that rarely bath and wouldn't know laundry detergent if it hit them in the face?

    I think everyone is a geek in their own sense. I think geekyness is good.

    EMBRACE GEEKYNESS! =)
  • actually think everquest was populated just by geeks? most proplr I know that play would not be considered a geek at all. Unless play EQ in anf of itself qualifies you for geek status, and I sure as hell hope it doesn't.

  • I'll never forget ... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by detritus. ( 46421 )
    I had a college instructor for a writing class once, and what she said the first day of class i'll never forget:

    "I will try to get your assignments graded and back to you ASAP, but I must confess I am an avid gamer and Diablo II addict, so please, let me know if I forgot to get something back to you."

    My jaw immediately dropped, along with my stereotypes of gamers (especially in the RPG/adventure genre) only being geeky males. A late 20's/early 30's female instructor with no telltale signs of any gaming/g

  • Star Wars Galaxies (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jafuser ( 112236 ) on Monday April 14, 2003 @01:28PM (#5729727)
    I'd bet that Star Wars Galaxies will attract a whole new crowd of people into MMO games who may not have considered them before. SWG puts less emphasis on fighting, since loot from MOBs are less valuable than crafter-built items. A lot of effort has been invested in the game's economy, making activities like harvesting resources, farming, and crafting all full-time activities which can be done exclusively or as a part-time activity in addition to "blowing things up".

    Also there are a couple of new classes which I haven't seen in other MMORPGs. There are two "entertainer" classes which heal "mind" wounds. They are dancers, and musicians. People in these classes can even group up to multiply their healing effects.

    I can see perhaps some aspects of this game attracting a much broader audience who don't fall into the traditional AD&D/fantasy geek crowd. It should be interesting to note how the gender/age numbers differ between EQ and SWG once SWG has a couple of years on it.

    [goes back to checking email to see if he got an SWG beta invite yet]
  • Edward Castronova [fullerton.edu] wrote a paper a while back concerning emerging economic theory within virtual worlds [ssrn.com].

    The paper goes into much greater detail about the type of people who play MMORPGs than the BBC article. In addition to a short history of MMORGSs, he also gives his thoughts on the future of avatars as our means of shopping/working/interacting.

    "Journal entry, 18 April. I have called my avatar 'Alaniel.' I land in Norrath for the first time, in a town called Freeport. I am standing in a stone courtya

  • Curt Schilling plays (Score:2, Informative)

    by sker ( 467551 )
    Major League Baseball star pitcher Curt Schilling and OF Doug Glanville have a highly publicized [go.com] EverQuest feud... from Jayson Stark's ESPN.com column:

    "But just when we thought this scene had quieted down, along came the folks from Sony Online, the corporate father of EverQuest, to fire it back up again. Inspired by Week in Review's coverage, the Sony people invited Schilling and Glanville to battle each other last week in an official Event, with actual witnesses.

    So the next thing we knew, Glanville repo

Slashdot Top Deals

We're here to give you a computer, not a religion. - attributed to Bob Pariseau, at the introduction of the Amiga

Close