This Is Your Brain While Videogaming Stoned 168
Daniel_Stuckey (2647775) writes "Pot and video games have long been bound together in hazy, wedded bliss—as well as in compulsion and codependency. Many a World of Warcraft binger has been found in the darkest hours of the night with clouds of sweet, milk-white smoke curling around him, a bong next to the keyboard. But the way these lovers, games and weed, commingle has only rarely been studied, and when done so, usually exclusively in the context of substance abuse and how it relates to what is known as PVP: 'problem video game playing.'" Motherboard takes a different look.
Re:PVP? (Score:2, Interesting)
Was this an intended response to the parent.. because if so.. not only is it quite silly, it makes no sense.. he's stating a fact about a well known acronym.
Re:This again... (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, it's getting harder and harder to demonize video games. The kids of today are already the second generation of gamers, their parents are the first. Having a teenager (i.e. the time when you start wondering "just where did my kid go wrong?") means that you're about 40 years old. That is about the age where you had an Atari 2600 or a C64 as a kid.
Demonizing weed isn't easy either, since it's been around for two generations by now (or rather, two generations had some rather high rate of exposure to it).
What's left is demonizing the combo. Because when you were a kid during my generation (i.e. the "40ish" people of today), you were EITHER a geek OR doing dope. The combination was rather rare.
And it simply can't be that your kids are simply walking hormones that come without a user manual, where you have to figure out how to deal with them. So SOMETHING must be wrong here. He was always such a nice boy...
Re:Gamers? (Score:5, Interesting)
Gamers? What about the programmers? They can't be straight.
Portrait of J. Random Hacker: Ceremonial Chemicals [catb.org]
I have often found that when any problem is to be solved, be it creating universes from singularities, forming life from atoms, building solutions from syntax, etc. the process will benefits from an entropy gradient: Energizing and expansion, Heating then chilling, Randomizing design patterns then benchmarking, Changing strategies and sorting what works. Any who think that drugs are inherently evil and detrimental are arguing against the nature of the universe itself.
Sometimes considering every option methodically gives insight, but that is not the only way, that is not natures way. Sometimes the entropy added is natural, sometimes deliberate. Sometimes induced by the disjoint dreams of sleep. Humans are tool using creatures, and with moderation of dosage they may even use drugs as tools. A recreational chemical may give a different perspective, heighten some inherent ability, dull some pain or inhibition, or mix up the approaches to problems. A little entropy can be a good thing in a self corrective system. Without chaos there would be no order: There would be no life, only crystals; No mutation only stagnation; No adaptation only the vulnerability of the monoculture; No new discoveries only existing knowledge; No new innovations only the dark ages.
Sometimes the temporary detrimental effects of being mixed up inside are worth the resultant order that settles out from the chaos. Even the ancients knew of catharsis. Their trial by fire is yet another stress then relaxation.
My Takeaway (Score:5, Interesting)
Playing stoned made them more confident. They felt like they were playing better, so they took more risks. A lot of games have systems in which risky behavior is often more greatly rewarded, but rewarded less frequently. Spelunky especially is one of those games. Tetris, however, can be much less forgiving of risky behavior, hence the lower scores there.
So I don't think this was a very good test of the effect of actual basic skills that contribute to good or bad play. I think a series of reaction time tests, memorization tests, and problem solving tests, independent from complex interactions within the game itself or the nebulous "score" would make for a better testing environment. Also, three people playing just four games, all of which are single player and most of which are puzzle games, doesn't seem like enough data to come to any useful conclusion whatsoever.
I've played with and against players who were high in competitive multiplayer games in which the high players were obviously making mistakes and playing poorly (the whole time insisting that playing high enhanced their abilities) to change my belief that playing high probably makes you worse rather than better. Especially in a multiplayer context with a group of highly skilled and experienced players, ones overconfidence can be much more directly and specifically exploited and countered. The high players were not only overconfident, but much less likely to recognize and acknowledge mistakes, leading them to repeat those mistakes or allow their opponents to capitalize on the mistakes even more frequently or severely than normal.