Are video games harmful?

Post by **yovargas** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:42 pm

All in all, I didn't much play the game the way it was meant to be played.

A major part of its appeal was that there was no way it was "meant to be played".

Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:51 am

Myst is exactly the sort of game I hate because it made me feel stupid!

Me too, Eru.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:04 am

Eruname

so we have it set then

young and healthy you versus old and worn out geriatric me ... ten miles to the finish with video game controllers in our hands ...

should be fun...

for one of us..

Post by **vison** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:38 am

sauronsfinger wrote:Eruname

so we have it set then

young and healthy you versus old and worn out geriatric me ... ten miles to the finish with video game controllers in our hands ...

should be fun...

for one of us..

sf,you can't just CARRY it. You have to operate it, press buttons, use your thumbs, shake it and curse, etc. Jeez.

Even I could do it, just CARRYING it.

Post by **Erunáme** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:29 am

Sorry sf, but you won't be allowed to run:

The gamers will have to do something they are not normal ues to while the non-gamers will have to do likewise.

You'll be playing a game.

Post by **Teremia** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:41 am

I saw Ethel's post about Myst and became all nostalgic. I sure did love Myst and Riven. If more games were like that, I'd be a devotee. I hate conquering territory and fighting things with Special Powers. Loved the puzzles, though.

On the other hand, that Myst stuff was pretty addictive in its own right: "Oh, I can't stop now, I just have to get this one darned puzzle first -- oh, look, I'm through! I can't stop now, I have to see where this goes next -- "etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

(Did anyone here try the last Myst variant? Was it any good?)

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:59 pm

You'll be playing a game

cannot do -- religious prohibitions and all

still willing to run the ten miles though

Post by **Alatar** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:48 pm

Interesting sidebar on this one....

Hollywood Byte #6: Peter Jackson Talks Games
Feb 16, 2006

Oscar-winning writer, director, and producer Peter Jackson has already left an indelible mark on Hollywood with his epic Lord of the Rings trilogy, which stands out as one of the best marriages between cutting-edge special effects and J.R.R. Tolkien's rich narrative. Jackson's most recent project, the big screen re-make of King Kong, resulted in another successful melding of entertainment -- this time between the linear film and the video game that bears Jackson's name in the title.

Not since Enter the Matrix has there been such collaboration between a Hollywood director and a video game based on his creation. Like the Wachowskis, Jackson has been a gamer all of his life, so he brings gaming sensibilities to the table in his interactive collaborations. Jackson hand-picked Rayman creator Michel Ancel to spearhead the King Kong game because he had been impressed with his critically acclaimed, but commercially unrecognized adventure game, Beyond Good and Evil, several years ago.

"It was a great experience, and working with such a talented developer, Michel and his Montpellier team, made it a great learning experience and a great game," said Jackson. "I feel that our collaboration worked; I was really busy working on the film, and they were equally as busy working on the game, so I didn't need to provide too much day-to-day input. I just oversaw from a creative perspective and made sure they captured our core values for what we wanted to accomplish in the game."

It was Jackson's idea to split Ubisoft's video game into two parts: a third-person perspective fighting game featuring Kong and a first-person perspective adventure game starring Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody from the film). He also recommended Philippa Boyens, co-writer of King Kong, contribute to the game's script and supervise and direct the voice acting sessions with the cast from the film. The actors recorded dialogue in New Zealand sound stages while they were filming, as well as in Los Angeles.

"This model of development worked, so if I have a similar project, I'd have to evaluate and see if this same process would be applicable," said Jackson, when asked if he'd use this model for future film projects.

Jackson believes that video games will allow directors to possibly add alternate endings to their stories, like he did with the King Kong game, which allows players to see Kong back at home, safe and sound, on Skull Island in an unlockable closing scene.

Ubisoft President Yves Guillemot told me last year in Paris that the publisher has the rights to do additional Kong games. When asked about a potential video game sequel and the direction the story might go, Jackson replied, "I have been in discussions with Michel Ancel and the Montpellier team, but there is nothing to share at this point in time."

In addition to alternate endings, Jackson said video games can allow the player to live a movie experience as a protagonist, which may not work for a movie. "I also see the role of video games as one that will continue to command respect and attention due to the improved graphics, forms of narrative, interactive capabilities, and ways of storytelling/immersion," added Jackson.

Having brought his film to the interactive realm, Jackson is now busy at work on one of the most-anticipated video game adaptations out there: Halo. Microsoft enlisted Jackson (and his partner Fran Walsh) to executive produce Halo, which already has a completed script by Alex Garland (28 Days Later) and is expected to begin filming in New Zealand as early as this spring. Universal Pictures and 20th Century Fox will share the production and distribution duties.

Jackson's special effects house WETA will handle everything from creating real-life Covenant weapons to integrating live action with CGI to bring Bungie's sci-fi game universe to the big screen. Guillermo del Toro (Hellboy) is currently the reported frontrunner to take on director's duties for the film.

"I think that intrinsically, most video games, and virtually all movies, do one basic thing: tell stories," said Jackson. "The aspects and elements of an interactive experience are unique to the video game but not necessarily the way it's perceived and/or understood as a story -- you still have characters, plot, environments, dialogue, or types of interactions and this is standard fare."

Jackson thinks that initially movie-makers will be more focused on the universal appeal of the video game, whether it's particular characters or storylines/themes, and that's because it fits naturally into the collective equation that is a movie."

"It'll be very interesting when a filmmaker creates a video game-based film experience that goes beyond what people thought it could be," said Jackson. "For example, music videos were originally just musicians playing music while being recorded on video so people could watch them, but now they are elaborate short movies that do everything from interpret the song through the medium of visual art to communicating political statements."

The advent of next generation gaming will further blur the line between Hollywood and interactive entertainment.

"Each new console amazes me with the graphics, sound, and what video game makers can accomplish," said Jackson. "I definitely see improved graphics and sound as continuously positive attributes for consideration among the Hollywood community. Actors will look more "life-like" in HD and the sound continues to get closer to the theatrical movie experience -- this makes it easier to provide sound effects, artwork, and talent when you, as a filmmaker, know that the final game will be a strong representation of the film."

When Jackson talks about video games, he speaks both as a gamer and as one of the leading producers/directors in Hollywood.

"I'm excited that with the new hardware and such amazing leaps forward in technology, I may be able to experience games that even I can't imagine," said Jackson. "I have such admiration for the video game development process and the talent behind these games, that giving them more tools, better hardware, and more budget will only lead to more fantastic adventures."

Now that Jackson has left his mark on the video game world with King Kong, other projects are likely to follow (beyond any Kong sequel). And now that gamers have seen what Jackson can do on the big screen when it comes to translating literary works and updating cinematic history, the next project to bear his name (albeit as executive producer, not director) will show how a best-selling video game can become a Hollywood blockbuster.

The King Kong DVD hits stores March 28 and Ubisoft is gearing up for another big push for Peter Jackson's King Kong video game to coincide with Universal's Home Entertainment marketing blitzkrieg.

Post by **yovargas** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:57 pm

Interesting. Halo is the first video game adaption I can think of with a story interesting enough to have a shot at being a good movie.

*praying for Blizzard to get into the film-making business*

Post by **The Angel** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:13 pm

Here's an article that is relevant to this discussion:

Ars Technica wrote:Are games like drugs?

2/27/2006 8:51:59 PM, by Ryan Paul

Chicago's WGN news is warning parents that video games are like drugs, an audacious claim that has gamers across the country wondering what those crazy journalists are smoking. According to the WGN health segment on the impact of gaming, the adrenaline rush that occurs during gameplay makes the experience itself an addictive stimulant:

"It's a stimulant. It's highly addictive. It's causing kids to forget about their friends, ignore their schoolwork and become impulsive and hot tempered."

To support this dubious assumption, they call in a social worker to give his expert medical opinion. How does social worker Robert Kauffman know that games are destroying the fabric of society? Because, he says, youngsters aren't as obedient as they used to be:

"We get kids who act out more. They don't think about what they are doing. they don't see the consequences in it. They tend to act less respectfully to their parents, and it just keeps going on."

How many countless times before him have the same words been uttered in admonishment? Transformative social catalysts are always feared by those that lack familiarity with new cultural and technological developments. Stale contempt for progress resonates throughout history. No doubt Kauffman's concerns were voiced by a previous generation when Rock 'n Roll and television began to transform the fabric of American social identity, or when jazz and beat poetry invented a new kind of self expression before that. Could it simply be that no matter the era, children invoke self-affirming defiance as they grapple with the challenges of individuality and learning what it means to be an autonomous adult? Old people have been accusing young people of being impulsive and direspectful for the entire length of recorded history, so I'm inclined to believe that it has very little to do with gaming.

Claiming that gamers play for an adrenaline rush is also a rather nebulous assertion. I certainly can't speak for other gamers, but aside from the occasional frenzied boss fight, I rarely get an adrenaline rush from playing games. On the other hand, I usually get a collosal adrenaline rush from a good cup of coffee. In North America, approximately 80 to 90 percent of adults use caffeine on a regular basis, consuming an average of about 280mg per day, which is the equivelant of about five sodas or two cups of coffee. Abusing coffee can definitely have a negative impact on health (I speak from experience), but the vast majority of coffee drinkers experience few negative affects from the massive amount of extra adrenaline. If coffee consumption hasn't caused the collapse of civilization (one could argue that it actually makes some people more efficient) I don't see how adrenaline induced by gaming possibly could. Stimulants have become an inextricable part of American society, and if gaming is a stimulant, it is significantly less potent and detrimental than many stimulants in wide use today. Extremely addictive prescription amphetamines like Adderall and Dexedrine are prescribed to literally millions of people, including young children. In a society where a majority of the population responsibly enjoys addictive stimulant beverages, all this talk about the dangers of a little extra adrenaline make very little sense, particularly when the average child can get plenty of excitement from television or any number of other comparably stimulating venues anyway.

So does this mean that people don't get addicted to games? There are an increasing number of socially maladjusted individuals that do seem to become addicted to gaming. According to an article in Psychology Today about University of of Pittsburgh assistant professor of psychology Kimberly Young's study on the subject of "Internet addiction," the behavior is compulsive and pathological rather than chemically motivated:

"Addiction," notes Young, "is a layman's term, not a clinical one." In fact, the DSM-IV doesn't even mention the word. Young chose the label "Internet addiction" because it's readily understandable by the public. When writing for clinical journals, however, she refers to "pathological Internet use," modeling the term after that for pathological gambling in the DSM-IV.

Other experts shun the term addiction altogether because it means too many things to too many people. "It's a sloppy word," says pharmacologist Carlton Erickson, Ph.D., head of the Addiction Science Research and Education Center at the University of Texas at Austin. In the drug abuse field, he notes, "dependence" has replaced "addiction". "In dependence, people can't stop because they have developed a brain chemistry that does not allow them to stop," explains Erickson. Excessive behavior that hasn't quite reached full-fledged dependency, meanwhile, is called "abuse". If Internet abusers cannot stop for a month, suggests Erickson, then "Internet dependence" would be the appropriate term. Others believe that the problem is best described as a compulsion, suggesting the phrase "compulsive Internet use". And many psychologists question whether excessive Internet use should be pathologized at all: John Grohol, Ph.D., who directs the Web site "Mental Health Net," says that by the same logic, bookworms should be diagnosed with "book addiction disorder".

So when it comes right down to it, excessive and self-destructive gaming habits seem to have more in common with eating disorders or compulsive gambling rather than heroin or cocaine addiction. It is most certainly not an inevitable result of gaming, nor is it a normal or frequent occurence, but it is an unfortunate situation that deserves consideration. I think that in many situations, people who become that involved in a game do so because they live in a socially dysfunctional setting or lifestyle to begin with. In cases where the activity becomes a pathological compulsion, gaming is most likely the symptom of a much larger problem rather than the problem itself.

In many respects, the steady stream of modern antigaming propaganda resembles Reefer Madness, the political posturing and media manipulation that compelled ignorant Americans to call for costly and ineffective prohibition of a substance that is relatively benign when used responsibly. Today, I see politicians and journalists taking an alarmingly similar position on the gaming issue: loudly promoting myths of addiction and destruction while silently ignoring the specter of personal freedom and responsibility. Let's hope that cooler heads prevail, and that this senseless demonization and drug comparison nonsense ends before ignorant politicians get the wrong idea and do something unfortunate.

As you might guess, I agree with this article, and I think it adds some intelligent commentary on the anti-hyperbole being proclaimed by politicians chasing headlines.

Post by **Jnyusa** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:36 pm

Good catch, Angel. That's illuminating. Thanks for posting it.

Jn

Post by **vison** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:26 pm

Thanx. Very interesting.

Post by **Alatar** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:22 pm

An example of the sort of game that can be good for developing the mind.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 98&q=spore

Post by **Alatar** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:28 pm

In late 2004, Stephen Gillett was in the running for a choice job at Yahoo! - a senior management position in engineering. He was a strong contender. Gillett had been responsible for CNET's backend, and he had helped launch a number of successful startups. But he had an additional qualification his prospective employer wasn't aware of, one that gave him a decisive edge: He was one of the top guild masters in the online role-playing game World of Warcraft.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.04/learn.html

Post by **superwizard** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 5:45 pm

[Note: I moved this and the following couple of posts from the new thread that sw started in Bag End - VtF]
Violent video games (particularly Grand Theft Auto) are pretty usual topics on the news these days and some people blame them for certain crimes commited and say that the companies are responsible. What do you think?
I'm guessing that I'm probably one of the few people on this board who have actually played this game and so I will try to explain to you why kids don't even seem to think twice before shooting a civilian in this game. You see when you first play the game (or watch someone play it) you'll probably be horrified about what you can do in the game, I will not go over the many ways you can kill people in the game but suffice to say many of the ways are pretty gruesome. However after playing the game for a short while you will get used to killing people and seeing them die; so much so that you'll probably just kill a few people when you feel bored. (I don't want to sound like some sort of crazy monster but I am trying to explain what goes on in these kid's minds.) This game pretty much makes you immune to the deaths of these video game people (much the same way butchers don't freak out ever time they see someone kill an animal). So in the child's mind it becomes okay to kill these people and so when they see you freak out over them shooting some guy in the head just to watch blood squirting from the guy's throat like a fountain they won't understand what's so wrong.

I hope to see your opinions on this matter. (I won't say my own opinions write now)

Post by **axordil** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:10 pm

Causality and connection are not the same. There is a larger tapestry here that both the games and the crime are a part of, which is the love-hate relationship US society has with the Outlaw. The tension between the romanticized vision of the man who plays by his own rules and the often bloody real-life results of men who actually DO is one of two or three central motifs in our culture. It's not unique to the US (witness the folkloric impact of the highwayman in the UK) but it's had its longest run and greatest number of variations here: mountain men, gunslingers, vigilantes, gangsters, lawmen more interested in results than law...the list continues to grow.

Post by **The Angel** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:57 pm

Are violent video games responsible for crime?

No.

Glad we settled that. Next question!

Post by **superwizard** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:45 pm

The Angel wrote:
Are violent video games responsible for crime?
No.

Glad we settled that. Next question!

Wow that was fast Angel, why do you think so?

Post by **vison** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:59 pm

superwizard wrote:
The Angel wrote:
Are violent video games responsible for crime?
No.

Glad we settled that. Next question!
Wow that was fast Angel, why do you think so?

Was there crime before video games?

Post by **superwizard** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:24 pm

vison wrote:
superwizard wrote:
The Angel wrote: No.

Glad we settled that. Next question!
Wow that was fast Angel, why do you think so?
Was there crime before video games?

I mean certain crimes where it is pretty evident that the child/teenager at least got some of the ideas from violent video games.