Moar anti-gaming propaganda !

Tyrant^

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/15002820

"going for the stab button if someone is in your way. I can imagine if you played it even more than I do, it could be a problem."

"Grand Theft Auto 4 came out and I got it for my birthday. ... I went outside one day and I had this sudden urge to punch everyone and steal all their money and cars and stuff."

This propaganda is getting more frequent. Cant remember how many times I heard the "Grand theft auto made me do it" story.

So... my hypothesis is ... more of this non sense will fill the public's minuscule brains over a very long period of time and a political decision will be made bringing down the ban hammer on gaming !

Sesudra

Ah here! Is that article a Brass Eye style hoax? "Playing Assassins Creed made me want to run up buildings *tee hee*"

Kiith

I regularly see health bars over people, and if i dont get a conversation wheel when talking to someone, i know they're not important. It's actually quite useful.

Stupid article is stupid.

chin_grin

Media will always need something to blame other than lackadaisical parents. Video games are just the easiest target because it's an interactive medium instead of just observing. I wish retailers and parents would actually heed to the age limits of modern video games.

My friends cousin (around ten) is playing games like Dead Space, FEAR, GoW, etc and I'm biting my tongue as you can't say anything in case you incur the wrath of a parent. Pleasing their child or otherwise, they're still in the wrong buying these games for such a youngling.

AnCapaillMor

It's just the 2000's version of hidden messages in songs, the media is making us so paranoid on everything.

Sabre0001

If I think someone is lying I tend to start screaming at them and accusing them of murder...I did hear an off tone though just before I started

Kiith

Sabre0001 wrote: »

If I think someone is lying I tend to start screaming at them and accusing them of murder...I did hear an off tone though just before I started

I just shoot them in the face. Easier that way, and you get more exp.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

i dunno, when i was playing lots of starcraft in the evenings I'd go to bed thinking in build orders

chin_grin

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

i dunno, when i was playing lots of starcraft in the evenings I'd go to bed thinking in build orders

Everytime I read your username I have the slurred jingle in my head. :pac:

Yeah, I'm now afraid of getting an arrow in the back when the sun goes down. Bloody minecraft! And if I hear a hissing noise? You betcha that bed has some fresh pee stains!

hooradiation

Sesudra wrote: »

Ah here! Is that article a Brass Eye style hoax? "Playing Assassins Creed made me want to run up buildings *tee hee*"

I suffered from this for a bit. Then I realised I had insufficient upper body strength and Italian vocabulary to make it happen.

But I'm failing to see why people are getting so goddamn butthurt, I'd go as far to say most people who play a certain game for prolonged periods of time, as most of the people interviewed said they did, would encounter this phenomenon.

But it wasn't about how games are so awesome so I guess it must be "anti-gaming propaganda".

Kiith

hooradiation wrote: »

But I'm failing to see why people are getting so goddamn butthurt, I'd go as far to say most people who play a certain game for prolonged periods of time, as most of the people interviewed said they did, would encounter this phenomenon.

Ah come on. Most people don't get this. Most people who play games for prolonged periods of time might think "wouldn't it be cool if i could do that like in the game" and not "i think i'll actually do that like i did in the game". There's a big difference.



If someone actually starts to think that they can parkour their way up a building after playing Assassins Creed...well, then they're ****ing retarded.

super_furry

I remember after a mamoth COD session a couple of years ago, leaving the house and seeing a helicopter hovering above. I stopped for a second wondering how I could get my rocket launcher out.

If you spend a prolonged amount of time doing anything, it'll linger with you mentally for a while afterwards.

Grumpypants

Its like the time I tried to use the force to get the TV remote from the ground without getting out of bed.

All those stories just sound like they are people using their imagination when did that become a bad thing.

chin_grin

Although I remember after playing Resi 4 for AGES I kept looking up in to trees for nests to shoot. I'm sure I looked very strange (more so).

Kiith

Kiith wrote: »

Ah come on. Most people don't get this.

super_furry wrote: »

I remember after a mamoth COD session a couple of years ago, leaving the house and seeing a helicopter hovering above. I stopped for a second wondering how I could get my rocket launcher out.

Grumpypants wrote: »

Its like the time I tried to use the force to get the TV remote from the ground without getting out of bed.

chin_grin wrote: »

Although I remember after playing Resi 4 for AGES I kept looking up in to trees for nests to shoot. I'm sure I looked very strange (more so).

It seem's i stand corrected

marco_polo

Kiith wrote: »

Ah come on. Most people don't get this. Most people who play games for prolonged periods of time might think "wouldn't it be cool if i could do that like in the game" and not "i think i'll actually do that like i did in the game". There's a big difference.

That pretty much what the study was getting at, there is no stopping a few journalist from cherrypicking to suit their agenda though.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-21-game-transfer-phenomena-authors-defence

reallyrose

There's a difference between being involved with a medium for a long time, so your brain goes a bit funny and actually thinking that the game (or whatever) is real.

I couldn't sleep last night, so I watched quite a lot of Star Trek. Between the sleep deprivation and the exposure to Captain Picard, this morning I half-thought that I had a food replicator in my kitchen.

However, I didn't get upset because my microwave didn't produce coffee suddenly, or that doors didn't slide open with a soothing whirr.

The immersion is just a little easier with games, you're actually on control of events, and can play for far longer than most people could tolerate watching a tv show.
If you did ANYTHING for 12 hours constantly, you would become slightly off-kilter. If someone watched a cat for 12 hours, I'll bet that they'd think about licking themselves instead of a shower and start trying to sleep under a radiator.

Captain's log, Star Date :pac:

Grumpypants

I did hide in a box like Solid Snake does to scare a friend of mine," said Adrian, 21.:D

Blazer

I remember I came out after a 14 hour Battlefield 2 Lan and as I was driving my car I remember I was checking for landmines...I was just still in game mode
Lads had a great laugh about it as they were in the back seat wondering why I was peering down at the ground.

hooradiation

marco_polo wrote: »

That pretty much what the study was getting at, there is no stopping a few journalist from cherrypicking to suit their agenda though.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-21-game-transfer-phenomena-authors-defence

I was going to say that the interesting area would be where what games allow you to do has a significant overlap with the real world - the guy who tried to transplant his FIFA skills into the real world might only end up making a tit of himself, but it might be less comical in other scenarios.

chin_grin

Grumpypants wrote: »

I did hide in a box like Solid Snake does to scare a friend of mine," said Adrian, 21.:D

http://kotaku.com/5356261/metal-gear-style-cardboard-box-prison-escape

^_^

(Sorry I can't paste the full story as gaming sites are blocked in work. Aw).

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

hooradiation wrote: »

I was going to say that the interesting area would be where what games allow you to do has a significant overlap with the real world - the guy who tried to transplant his FIFA skills into the real world might only end up making a tit of himself, but it might be less comical in other scenarios.

well that guy recently did train for his mass shooting using fps games

hooradiation

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

well that guy recently did train for his mass shooting using fps games

oh yeah, Anders Brevik.

Grumpypants

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

well that guy recently did train for his mass shooting using fps games

Yea but that guy is a retard

Retr0gamer

A study group of 42 'volunteers' self reporting, no control group and BS claims like one of of them reaching for the reverse time button when he drops his sandwich because of playing sands of time too much. Don't expect this to get published except in the crappiest of journals. All it is is terrible research but of course the media will jump on anything that can push their agenda.

penev10

Everytime I hear someone say they were addicted to a game it really bugs me (like the guy the BBC quoted as being addicted to GTA4).

You can't be addicted to games, there is no scientific evidence it changes your brain chemistry outside of when you are actually playing. Yet if a few teenagers say they're "like sooooooooo addicted to COD" or whatever it's somehow evidence of a problem and can be quoted as such in the media.

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

A study group of 42 'volunteers' self reporting, no control group and BS claims like one of of them reaching for the reverse time button when he drops his sandwich because of playing sands of time too much. Don't expect this to get published except in the crappiest of journals. All it is is terrible research but of course the media will jump on anything that can push their agenda.

Except It's not terrible research, it's a perfectly good basis for a hypothesis, which is why there is being a second study done.
It's been badly misreported but that's about it.

cherryghost

The media industry are afraid of the upward trend of gaming as people's preferred method of entertainment, hence scathing it whenever possible.

/argument :P

n0irin

I'd like to read the actual study that this article is describing. I have heard a lot of people saying that when they stop a long gaming session, they have a short period of disconnect where they go to do something their character would/could, only to realise they're not still playing the game - the important distinction there is that they don't actually believe that they can physically do it, or - in the case of GTA's punching people/stealing cars - they don't actually go and do it, once they think for a second!

penev10 wrote: »

You can't be addicted to games, there is no scientific evidence it changes your brain chemistry outside of when you are actually playing. Yet if a few teenagers say they're "like sooooooooo addicted to COD" or whatever it's somehow evidence of a problem and can be quoted as such in the media.

Actually there are a lot of people doing research on addiction to games, and it does seem like quite a real phenomenon in *extreme* cases. I mean, if you can get addicted to gambling, then why can't you get addicted to a game? It's not chemical addiction as it would be to drugs, but it's still addiction.
In South Korea, there are plenty of rehab centres which deal with gaming addiction, as it's pretty common there.

There will be a definition included in the new edition DSM of Mental Disorders in 2013 of internet addiction, and I've heard that there will be a footnote in there about gaming addiction. It's not being recognised yet as a specific psychological disorder in itself, as distinct from internet addiction, but even a mention of it in an appendix shows something.

I'll admit that it's not as common as people say, and it's only in extreme cases. As you say, tons of gamers say "Aww, I'm so addicted to <insert game here>" and they're just exaggerating, but it does happen to some. That doesn't mean that the media should listen to all of those people who are exaggerating long periods of game play and enjoyment into addiction, and blow it out of all proportion, but somehow they keep doing it.

Grumpypants

Retr0gamer wrote: »

A study group of 42 'volunteers' self reporting, no control group and BS claims like one of of them reaching for the reverse time button when he drops his sandwich because of playing sands of time too much. Don't expect this to get published except in the crappiest of journals. All it is is terrible research but of course the media will jump on anything that can push their agenda.

The researcher done it as a light hearted study though not as a games are bad one, he even slags of the idiot reporters for misrepresenting it. Reading the report it really does come across as a "its funny the way people think" study rather than a this is harming our kids one. He even said his own 7 year old plays games but knows the difference between reality and fiction.

Morlar

I think stories like this are kind of a right of passage for journalists. Like 'fluffy kitten up a tree' or 'panda giving birth' stories. This is never the kind of story they give to established journalists like Kate Adie or Robert Fisk. It's always the office junior/just graduated from journalism school nobodies who author these kinds of fluff articles.

Having said that, if you play a video game intensely for long hours or over the course of an extended period of time it can slightly affect you. There's a massive leap between that temporary glitch and being unable to tell what's real and what isn't.

Grumpypants

Right I must get up there is a building across the road that needs scaling

Mindkiller

God, I really wished I had a reverse time button. And an invisibility cloak. And force powers.

Retr0gamer

Grumpypants wrote: »

The researcher done it as a light hearted study though not as a games are bad one, he even slags of the idiot reporters for misrepresenting it. Reading the report it really does come across as a "its funny the way people think" study rather than a this is harming our kids one. He even said his own 7 year old plays games but knows the difference between reality and fiction.

It's still pretty bad that he's passing it off as proper research and charging for it. He knows what he's doing and making money from it. Very poor form from an academic. Whatever way you look at it, without proper control groups it's absolutely worthless.

Elrollo

Alfie Binyon:
I was badly addicted to GTA and people would ask me what I did today, I would think I've been out but I've been sat in at home. The problem got worse when Call of Duty Modern Warfare came out, spent a total of 32 days playing it and lost touch with reality.

My response to this hero

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's still pretty bad that he's passing it off as proper research and charging for it. He knows what he's doing and making money from it. Very poor form from an academic. Whatever way you look at it, without proper control groups it's absolutely worthless.

This is not true - it's perfectly valid to do research like this as a start to a theory. It helps to form the hypothesis.
If he was saying that this was conclusive proof of something, you'd have a point. But he's not.

Retr0gamer

Why publish a hypothesis though based on flakey research other than to generate controversy and get your face in the limelight? He's just trying to get some publicity and it's ethically wrong. You don't publish poor research like that, it's not even enough to be a communication.

Fnz

It's currently a 42-person study, limited to 15-21 year olds. Would be more interested in a larger study that includes participants in their 50s... what's the age of the average gamer, 38?

penev10

n0irin wrote: »

Actually there are a lot of people doing research on addiction to games, and it does seem like quite a real phenomenon in *extreme* cases. I mean, if you can get addicted to gambling, then why can't you get addicted to a game? It's not chemical addiction as it would be to drugs, but it's still addiction. .

Depends on your definition of addiction I suppose.There's a lot of debate on the nature of addiction and an over-willingness to medicalise the problem thus exhonerating the "victim".

I've seen studies that try to tie addictive behaviour to anything that stimulates certain pleasure centres in the brain! Tomato Kethcup is addictive allegedly!

n0irin wrote: »

In South Korea, there are plenty of rehab centres which deal with gaming addiction, as it's pretty common there..

There are methadone clinics all around the globe without a shred of credible evidence that such an approach treats heroin addiction.

There is also a clinic in Holland which purports to be leading the way in treating "video game addicts". Counselling teenagers with social and behavioural is only to be admired but claiming it treats a problem that doen't exist is ridiculous.

Retr0gamer

I think videogame addiction could definitely be legit. Stuff like the levelling up in CoD or WoW target people with OCD tendencies and addiction can be linked to the release of dopamine and adrenaline which can happen while playing an intense game. It's no secret that the big games companies have psychologist consultants to help make their games more addictive, although they'll never admit that it's what they are there for. You can see a lot of tactics used in the gambling industry making their way into games like CoD and Wow.

BrerWolf

I'm a BIG fan of games (mainly console, but I go back to the PC for serious ones...) but I have to admit that Games can be addictive.


Just like TV, sweets, exercise and anything else.

Setting up specialised game-addiction clinics is going too far, but pretending/insisting the problem doesn't exist is going too far in the opposite direction.

reallyrose

I completely believe that computer games are addictive. I guess I think that there are levels of addiction. I'm addicted to caffeine but if I had to go without it, I wouldn't be clawing the walls or robbing money from old ladies to buy coffee. However, without it I'm grouchy, unhappy and get headaches.
There's addiction and dependancy maybe?

A-ha! I found my point. Eventually.
"Addiction is not about what you DO, but what you DON'T DO because of the replacement of the addictive behavior."
If you don't cook yourself a nice dinner, or go out with your friends or go home from work early so that you can play computer games; that's a level of addiction. I'm not talking about the "omg, new game so awesome" effect. Everyone does that. I'm talking about continual behavior change because one is playing games.


Read more: 5 Creepy Ways Video Games Are Trying to Get You Addicted | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted_p2.html#ixzz1YgfX9bQV


Anyhoo, this is good reading. Scary reading too!
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html

penev10

I know what you mean Retro but, and maybe I'm being too pedantic for this forum, if someone becomes obsessed by a game (or a game mechanic) it doesn't mean they're addicted to it.

This piece by Extra Creditz makes a nice differenciation between Compulsive and Addictive Gameplay:
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/game-addiction-pt.1

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Why publish a hypothesis though based on flakey research other than to generate controversy and get your face in the limelight? He's just trying to get some publicity and it's ethically wrong. You don't publish poor research like that, it's not even enough to be a communication.

Why would you spend the time, effort and money to do a more studies to investigate the hypothesis further without being able to demonstrate that there may be something there to begin with?

And seeing as he's now spent time trying to put right some of the misconceptions that have arisen from articles that have mangled his findings I can't really put much stock in you constant claims that "he's being unethical!"

Retr0gamer

You present a hypothesis to funding agencies to get funding for further studies. You don't go giving it to the daily mail and other such papers to get yourself publicity to get funding since the papers will and have in this case presented your hypothesis as a well documented study when in fact it's nothing but a hypothesis. That's what makes it unethical. He released this to the papers to get publicity to try and further his plans to get funding and is now on damage control. It's his own fault his findings got mangled. I never heard of someone putting his hypothesis alone up on the university network or in the library and charging for it and I don't see how the papers got wind of it unless he purposefully told them about it. It's his own fault his findings got mangled from the press but sure that's the reason why you don't present a flakey hypothesis to the press. I hope the university ethics commitee go to town on him.

marco_polo

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You present a hypothesis to funding agencies to get funding for further studies. You don't go giving it to the daily mail and other such papers to get yourself publicity to get funding since the papers will and have in this case presented your hypothesis as a well documented study when in fact it's nothing but a hypothesis. That's what makes it unethical. He released this to the papers to get publicity to try and further his plans to get funding and is now on damage control. It's his own fault his findings got mangled. I never heard of someone putting his hypothesis alone up on the university network or in the library and charging for it and I don't see how the papers got wind of it unless he purposefully told them about it. It's his own fault his findings got mangled from the press but sure that's the reason why you don't present a flakey hypothesis to the press. I hope the university ethics commitee go to town on him.

It was a pilot study published in the Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning. In all fairness there wouldn't be too many scientists left if university ethics commitees went after every one who studies were misreported by the Daily Mail.

Mr.Saturn

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I think videogame addiction could definitely be legit. Stuff like the levelling up in CoD or WoW target people with OCD tendencies and addiction can be linked to the release of dopamine and adrenaline which can happen while playing an intense game. It's no secret that the big games companies have psychologist consultants to help make their games more addictive, although they'll never admit that it's what they are there for. You can see a lot of tactics used in the gambling industry making their way into games like CoD and Wow.

Microsoft's studios test their games like they're trying to make Captain America, vibration-measuring jelly (eeww-arrr), players hooked up to a
plethora of machinery scaling their blood pressure and brain activity at certain parts. Like you say, it's an industry built around turning people
into crack-addicts for months at a time. Somewhat hyperbolicly put.

Retr0gamer

marco_polo wrote: »

It was a pilot study published in the Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning. In all fhere wouldn't be too many scientists left if university ethics commitees went after every one who findings were misreported by the Daily Mail.

Ah I see it was published in a crappy journal. Explains a lot. I still don't think such a poor study that didn't have any control groups and even the sample group was questionable should have been published at all but if you plumb the depths of academic journals you can get anything published it seems. I wouldn't be surprised if the journal leaked it to the papers to try and raise it's impact factor

deathrider

AnCapaillMor wrote: »

It's just the 2000's version of hidden messages in songs, the media is making us so paranoid on everything.

If you play your games backwards, you hear satanic messages :P

Anyways, I usually dragon punch people I meet on the street. Does this count? :pac:

o1s1n

deathrider wrote: »

Anyways, I usually dragon punch people I meet on the street. Does this count? :pac:

Only if they're children. Because we have to think of them.

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You present a hypothesis to funding agencies to get funding for further studies. You don't go giving it to the daily mail and other such papers to get yourself publicity to get funding since the papers will and have in this case presented your hypothesis as a well documented study when in fact it's nothing but a hypothesis. That's what makes it unethical. He released this to the papers to get publicity to try and further his plans to get funding and is now on damage control. It's his own fault his findings got mangled. I never heard of someone putting his hypothesis alone up on the university network or in the library and charging for it and I don't see how the papers got wind of it unless he purposefully told them about it. It's his own fault his findings got mangled from the press but sure that's the reason why you don't present a flakey hypothesis to the press. I hope the university ethics commitee go to town on him.

Ahh, so you've already decided that it's unethical and that's that.
Fair enough.