"Are Virtual Games a Virtual Problem?" by Shay L. B. Larsen
(And I mean "nerds" in the nicest sense of the word :) )
What kinds of conclusions can we come to based on the research presented in Larsen's article? How does this article compare to Gillen's? And looking ahead, how does it conflict with Nguyen's?
personally this picture reminds me when I was a kid. when I was a kid all I ever did was come home and play video games and that was my life. I would go to school (sometimes) come home or if I was home play my video game. that was what I was doing all day. I was getting no exercise and just kept on looking at the tv playing my video game. I got to a point in my life were I was pretty over weight and was un happy. do I blame the video game not I do not. I just think we need to have a even balance when we play video games for a hour we need to do a activity for the same amount of time. By Todd Harris
This is exactly what people need to understand. It's not the game's fault, it's the person playing it. If people can moderate and learn to put the right amount of time in, then there is NO PROBLEM with playing video games.
This reminds me too of when I played the virtual life games as a kid. Back then I got discouraged because my life was nothing like the like of my game character, not as exciting or whatever and so I became depressed, but now I see that everything has a time and place. That's what I feel all of these articles are missing, none seem to say that yes these games are okay. They teach some skills and logical reasoning, and some even teach others how to work in a team, and while there are better ways to learn this in the real world, it is more convenient to learn them in the virtual one. I'm not saying video games are good, but I am saying that it's not a black or white issue, it's a mix of grey.
I like your mix of grey analogy. :) It makes sense, there are a lot of mixed issues in this controversy. Neither side is only right or only wrong, they have mixed views that have a lot of validity to them.
My older brother was truly addicted to video games when he was younger. Being a child with ADD his mind was jumping from one thing to another at a very rapid pace. He had a hard time staying on task. The one thing he could focus on was video games, this was because video games have a rapid pace with loaded action. My mom was okay with him playing them all the time because it kept him out of everyone's hair. His hyper behavior was sustained by video games. He made video games number one priority in his life, even before eating on occasions. A balance needs to be established from parents. My mother should have reduced his playing time and provided options for more productive hobbies. Video games aren't the evil, they are a great entertainment option. They just need to be regulated like everything else in our lives.
I know from many people, luckily not myself, that video games can be very addicting. There are a lot of people that will completely dedicate their lives to one game and it can get extremely out of hand. Larsen and Gillen's article visit a lot of the same arguments, but obviously they both conflict with Nyugen's. Gathering what we know from all of these articles, clearly some more research in the right areas is needed.
I think the view points in both articles are valid. How they prove that is a little off but that what you can expect in a 1010 essay from an English class. It's definitely true how the games affect people. But how and how much I would say is taking it a little to far without the research needed.
Larson's article is a well written overview of both sides of the video game violence issue. He informs of a variety of studies with little if any bias. Gillen's main issue with video games is addiction and the chemical dophamine (a reward similar to drug addiction) and the probability that endorphins (the chemical released by excercise that gives a sence of well being) will not there for idle video game players. Gillen like Larsen thinks parental monotoring of time spent gaming is a benefit to those who tend to spend too much time behind the game paddle. For the average game player (male age 34 ) the demands of job, school, and family take the place of parental monitoring. Nguyen's focus is on the lack of concrete evidence that video game violence increases actual violent behavior. He is in agreement with Larson that like Rock in Roll music was looked on as a negative influence by parents when it first came out, video gaming also has been looked down on as evil, perhaps with no real vice. All three are open to further sound scientific study on the issues involving video games and see that it is an area of interest that should be looked into more as time goes on. The bottom line is that video games are not going away, they are fun, entertaining, educational, and somewhat beneficial to play them in moderation. Even if the public is made aware of actual negative aspects from playing in the future there will be money and research to negate those negative forces at play while we play. When time and occassion allows, you bet I am going to be blasting zombies away for hours with my cousins.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletepersonally this picture reminds me when I was a kid. when I was a kid all I ever did was come home and play video games and that was my life. I would go to school (sometimes) come home or if I was home play my video game. that was what I was doing all day. I was getting no exercise and just kept on looking at the tv playing my video game. I got to a point in my life were I was pretty over weight and was un happy. do I blame the video game not I do not. I just think we need to have a even balance when we play video games for a hour we need to do a activity for the same amount of time.
ReplyDeleteBy Todd Harris
This is exactly what people need to understand. It's not the game's fault, it's the person playing it. If people can moderate and learn to put the right amount of time in, then there is NO PROBLEM with playing video games.
DeleteThis reminds me too of when I played the virtual life games as a kid. Back then I got discouraged because my life was nothing like the like of my game character, not as exciting or whatever and so I became depressed, but now I see that everything has a time and place. That's what I feel all of these articles are missing, none seem to say that yes these games are okay. They teach some skills and logical reasoning, and some even teach others how to work in a team, and while there are better ways to learn this in the real world, it is more convenient to learn them in the virtual one. I'm not saying video games are good, but I am saying that it's not a black or white issue, it's a mix of grey.
ReplyDeleteI like your mix of grey analogy. :) It makes sense, there are a lot of mixed issues in this controversy. Neither side is only right or only wrong, they have mixed views that have a lot of validity to them.
DeleteMy older brother was truly addicted to video games when he was younger. Being a child with ADD his mind was jumping from one thing to another at a very rapid pace. He had a hard time staying on task. The one thing he could focus on was video games, this was because video games have a rapid pace with loaded action. My mom was okay with him playing them all the time because it kept him out of everyone's hair. His hyper behavior was sustained by video games. He made video games number one priority in his life, even before eating on occasions. A balance needs to be established from parents. My mother should have reduced his playing time and provided options for more productive hobbies. Video games aren't the evil, they are a great entertainment option. They just need to be regulated like everything else in our lives.
ReplyDeleteI know from many people, luckily not myself, that video games can be very addicting. There are a lot of people that will completely dedicate their lives to one game and it can get extremely out of hand. Larsen and Gillen's article visit a lot of the same arguments, but obviously they both conflict with Nyugen's. Gathering what we know from all of these articles, clearly some more research in the right areas is needed.
ReplyDeleteI think the view points in both articles are valid. How they prove that is a little off but that what you can expect in a 1010 essay from an English class. It's definitely true how the games affect people. But how and how much I would say is taking it a little to far without the research needed.
ReplyDeleteLarson's article is a well written overview of both sides of the video game violence issue. He informs of a variety of studies with little if any bias. Gillen's main issue with video games is addiction and the chemical dophamine (a reward similar to drug addiction) and the probability that endorphins (the chemical released by excercise that gives a sence of well being) will not there for idle video game players. Gillen like Larsen thinks parental monotoring of time spent gaming is a benefit to those who tend to spend too much time behind the game paddle. For the average game player (male age 34 ) the demands of job, school, and family take the place of parental monitoring. Nguyen's focus is on the lack of concrete evidence that video game violence increases actual violent behavior. He is in agreement with Larson that like Rock in Roll music was looked on as a negative influence by parents when it first came out, video gaming also has been looked down on as evil, perhaps with no real vice. All three are open to further sound scientific study on the issues involving video games and see that it is an area of interest that should be looked into more as time goes on. The bottom line is that video games are not going away, they are fun, entertaining, educational, and somewhat beneficial to play them in moderation. Even if the public is made aware of actual negative aspects from playing in the future there will be money and research to negate those negative forces at play while we play. When time and occassion allows, you bet I am going to be blasting zombies away for hours with my cousins.
ReplyDelete