Parents Sue Gaming Companies Over ‘Video Game Addiction’, Because That’s Easier Than Parenting::Video game addiction. Sigh. Big sigh, even. Like, the biggest of sighs. We’ve talked about claims that video game addiction is a documentable affliction in the past, as well as the pushback that claim has received from addiction experts, who have pointed out that much of this is being done to allow doctors to get…

  • lekor55@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The recent lawsuits against gaming companies over ‘video game addiction’ seem to overlook the importance of parental guidance. It’s easier to blame external factors than to address the root causes at home. The principles of the AA twelve steps teach us about taking responsibility and seeking personal growth, which can be applied to parenting as well. Just as recovering from addiction requires commitment and support, guiding children through their challenges needs consistent involvement and understanding. Instead of looking for quick fixes, parents could benefit from actively engaging in their children’s lives and setting healthy boundaries around gaming and other activities.

  • HelloThere@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t want to be all old man yells at cloud, but back in my day popular games were played a lot because they were primarily enjoyable for the story, the achievement of completing a particular level or boss, playing against friends, etc. And sure, you’d have the odd bad parent trying to claim their kid was addicted to Counterstrike 1.6, but it was broadly speaking nonsense. The vast majority of games were offline, or had very limited online modes built around direct competition with other players (FPS, sports games, etc), and publishers would get all their money from the initial sale, with only a few games having expansion packs, most notable The Sims.

    But in the early 2010s a few things changed:

    • broadband internet became ubiquitous in markets with high levels of existing gamers
    • distribution of games swapped from physical media to downloads
    • ‘everyone’ had a pretty powerful computer in their pocket making it much more accessible
    • a bunch of people in the industry started reading about positive psychology - the idea that you can create habits through rewards - and apply them to video games to increase playtime
    • those mechanics turned out to be very powerful in driving particular user behaviours, and started to be targeted at monetisation models - and so we got loot boxes, etc

    So we went from a situation where video games were fun for the same reasons traditional games, or sports, are fun, to one where many video games include a lot of gambling mechanics in their core gameplay loops - loot boxes being the obvious one, but any lottery-based mechanic where you spend real money counts - in an industry with no relevant regulation, nor age limitation.

    It is definitely possible for people to get addicted to these mechanics, the same way people can get addicted to casino games, or betting on horse racing, especially when for some games that is literally what the developer wants.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah let’s just disregard the prevalence of gambling mechanics deliberately intended to induce addiction in minors to juice them for their parents’ cash.

    • zepheriths@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      True but parents have a responsibility to look at the game before letting their children play it. Should the mechanics exist? No. But should the parents look into the game beforehand? Yes

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        True but parents have a responsibility to look at the game before letting their children play it. Should the mechanics exist? No. But should the parents look into the game beforehand? Yes

        Switch the word ‘game’ with the word ‘drug’ and the word ‘play’ with the word ‘use’, and your comment still reads the same.

        We still outlaw addictive drugs.

        • Vqhm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I highly doubt I will have the time to try all the new research drug-games my children acquire access to. Better stick to first party Nintendo games-drugs.

          In all seriousness, PBS kids apps on mobile go hard, work on any device, and are fairly educational while being easy to use and fun enough to hold attention while being completely FREE.

          We’ve paid for ABC mouse but the whole fuckin thing reeks of slot machine pokie stimulus while the puzzles and games crash often. The only thing that 100% works all the time is the store to exchange your “tickets”

          Abc mouse is the highest rated most teacher recommended app and it’s fucking awful.

          My 3 year old has gotten way more out of free software than any pay software that’s littered with addictive BS.

          I would recommend:

          GCompris

          Khan academy kids

          Learn to read Duolingo ABC

          PBS anything

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Two things.

            First, teenagers are also children, and every product that you describe would not fit them, those are more for the very young.

            Second, we’re talking about designing the game in such a way that it provokes the brain in the same way a drug would, in essence being a drug itself.

        • retrieval4558@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Comment does not read the same at all, and two of the most addictive drugs, alcohol and nicotine, are legal.

          Now if you’d said “we still outlaw addictive drugs FOR KIDS”, you’d be right.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Switch the word ‘game’ with the word ‘drug’ and the word ‘play’ with the word ‘use’, and your comment still reads the same.

            We still outlaw addictive drugs.

            Comment does not read the same at all,

            Well, let’s see…

            True but parents have a responsibility to look at the drug before letting their children use it. Should the drug exist? No. But should the parents look into the drug beforehand? Yes

            They read the same to me. Both of them are about parents watching what a child does (gaming or drugs) and having responsibility over the child, which no human being can watch another one 24/7 successfully (even people in prison get murdered).

            and two of the most addictive drugs, alcohol and nicotine, are legal.

            And children are not allowed to purchase those, because it’s harmful for them.

            We, as a society, help the parents look out for their child by making laws to protect them.

        • Iteria@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Do we though? Alcohol the most commonly used addictive drugs is allowed for adults and even children in many states as long as the adults approve and do it in in private residences.

          Parents need to be better about paying attention to games. I remember telling my aunt about a game my 10 year old cousin wanted. She was horrified and said absolutely not. She bought it for him when he asked when they were in the store because she doesn’t take any time to pay attention to game They’re for kids. Even though games are clearly marked with any objectionable material. She “blindsided” by what was in the game when her son booted it up dispite the game be rated as mature, marking objectionable things and me giving her a play by play.

          There are a lot of additive things that we expect parents to use their judgment on. Sugar for example. Until someone is talking to me about how we need a bad on soda and BS like that because parents can’t be expected to parent their kids about it, I don’t really care about the most optional of activities that is games. Children have extremely limited access if their parents don’t allow it. Theu buy the phones/tables/game consoles and robust parental controls have existed for a while.

          Kids can be addicted to all sorts of things and it’s still on the parents. Because it’s technology we for some reason stop believing parents can do a thing. Oh however would the person who controls the internet ans the devices control their child’s access to social media (another one I see whining about) and video games. As a parent myself, I’m just under the impression that at least watching in my circle, the parents who don’t aren’t paying attention or don’t actually care that much, they just don’t like the outcome judgment.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Alcohol the most commonly used addictive drugs is allowed for adults and even children in many states as long as the adults approve and do it in in private residences.

            Not to get dragged down into a IANAL argument, but children purchasing alcohol though is not legal.

            And what you described is adults helping children get around the law.

            The law still exists.

  • jozza@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This author seems pretty comfortable mocking the concept of games being addictive.

    Loot boxes need to stop for sure, but things like limited-time content are 100% designed to form habits and ultimately feed gaming addiction. Season passes or weekly achievements require you to log on and grind out challenges at regular intervals to avoid missing out on rewards that are required for competitive play.

    I know plenty of people who have had to make an active choice to stop playing certain games because they found they couldn’t play the game ‘on their own terms’. It sucks as an adult, but kids without fully developed brains capable of rational thinking would stand no chance.

    • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      things like limited-time content are 100% designed to form habits and ultimately feed gaming addiction. Season passes or weekly achievements require you to log on and grind out challenges at regular intervals to avoid missing out on rewards that are required for competitive play.

      Hell, even subscription-based games like MMOs. After all, if you’re paying every month for something, you want to get your money’s worth.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s part of why I never played WoW. I knew that I’d constantly be like “I’m paying for it I should be playing”.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I do feel like it’s kind of a bad thing that many large game devs employ psychologists specifically to come up with ways that psychologically addict players. They could be addicting even without being specifically designed that way, but going out of your way to ensure it is does, does not seem the least but ethical to me.

    • topinambour_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Like EA who use the same technics that casinos for their loot boxes. But you have better odds with casinos than EA…

      • bassomitron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        EA is hardly the only one doing that. I’d even argue that there are far more offensive examples, sadly. Just look at the mobile market, it’s a cesspool of extremely exploitive tactics and even more accessible than traditional gaming.

  • ntma@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s like when parents go after the drug dealers than blame their own kid for doing drugs.

    • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s also like when you ignore that video game makers research and develop how to make their game as addictive as possible and ignore an entire thread talking about it. Oh wait…

  • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This isn’t shitty parenting, companies are intentionally creating addictive mechanics in games. Instant gratification causes a release of dopamine, which keeps the person playing over and over again. It’s the reason why people “grind”.

    They’re virtual Skinner Boxes. If you don’t know what that is, I suggest looking up the term and B. F. Skinner himself.