We now have two countries that have intervened and imposed gaming limits on their citizens. I know that Britain has imposed a gaming tax in their country.
Bars cannot stay open all night. There are also age limits on drinking. There are limits on drugs.
Obviously, the countries see that this is harmful to their citizens and see a need to step in because the people aren't taking care of themselves.....
Sorry, just a band-aid in my opinion. If you aren't going to provide some sort of support to help people overcome the underlying reasons for their excessive-compulsive gaming, then the people are just going to find another way to harm themselves. This doesn't fix the problem. It doesn't. It doesn't! And besides...when governments step in to start limiting a product or activity, then that means there is going to be a black market opening up to service the wants and needs of those people who want to continue to use the product or activity. As gaming is technology oriented...there will always be a way to keep ahead of the game police.
If people could get their lives back on track by merely having their 'drug' removed or limited..then there really wouldn't be a need for groups like OLGA or A.A. for that matter. Truth is that recovery requires a multi-faceted approach...the first of which is the gamer deciding he wants and needs to get his life back under control.
A noble effort, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
I agree with you Ron that once a gamer is in the midst of an addiction such strategies aren't going to work. However, for those on the road to addiction I think it could be useful. I remember at highschool we were never allowed to smoke. But by my final year of school we were, and in my "I'm so grown up and independant" adolescant stupor I started smoking. That's not to say I wouldn't have ever taken up smoking, but I hadn't ever dreamt of smoking at school before then, it simply didn't cross my mind. Likewise, it could be helpful if, rather than being encouraged by the design of the games to play 150hrs/wk, people entered the virtual world with sound knowledge that they can only go 3 hrs at a time...and anymore may seem simply stupid. ...To some people, not all. Surely making an environment less conducive to such behaviour is a good band aid, if only a band aid.
I agree it don't solve the problem, but i don't believe it make it worse! rather better, because you don't have to play that much to be the best player, also the activity they do when they have passed the time limit, it's probably that it wont be so damaging as playing, but they could just jump to another online game, but in entirety over all players, does I believe it make things a bit better.
Well, after some thought I think I would tend to agree that it would be beneficial - The mere activity of sitting and hyper-focusing on a screen for countless hours in itself is not healthy for the body and mind. I would just hope that a psychological 'withdrawal' would not develop creating who knows what other kinds of issues. Time will tell.
Gaming is fun - Too much of it rots the body, mind and spirit.
Quote:I think they should do something like that here too.
No offense, but I don't want the government butting in and telling me when I can and can't play. Granted, I usually don't spend more than a couple hours a week playing online games, because I also play non-online games, go to work, have a social life, and draw two weekly webcomics. But mine or anybody else's gaming habits is none of the government's business. We don't need a nanny state.
I have to agree with MiteKitsune. Alcohol and tobacco are substances that can be controlled, online gaming is a behavior and letting government control behavior (assuming it is not criminal) is a slippery slope.
Would it help? I'm skeptical. I think, as Diggo said in his earlier post, that tech savvy gamers would instantly figure out a way around it. Those less adept would fall prey to the inevitable opportunistic profiteers that would no doubt spring up. Gamers would just end up either paying more for their fix or spending more time working around the restrictions.
Quote:I have to agree with MiteKitsune. Alcohol and tobacco are substances that can be controlled, online gaming is a behavior and letting government control behavior (assuming it is not criminal) is a slippery slope.
Exactly. What's next? The amount of time you can spend using the internet? Watching TV? Spending time outdoors?
p198.ezboard.com/folgafrm30.showMessage?topicID=99.topic
We now have two countries that have intervened and imposed gaming limits on their citizens. I know that Britain has imposed a gaming tax in their country.
Bars cannot stay open all night. There are also age limits on drinking. There are limits on drugs.
Obviously, the countries see that this is harmful to their citizens and see a need to step in because the people aren't taking care of themselves.....
Liz
Liz Woolley
Sorry, just a band-aid in my opinion. If you aren't going to provide some sort of support to help people overcome the underlying reasons for their excessive-compulsive gaming, then the people are just going to find another way to harm themselves. This doesn't fix the problem. It doesn't. It doesn't!
And besides...when governments step in to start limiting a product or activity, then that means there is going to be a black market opening up to service the wants and needs of those people who want to continue to use the product or activity. As gaming is technology oriented...there will always be a way to keep ahead of the game police.
If people could get their lives back on track by merely having their 'drug' removed or limited..then there really wouldn't be a need for groups like OLGA or A.A. for that matter. Truth is that recovery requires a multi-faceted approach...the first of which is the gamer deciding he wants and needs to get his life back under control.
A noble effort, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Ron
Ron Jaffe AKA Diggo McDiggity
Discussion Board Administrator
On-Line Gamers Anonymous
Edited by: Diggo McDiggity at: 8/29/05 10:23
Co-Founder of OLGA and member since 2002
I agree with you Ron that once a gamer is in the midst of an addiction such strategies aren't going to work.
However, for those on the road to addiction I think it could be useful. I remember at highschool we were never allowed to smoke. But by my final year of school we were, and in my "I'm so grown up and independant" adolescant stupor I started smoking. That's not to say I wouldn't have ever taken up smoking, but I hadn't ever dreamt of smoking at school before then, it simply didn't cross my mind. Likewise, it could be helpful if, rather than being encouraged by the design of the games to play 150hrs/wk, people entered the virtual world with sound knowledge that they can only go 3 hrs at a time...and anymore may seem simply stupid. ...To some people, not all. Surely making an environment less conducive to such behaviour is a good band aid, if only a band aid.
I agree it don't solve the problem, but i don't believe it make it worse! rather better, because you don't have to play that much to be the best player, also the activity they do when they have passed the time limit, it's probably that it wont be so damaging as playing, but they could just jump to another online game, but in entirety over all players, does I believe it make things a bit better.
Well, after some thought I think I would tend to agree that it would be beneficial - The mere activity of sitting and hyper-focusing on a screen for countless hours in itself is not healthy for the body and mind. I would just hope that a psychological 'withdrawal' would not develop creating who knows what other kinds of issues.
Time will tell.
Gaming is fun - Too much of it rots the body, mind and spirit.
Ron
Ron Jaffe AKA Diggo McDiggity
Discussion Board Administrator
On-Line Gamers Anonymous
Co-Founder of OLGA and member since 2002
Quote:I think they should do something like that here too.
No offense, but I don't want the government butting in and telling me when I can and can't play. Granted, I usually don't spend more than a couple hours a week playing online games, because I also play non-online games, go to work, have a social life, and draw two weekly webcomics. But mine or anybody else's gaming habits is none of the government's business. We don't need a nanny state.
-Mutt
Creator of Perki Goth/Candi Raver
Edited by: MiteKitsune at: 9/21/05 19:23
I have to agree with MiteKitsune. Alcohol and tobacco are substances that can be controlled, online gaming is a behavior and letting government control behavior (assuming it is not criminal) is a slippery slope.
Would it help? I'm skeptical. I think, as Diggo said in his earlier post, that tech savvy gamers would instantly figure out a way around it. Those less adept would fall prey to the inevitable opportunistic profiteers that would no doubt spring up. Gamers would just end up either paying more for their fix or spending more time working around the restrictions.
Quote:I have to agree with MiteKitsune. Alcohol and tobacco are substances that can be controlled, online gaming is a behavior and letting government control behavior (assuming it is not criminal) is a slippery slope.
Exactly. What's next? The amount of time you can spend using the internet? Watching TV? Spending time outdoors?
-Mutt
Creator of Perki Goth/Candi Raver