They don't need a new rating system. The one we have now is fine. Just get the dumb ass parents who don't understand these simple things to under stand.

Does this mean I can apply for disability if my love of gaming becomes a recognized mental disorder? :)

Well, I've read AMA's document, and it's much more moderate and balanced than the Seattle-Post Intelligencer claims. They've reviewed research on positive uses of video games as well as negative uses, and they don't target only "video game addiction", but more general ""Internet/video game addiction".

If I may just play devil's advocate here for a moment, I don't think this is entirely unreasonable. There is such a thing after all as gambling addiction. And if that's the case, it's conceiveable that internet/game addiction could exist as well. The Chinese have been tackling the same issue in their own way, even though it's not the right way to go about it. So apparently it is there. At least unlike the Chinese they're not seriously advocating a mandatory length of time one should be on to be enforceable by law.

While I agree that the current ratings system is more or less fine as-is, any opportunity where the ESRB can get involved and try to educate parents is a good one. Something tells me that they'll advocate for pushing for more awareness of the current ratings system than revising the existing one.

While I think its good they need to tackle the overall addiction to reward systems that people develop. Peple don't get addicted to the game perse but the reward and the feeling of accomplishment.

I guess it bothers me that they specifically target computers as an addiction while ignoring other things that have similar symptoms and identical results expressed in different ways depending on the mechanism.

People get addicted to sunbathing for gods sake. Its funny, but you can tell them that the skin cancer will kill them and they don't give a fuck. Show them a picture of the hidden skin damage already done and show them what it will make them look like in 20 years, it will be a while before thy go back outside again.

Considering what UV can do to your skin where is the push to have sunbathing addiction studied? God knows the overall risks from that far out weigh the risks of game addiction. Most gamers will never get morbidly obese. They can lose said weight, you can't really repair the damage that causes skin cancer to develop.

More specific to games why not look at the environment that creates a game addiction. If your reward system is so messed up that a game gives you more accomplishment than life... what caused that in the first place?

Thats why this stuff bothers me. It always seems like they want to focus on games/internet/computers/newfangledmachines and ignore anything else.

Remember to read this AMA document like a doctor would. They have a rather strong statement about aggressive behavior and violent videogame playing, but a doctor will read this as a potential correlation, not cause and effect, and definitely not a 100% correlation.

The goal of these proposals by the AMA is to determine what aspects of behavior (in this case) warrant scientific study. Declaring something as an addiction allows doctors to treat it and patients insurance to help pay for it.

I think they should allow it to be an actual disease. The true sign of addiction is whether a life is negatively impacted by the behavior. Things like missing classes/dropping out, excessive time lost from work, or believing fantasy things are real.

Delegates will also vote on whether to recommend that children’s video game use be limited to two hours a day.

Two hours? Are they kidding it would take a month or more to beat Kingdom Hearts or Final Fantasy 12 that way (even if you don't side quests)

xzero87 Says:
Does this mean I can apply for disability if my love of gaming becomes a recognized mental disorder? :)

Haha, I can see an increase in applications once FFXIII hits.
I can understand why they would want to discuss internet/game addiction, but addressing the ratings systems is a little out of their field.

I find this specifically disturbing. Historically, this has happened several times where perfectly normal behaviors become pathological, and therefore deviant, stepping away from the mainstream. For example, in the age of enlightenment, there was vague wording surrounding a condition called "Religious hysteria," which spoke of "excessive religious fervor" as being a treatable, mental disease for which people were put into mental institutions for help (Religion, Deviance and Social Control http://www.amazon.com/Religion-Deviance-Social-Control-Rodney/dp/0415915...)

In the same vein, and what I think we have the unique "honor" of watching the beginnings of, is certain characteristics being indicative of other disorders by way of "objective" mental health issues. For example, in City of Plagues, an example of made of those Asians within the city during various plague breakouts in which the very "act" of being Asian meant that you were diseased and therefore marginalized. To be Asian in San Francisco during the 19th century was akin to being pathological.

This same kind of marginalized can be seen through various "medical" and scientific justifications throughout history, such as the marginalization of African Americans during the 1700-1800s in which scientific evidence was provided to show that blacks were inferior to whites in a variety of ways.

The chance of video games earning anything similar to this in terms of being deemed "pathological" could have similar consequences in terms of marginalizing a group of people (aka Gamers) already perceived to be on the edge of socially acceptable behavior and in fact, could become justification for creation of making those activities not typically seen as pathological, to suddenly earn that title (aka - mild gaming).

Am I saying that this will happen? No. All I am saying is that in european and European descended countries, have precedence of following similar courses of action when dealing with groups of people they feel need to controlled, or marginalized.

I think it's interesting, and a little bit unnerving to see video games even in the foothills of those particular mountains.

My gut reaction to each of the proposals:

VG/Internet addiction: yes, people can become addicted to video games or the internet; people can become addicted to essentially anything. In fact, I think the AMA needs to change their definition of addiction to treat it as a single disorder with many different triggers, or as two at the very most (one for chemical addiction, one for non-chemical).

Improved rating system: no, all that needs to be done is to ramp up parental education efforts in relation to the existing system.

2 hours a day recommendation: yes, this is reasonable; as far as I know, the AMA (or another somewhat equivalent organization, at the very least) already recommends a similar limitation on television viewing. Actually, a separate recommendation for video games may be redundant at this point - many parents lump video games in with television already, current recommendation and all.

In my personal opinion, more than two hours of gaming in a day on an infrequent basis isn't excessive at all - on Memorial day, my friends and I had a long Halo, Battlefront, and SSBM marathon - but for kids, if it's happening on a regular basis, it's a bit excessive. From elementary school all the way to my first year of college - now just ending - I've been lucky to get half an hour to an hour of gaming on weekdays. Two hours a day can really cut into time that's much better spent studying, socializing, or exercising.

There are exceptions, of course - the amount of exercise a kid would get from playing Wii Sports every day is a healthy supplement to the (often inadequate) physical education they get in school, and the social interaction of in-person or even online multiplayer games is certainly a good thing. But the fact is that a lot of kids do spend a lot more time than they should playing games.

@EOTD, I agree about the "addiction" definition. I have a feeling that legal wranglings prevent a general treatable condition definition. If you are or know parents, 2 hours is generous per day. The truth is that replacing study or sleep time for a child or teen with game playing will negatively impact their schoolwork and possibly health. Kids have so much more homework these days, you may as well make the games "weekend activity." Then again, it depends on the kid, and only the parent can make an informed decision.

I'm a full-time working adult who plays a game almost every night, but it's rare to get 2 hours in.

@Terrible Tom, addiction is an obsession that becomes compulsory. You were obsessed for awhile, but it doesn't sound like you were truly addicted.

I imagine the best treatment would be to go cold turkey for at least a week and attempt to realize that it not only doesn't affect the real world, but your life may even improve.

My closest experience to game addiction was Puzzle Quest. I loved that game, but I could see that the game didn't advance the plot very fast and you're always playing the same puzzle game for each fight. I purposefully put it down, and now I feel a little liberated.

this is redicilous hows bout the docs get back to aids cancer and stem cells

Easy solution for parents to stop the video game addiction is take away their kids video console or computer. its not like their kid will jsut be able to up and buy a new one. for the older folks not a good solution because they will spend money to get a new one. but by now they should realize they are adults by now. i know their is addictions but get help. why does it have to become a reconnized one where people can start to abuse the system.

Hello!
I think this try.