October 21, 2007
Hey, gamer! Are you an antisocial, friendless shut-in who wouldn’t know how to interact with another flesh and blood person if one walked up and bit you on the controller?
Sadly, the stereotype of gamer-as-misfit remains alive and well. BBC News’s Paul Rubens notes that in the wake of the Halo 3 launch, many non-gamers have concerns about the millions of hours sure to be invested (or, in their view, wasted) in playing the popular Xbox 360 shooter. As Rubens writes:
…over the years, video games have been blamed for everything from destroying marriages to turning balanced adults into murderers and rapists. At the very least, will video games produce a generation of unsociable hermits?
It's a common misconception that gaming is a solitary activity, as today an increasing number of titles are for gamers to get together and play in turn. In this respect, it's no different to golf - a game which can be a source of marital friction but is rarely accused of incitement to murder.
Indeed, many of today’s popular titles include online modes in which players from all over the world can play together competitively or cooperatively. Not only that, but with the advent of such magical technologies as voice chat (AE: Ahem, get with the times Nintendo) gamers can even talk to each other while playing.
Says MCV deputy editor Tim Ingham:
There's now a massive social aspect to online gaming... You can share the camaraderie of gaming with others even when you are in your own bedroom, because gaming networks enable you to speak to the people you are playing with.
Okay, so gamers can socialize online. But what about in real-life situations? Rubens continues:
…school or work friendships often revolve around shared interests and experiences, and talking about Master Chief's latest discovery or tactic is no different to discussing the weekend's football results...
Dr. Mark Griffiths, of Nottingham Trent University suggests that gaming can have a positive effect on one’s social life. He cites research that found “moderate game players have a bigger circle of friends than non-game players.” He also says that gamers are likely to be more adept at sports, an inarguably social activity, thanks to video games’ ability to increase reaction time and improve hand-eye coordination.
Via: BBC News
-Reporting from the dark and lonely confines of his small studio apartment in San Diego, GP Correspondent and hopeless introvert Andrew Eisen
Comments
Well, duh. Not a day goes by that I don't hear a conversation about new Halo 3 multiplayer strategies.
You know, I get really turned off by the idiots who say that people "waste their time" by conversing with friends about things said idiots don't understand every once in a while. Seriously, when did discussing play become taboo? Is there anyone who devotes every second of thought to work? If there is, I hope I don't meet him/her.
Anyway, great article.
While I agree that all gamers aren't shut ins, we as a community have to be able to admit our faults so that we can heal and work on them. We have a growing problem with attitude and anger in the gaming community, and it is indicative of the non-intimate experience of gaming. We'd be lying if we said otherwise.
Watch TV.....play with friends, I wonder.
But its obviously unsocial when a new Final Fantasy is released ;)
Though I think the type of game one plays might have an impact. MMORPGs come to mind. Very social; yes. In-person social; No. Talking to each other through a headset still does not get them out of their basement and away from the eyes of those that would shun them. Whereas sports games will be played amoungst local friends. In that regard (A)D&D (another severally slammed game) was very social (and apparently devil worship).
H3 and other "popular" titles (since the SNES days) does gave common ground between those that would not have anything to do with each other otherwise. For all we know online games could well be paving the way to future world peace through understanding and common ground.
Nintendo should incorporate voice-chat. This won't attract child molester because the kids aren't as dumb and WILL hear that those peoples are older than they claim. Even if they can't, it wouldn't be much different from normal chat. With parents to control those chatting periods, as responsible parents should, there would be no problems.
@SounDemon
Sorry but you're wrong on this one. Nintendo produced highly an successful T-Rated game on both Wii and Gamecube, praised by fans of the franchise and critics. Try to guess which one it is (I'll tell you if you can't).
Here's an intereing point, though:
The "cliques" and "communities" that receive a negative stereotypical attribute as "anti-social" are groups such as "goth", "nerds", "video gamers", even "gay" or "".
BUT, the "cliques" and "communities" that receive little to no negative stereotypical attribute such as "anti-social", such as "jocks", "popular", and certain other "popular groups" (depending on where you are), are actually doing THE SAME THING: getting together with "like minded" people, shunning other "cliques" or "communities". Indeed, they actively verbally, mentally, sometimes even physically attack the so-called "anti-social" "cliques". So, uh, how are THEY any less "anti-social"?
Nightwng2000
NW2K software
@Nightwing2000:
Tru.dat :p .
When the news is positive, it's often over-looked, but when a certain attorney, or someone touting themselves as an expert in game-violence (anyone else still baffled how you can become an expert in that?) claims there MIGHT be negative evidence against video games every soccer-mom in the nation panics and starts another cultural witch-hunt.
honestly, its nice to see some of these 'non-gamers' figure things like this out (better late than never, imho).
in fact amaraderie is the reason I enjoy the latests Battlefield games, the game is purely multiplayer in its entirety and you live or die, win or lose by how well you work together as a team which if you know the people well is a great social experience.
Of course on the flip side there 12 year olds with pretent tourettes trying to mow you down with a C4 jeep but you gotta take the good with the bad.
In fact to move this towards the arguement as a whole, the social aspect of modern games helps to santise and remove the negative aggression that cna be built up from game frustration. The fact that no one gets hurt and its all just for fun in the end makes the only lasting effects of gaming online social and competative rather than violent. Jack couldnt understand likely he has few friends as spends all his time trolling and spreading his hate. Jack, pick up Bf2 and join a squad, might be healthier for you.
@Terminator44
those idiots tend to be the "populars" or anyone else that think that any minute not spent talking about football/hockey/skateboarding/snowboarding/anything-else is a wasted minute
i loved the moment i saw the "AE.Nintendo" part... simply hilarious.
LMAO, this had me laughing for a good minute. The sad thing is people take comments like that seriously, and even when it is the truth, the fact that you know about your "problem" and joke about it means that your not that bad off.
But as soon as addiction kicks in what might have been gained is lost rapidly.
Anyway the way I see it, is that you can play video games instead of watching TV. Only with video games you are actively participating in what's on the screen instead of juist sitting there lazily. But then again we have no video game version of the colbert report.
I assume you know that Sky Digital programming is typically insipid with the production values of used cars, so playing Video Games is a good alternative.
Infact, it's precisely what I do.
Call it sad if you will, but before I started playing my first MMO, I had no social life at all-- mostly due to health, partly because there were about 1.5 other people in my high school with similar interests. Now the social aspect is pretty much all that keeps me playing: I get to talk with friends for at least two hours a night, plus my guild actually has real-life get-togethers on occasion.
Blah blah blah, industry apologist/stooge, blah blah blah, study is wrong, blah blah blah, predicted Columbine, blah blah blah etc. etc...
At the college I go to, we have an entire club dedicated to games/movies/anime/DND. Considering it's a pretty small campus, we get a nice turnout, with about 25-40 people coming in and out every night. Always seems to be somebody to play Smash Brothers or Mario Kart DS with, even with 4 Xbox 360s and Halo 3.
It's like JT Mad Libs!
Also, great article. I'm also awaiting the hissy fit he's gonna throw after reading it... :P
No, duh. Some people think video games are a waste of time. Yet those same people will talk about sports for hours. They even form rivalries around said games. The difference between us? We're actively engaged in our past time.
@ Sparksalot
I wouldn't say one player games without online play, like your traditional Final Fantasy game, is an anti-social experience. My friends and I play plenty of such games and will discuss them constantly. We'll talk about the stories, villains, strategies for combat, and compare similar games and characters. Who hasn't gotten in an argument about which game character would kick which other character's ass? My favorite discussion is Cloud (from FF7) versus Squall (from FF8).
So while the game-play maybe a solo adventure, such games are open to social experiences. Same as watching a football game. You may watch it at home on Sunday, but you discuss it at the water-cooler Monday.
By the way, my money is on Cloud.
Are you an antisocial, friendless shut-in who wouldn’t know how to interact with another flesh and blood person if one walked up and bit you on the controller?"
...yeah, pretty much.
(long time lurker; first time poster; you don't care)
However, I was like that long before I ever played a video game: my preference for single player games (combined with suckitude at multiplayer mode), as well as my dislike of FPSes/"reflex games" and sports, is a function of my preexisting tendencies and not the other way around.
Good article, nevertheless.
"Gamers are generally very violent and display anti-social characters when communicating in these online communities and games. X-box Live games are either silent, or riddled with angry swearing assholes."
I would assume that the "swearing assholes" stem from the anonymity found on the Internet, while "angry" occurs because, well, the gameplay kinda requires you to piss someone off (i.e. fragging). It's like what happens to some normally civilized people in WoW when a ninja shows up.
I seriously need to get a PSP. FF Dissidia might just put that argument to rest.
Er give yourself a name that we can call you. You might have been a lurker but you are poster now (and not a troll) so welcome.
And yes I have seen that (hell I have done it). Words are said and behavior displayed that never would have happened in person.
Or as George Carlin put it:
"The amount of an asshole a person is is directly related to their distanct from you at the time you discover that flaw"
Does that make us violent? Dont think so. Most display that behavior gamer or not.
I had been trying to explain to my parents (before I left home) that I wasn't becomming an anti-social "internet addict" by spending an hour or so a night on the PC. I was rather, talking abd gaming with upwards of 20 people from the school I attended.
Maybe I'm just jaded, but when I see these kind of articles, they set off the DUR DUR DUR reflex.
I laughed at this because it was so true. But from what I've seen, Nintendo isn't going to do it. They're afraid that voice chat will lead to child molestors meeting up with children. I also laugh at that because that has never happened through Halo, Counter-strike, and all those other popular games that have little 8 year olds screaming into the mic. The friend code system pretty much proves this, and on the Official Nintendo forums, they have a very strict rule for no friend code sharing and they enforce it more then neccesary. The Nintendo forums were recently closed, which in my opinion, was because people were sharing friend codes.
That being said, I disagree with the notion that talking about games in public is a good way to practice your skills. For the most part, I try to leave it alone. Most people are so quick to whip out the stereotypes it's really better to let them think what they will. Now, if the subject comes up, I don't deny it; but it's still safer to just not mention it at the office coffee pot.
"They’re afraid that voice chat will lead to child molestors meeting up with children."
More likely they're afraid of idiots claiming that they're "endangering the children"... just look what someone started with Picto-Chat (don't have any links on hand, unfortunately).
That still goes to show that even though Nintendo doesn't want to be seen as a "Kiddie company", their mentality is still that of a kiddie company.
Where's "Grand Theft Mario"? "Gears of Mario"?
They've never produced a game rated higher than E on their own.
Yes, nintendo has more "mature" gamage available. On the other hand, if you think that games can't be fun if you're not blowing people's brains about or knee deep in "sexual themes" than maybe your own "maturity" is the problem...
On the topic of the actual post; I think for gamers this is kind of a "No duh." Games have been social activities for a loooong time. Hell, even Pong had multiplayer. Really, the perception that gamers don't do things with others has pretty much always been wrong. It's due to people not being able to move past the adolescent viewpoint that if you're not out hanging with a ton of people you call "friends" but aren't actually really deeply connected to, you're not "social."
Once again, the maturity thing comes in....
I mean, without games, I wouldn't have ANY friends at all. Honestly. And not having friends would lead me to be violent, and everything else that gamers are generally stereotyped to be.
Was that Metroid Prime?
http://www.votenic.com
Results Posted Tuesday Evening.
You're partly correct
Metroid Prime was developped by Retro Studios.
Metroid Prime Hunters (on DS) was actually developed by Nintendo itself.
The one I was thinking about was The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. EVERY Zelda games (except the Oracles games (developed by Capcom) and the CD-i games (developed by Philips)) were developed by Nintendo itself.
And Twilight Princess is rated T (and it's well earned).
Actually, if I'm not mistaken Retro Studios is owned by Nintendo (it's a first party developer), The same thing goes for Intelligent Systems, who were responsible for the T-rated Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance. So those games could also count, depending on how you want to treat first party companies here.
Though I guess in this case we're trying to keep things in-house.
I originally considered them as third-parties because I didn't knew they were owned by Nintendo. Still the guy above asked about games Nintendo made on THEIR OWN, so I was a bit more picky.
Enough proof that Nintendo is not a kiddie company anymore, but most likely do things because of parent complains.
It's amazing to me how far Videogames have come. Most of the employees at my company are 20-somethings and nearly all of play games. Actually, the socially inept guys are the ones who don't really play games and have less common ground to connect with their peers (amongst other things of course).
My college-age friends tell me they see similar things within their environment too.
Hell, look at that Cho guy from V-Tech. He was so antisocial that he didn't even have that to connect with others with (along with him generally being a psycho). His roomates even found that to be odd.
True, but only for the DS. Wii still barely features online at all, let alone voice chat.
Andrew Eisen