www.Tobold.com
Tobold@GMail.com
A blog with my thoughts regarding games I am playing and other stuff in life. Please read my Terms of Service
RSS Feed
Friday, August 11, 2006
Defining addiction
The big story this week is the one about the doctor claiming 40 percent of all World of Warcraft players are addicted to the game. But when you read the story with an open mind, you will notice two things: 1) The number of 40 percent is pure guesswork, with no scientific work or study supporting it. 2) The person claiming this happens to run an addiction treatment center, and is obviously fishing for customers.
Addiction makes for good headlines, because it sounds so serious, and is so badly defined. Lets take the loosest possible definition: An average person trying this is defined as addicted when he wants to come back for more. Under that definition you could probably claim over 90 percent addiction rate of World of Warcraft. At a medium definition level ("Person is defined as addicted if he spends most of his free time pursueing this activity") you might well get to something around 40 percent of addiction level. Unfortunately neither of these definitions has any scientific basis. Long before video games existed hobbyists obsessed about their stamp collection or model railroad, without newspaper articles claiming "model railroad addiction runs rampant!!!".
The scientific definition of addiction is: "Addiction is a chronic disorder proposed to be precipitated by a combination of genetic, biological/pharmacological and social factors. Addiction is characterized by the repeated use of substances or behaviors despite clear evidence of morbidity secondary to such use." The key factor here is continuous use or behavior despite clear evidence of negative effect.
Looking at World of Warcraft or video games in general, we can probably exclude genetic or biological/pharmacological factors. If anything there is a social addiction. And we have to be careful as what to define as negative effect. Look at this much more balanced story about a World of Warcraft player. The "negative effect" of World of Warcraft in this story is that the player has blocked two to three evenings a week for WoW, and will not play poker or go to a baseball game on these nights. Those are clearly all equivalent entertainment activities. Choosing WoW over poker, baseball, TV, or a book, is just a personal choice. It's just like choosing Coca Cola over Pepsi.
A person *can* be addicted to World of Warcraft, or other video games, or other hobbies. But for this to be true the person has to exhibit symptons of serious negative social effects: prolonged neglect of family and friends, grades going down at school, calling in "sick" at work to play, or performing your job badly because you raid every night are certainly signs of addiction. Even more serious cases of people being left by their wife, flunking exams, or being fired from work certainly exist. And there are one or two cases of people playing until they dropped dead, or their baby starved, or something similar catastrophic. But if you apply this scientific definition of addiction, the percentage of World of Warcraft players that are addicted is significantly lower than 40 percent.
Personally I have no problems with wife or boss to report. Which isn't surprising, as for example I refuse to raid on weekend nights after 11 pm, because I need to get up for work the next day at 6:30 am. Just like the large majority of World of Warcraft I first do the important things in life, job, family, etc., and then when I have done everything and get my normal share of leisure time, I choose to spend that leisure time on video games. Currently preferably WoW, but I played 2 hours of Titan Quest last night, so WoW isn't even exclusive. I also still read books, watch TV, play D&D, and do a range of other leisure activities. People like me are "addicted" only if you stretch the definition beyond the scientifically valid.
- posted by Tobold @ 7:53 AM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
You have to see the irony in what you say:
"The number of 40 percent is pure guesswork, with no scientific work or study supporting it"
And then claim that:
"But if you apply this scientific definition of addiction, the percentage of World of Warcraft players that are addicted is significantly lower than 40 percent."
Are you not just doing the same the doctor did? As far a I see it, there is no proof, right, but you can't say either that it's less than 40%. I may as well be 50, 60 or 70%... Who knows? Until someone really makes a study on it, you can't just say "the percentage of World of Warcraft players that are addicted is significantly lower than 40 percent." out of nowhere...
"The number of 40 percent is pure guesswork, with no scientific work or study supporting it"
And then claim that:
"But if you apply this scientific definition of addiction, the percentage of World of Warcraft players that are addicted is significantly lower than 40 percent."
Are you not just doing the same the doctor did? As far a I see it, there is no proof, right, but you can't say either that it's less than 40%. I may as well be 50, 60 or 70%... Who knows? Until someone really makes a study on it, you can't just say "the percentage of World of Warcraft players that are addicted is significantly lower than 40 percent." out of nowhere...
# posted by 
: 11/8/06 10:37
: 11/8/06 10:37
That addiction thing is great cause, it´s a prove, that this genre hit the mainstream and this doctor fellow is one of the first jumping the bandwagon. What a suprise.
To bring some substance to this article though, WoW for millions of players is their first experience with this genre. When i think back to my first UO and EQ weeks, man i was hooked like mad and though not addictive the game dictated some schedules for sure. But this was a phase, like everything and even WoW will be a phase for many players. The sparkle will vanish for them too.
Let´s speculate here. How many of the playerbase saw MC and BWL yet? Experienced the groundhog day, that is the PvE endgame. My guild has many freshman so to speak, never seen another mmo before and being in BWL they are still really hooked and excited. They do not see the treadmill aspect here yet, still reaching for the next shiny toy that is the higher end loot. I doubt that the majority of todays playerbase is grounded on the social community aspect of this genre. Most of WoWs player would still point their fingers to the D&D tabletop players and label them as nerds. Those are the people the article refers from as the base for its numbers. Those are the same people wich will be cured from their addiction once they bank their tier 5 armor set in a couple of years.
To bring some substance to this article though, WoW for millions of players is their first experience with this genre. When i think back to my first UO and EQ weeks, man i was hooked like mad and though not addictive the game dictated some schedules for sure. But this was a phase, like everything and even WoW will be a phase for many players. The sparkle will vanish for them too.
Let´s speculate here. How many of the playerbase saw MC and BWL yet? Experienced the groundhog day, that is the PvE endgame. My guild has many freshman so to speak, never seen another mmo before and being in BWL they are still really hooked and excited. They do not see the treadmill aspect here yet, still reaching for the next shiny toy that is the higher end loot. I doubt that the majority of todays playerbase is grounded on the social community aspect of this genre. Most of WoWs player would still point their fingers to the D&D tabletop players and label them as nerds. Those are the people the article refers from as the base for its numbers. Those are the same people wich will be cured from their addiction once they bank their tier 5 armor set in a couple of years.
# posted by : 11/8/06 10:44
: 11/8/06 10:44
Are you not just doing the same the doctor did? As far a I see it, there is no proof, right, but you can't say either that it's less than 40%. I may as well be 50, 60 or 70%... Who knows? Until someone really makes a study on it, you can't just say "the percentage of World of Warcraft players that are addicted is significantly lower than 40 percent." out of nowhere.
Of course we know that the number of addicted people is not 40, 50, 60, or 70%. Because we all know lots of WoW players, in Real Life or as close enough friends in game that we exchange personal information on how its going with the family and so on. I've played on many servers and many guilds, and I've seen hundreds of posts on guild boards saying "sorry guys, I can't play right now, I'm moving house - taking care of my family - study for an exam - etc.". And I haven't seen a single post yet saying "my wife just divorced me because of WoW, my boss fired me, I failed my exam" etc. If the addiction rate of WoW were anywhere around or above 40%, we all would know a lot more people whose real life suffered from WoW, instead of WoW gameplay suffering from real life.
The trick the doctor used was stating a number, 40 percent. That sounds much more like solid science than saying "about half" or something similarly vague. If I stated that the percentage of WoW addicted players is only 0.875%, I would be doing the same as the doctor, and you would be right to criticize me. But I'm just saying that the 40 percent number is a) fictious, and b) too high. I don't need a scientific study for that, because it is obvious that we don't have 2.5 million addicted WoW players, all losing their family and job about the game.
Of course we know that the number of addicted people is not 40, 50, 60, or 70%. Because we all know lots of WoW players, in Real Life or as close enough friends in game that we exchange personal information on how its going with the family and so on. I've played on many servers and many guilds, and I've seen hundreds of posts on guild boards saying "sorry guys, I can't play right now, I'm moving house - taking care of my family - study for an exam - etc.". And I haven't seen a single post yet saying "my wife just divorced me because of WoW, my boss fired me, I failed my exam" etc. If the addiction rate of WoW were anywhere around or above 40%, we all would know a lot more people whose real life suffered from WoW, instead of WoW gameplay suffering from real life.
The trick the doctor used was stating a number, 40 percent. That sounds much more like solid science than saying "about half" or something similarly vague. If I stated that the percentage of WoW addicted players is only 0.875%, I would be doing the same as the doctor, and you would be right to criticize me. But I'm just saying that the 40 percent number is a) fictious, and b) too high. I don't need a scientific study for that, because it is obvious that we don't have 2.5 million addicted WoW players, all losing their family and job about the game.
I would advise any serious player to at least look at one of the mmorpg addiction websites . For a sobering read browse some of the posts on http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/WOW_widow/ (registration required). One thing that particulalry concerns me is kids who miss out on normal teenage socialisation because they are lost in online worlds. Will there be future class action lawsuits against Vivendi and SOE? I don't know but I do think proper scientific research is required not sensationalist speculation. Nick Yee's work at Stanford is a good place to start see here: http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/ and here http://www.nickyee.com/hub/addiction/home.html
# posted by : 11/8/06 12:59
: 11/8/06 12:59
Interesting and rational article, and a complex issue not suited to snappy headline soundbites, frankly.
One thing that irritates me about the topic, is how often the 'Denial' card gets played, muddying up the water, and effectively suggesting that the only people in any sound position to judge, are Scientists who have never actually played the games in question - anyone else rebutting their 'findings' is obviously addicted, and in denial, so don't count; ergo, all gamers are addicts, and all games should be banned.
Grrr!
One thing that irritates me about the topic, is how often the 'Denial' card gets played, muddying up the water, and effectively suggesting that the only people in any sound position to judge, are Scientists who have never actually played the games in question - anyone else rebutting their 'findings' is obviously addicted, and in denial, so don't count; ergo, all gamers are addicts, and all games should be banned.
Grrr!
# posted by : 11/8/06 14:05
: 11/8/06 14:05
My top annoyance with the subject is that World of Warcraft, or video games, are treated as if they were worse than other forms of entertainment. According to this site the average American youth spends 1500 hours per year in front of a TV set. But if you play that amount of World of Warcraft, you must be an addict.
I would say that playing an interactive game for over 100 hours a month is a lot better for your mental health than passively watching TV in that time. And if the game is a MMORPG, playing with others is a lot more social than watching TV with somebody else sitting on the sofa next to you, barely being aware of your presence.
I would say that playing an interactive game for over 100 hours a month is a lot better for your mental health than passively watching TV in that time. And if the game is a MMORPG, playing with others is a lot more social than watching TV with somebody else sitting on the sofa next to you, barely being aware of your presence.
Addiction is such a strong word, and whether it's used responsibly or not, it tends to provoke very emotional reactions. The stigma associated with the term is something most people want to avoid. The extreme examples, where people die, etc., are just that, extreme, and the sensational quality they possess tends to repulse and prevent players from really examining their gaming habits.
I'm certainly not a psychologist or doctor, and I'm not qualified to judge whether someone is an addict. Maybe it's easier to talk about problematic usage. After all, doctors do distinguish between alcohol abusers and alcoholics. I suspect that if a similar distinction were made with players of MMORPGs, many more would qualify for "problem players" than addicts per se.
I really don't play any more, but when I did, I think that I would have qualified as a "problem player." Here's why: at the peak, I was playing 25-30 hours/week. I did not exercise nearly as much as I had, and I had always been very very active (workouts 6 days/week, regularly cycling 125 miles/week, etc.). I did not socialize with people outside the game as much as I had. On the other hand, I was in a fantastic guild that was active and full of people I enjoyed grouping with. What's not to like, right?
But at the same time, the immersive quality of the game and the social aspects of the MMORPG kept me playing despite my gradual realization that I really didn't enjoy this mindless activity (let's face it, the quests, compared to a good single-player RPG, are just glorified grinds sweetened with a small reward designed to keep you in it), and that the quality of my life and my happiness level had in fact gone down. Yet I felt compelled to play. I didn't lose my job, or friends, or have any dramatic consequences that caused me to "hit bottom." I finally just realized that this is not what I wanted to do with my time, and quit. I know many people who have quit for similar reasons.
But there is something about WoW that, for me at least, is really captivating, despite all of that. If Blizzard is good at anything, it's stimulating a response from players to...keep on playing, despite the actual content of the game. I still play games, and I'm able to keep the time at a manageable level, about 1 hour a night. Because I forgot to cancel to prevent the 3-month renewal of WoW, last night I decided to check out the Night Elf starting zone, which I hadn't yet seen. 2 hours later...hmmm. Remember how many people got hooked on Diablo 2, and then realized, "I've been clicking my mouse for x hours straight! Agh!" WoW, for me, is just a step up for that. It's a triumph, in a way, for Blizzard, but for me it's just not a quality use of my time. But everyone who plays has to make this decision on his/her own.
I'm certainly not a psychologist or doctor, and I'm not qualified to judge whether someone is an addict. Maybe it's easier to talk about problematic usage. After all, doctors do distinguish between alcohol abusers and alcoholics. I suspect that if a similar distinction were made with players of MMORPGs, many more would qualify for "problem players" than addicts per se.
I really don't play any more, but when I did, I think that I would have qualified as a "problem player." Here's why: at the peak, I was playing 25-30 hours/week. I did not exercise nearly as much as I had, and I had always been very very active (workouts 6 days/week, regularly cycling 125 miles/week, etc.). I did not socialize with people outside the game as much as I had. On the other hand, I was in a fantastic guild that was active and full of people I enjoyed grouping with. What's not to like, right?
But at the same time, the immersive quality of the game and the social aspects of the MMORPG kept me playing despite my gradual realization that I really didn't enjoy this mindless activity (let's face it, the quests, compared to a good single-player RPG, are just glorified grinds sweetened with a small reward designed to keep you in it), and that the quality of my life and my happiness level had in fact gone down. Yet I felt compelled to play. I didn't lose my job, or friends, or have any dramatic consequences that caused me to "hit bottom." I finally just realized that this is not what I wanted to do with my time, and quit. I know many people who have quit for similar reasons.
But there is something about WoW that, for me at least, is really captivating, despite all of that. If Blizzard is good at anything, it's stimulating a response from players to...keep on playing, despite the actual content of the game. I still play games, and I'm able to keep the time at a manageable level, about 1 hour a night. Because I forgot to cancel to prevent the 3-month renewal of WoW, last night I decided to check out the Night Elf starting zone, which I hadn't yet seen. 2 hours later...hmmm. Remember how many people got hooked on Diablo 2, and then realized, "I've been clicking my mouse for x hours straight! Agh!" WoW, for me, is just a step up for that. It's a triumph, in a way, for Blizzard, but for me it's just not a quality use of my time. But everyone who plays has to make this decision on his/her own.
# posted by : 11/8/06 16:25
: 11/8/06 16:25
Good point about TV Tobold. Online gaming is far more interactive and sociable. Then again the fact that TV does not satisfy kids basic social needs eventually forces most kids out of the TV room and into the real world. Are mmorpgs more dangerous because they offer a more complete escape from reality including social interaction? Is this even a bad thing? Are the new forms of of online social interaction just as valid as those I grew up with? I have few worries for adults who have already established a solid base in the real world - work, friends, partner, family and so on but kids have not yet built those foundations and I do worry that they may never get the chance if they spend most of their lives in virtual reality.
# posted by : 11/8/06 16:30
: 11/8/06 16:30
I'm sorry but you do not have any proof... There's 6 milion players. It's not because you know a few dozens that you can say that... Most probalby you know people that are in the same condition as you are, for that exact reason.
People with other life styles may hang together in the game, and you have no idea of their existance... Once again, one cannot come up with anything he wants because e knows a few players.
About the posting in the forums, if your wife leaves you, you really think the first thing you will be doing is go to the forum to tell anyone about it? Plus even if you are totally out of your mind and do it, who would belive that? People can write whatever crosses their mind in the forum. So if no one is going to believe it, why write it in the first place?
I'm not saying the guy is right. I'm just saying you have no proof to say he isn't...
People with other life styles may hang together in the game, and you have no idea of their existance... Once again, one cannot come up with anything he wants because e knows a few players.
About the posting in the forums, if your wife leaves you, you really think the first thing you will be doing is go to the forum to tell anyone about it? Plus even if you are totally out of your mind and do it, who would belive that? People can write whatever crosses their mind in the forum. So if no one is going to believe it, why write it in the first place?
I'm not saying the guy is right. I'm just saying you have no proof to say he isn't...
# posted by : 11/8/06 17:33
: 11/8/06 17:33
I'm not saying the guy is right. I'm just saying you have no proof to say he isn't.
I have no proof either that not 40% of all humans are addicted to heroin. I just suppose that the number must be a lot smaller.
I have no proof either that not 40% of all humans are addicted to heroin. I just suppose that the number must be a lot smaller.
Seems you touched on a sore spot here Tobold but that is one of the things I love about your blog; you aren't afraid to speak your mind on sensitive topics. I agree with you on two issues: first, that video games-especially online- are much better than being a zombie staring into a box with little to no brain activity for hours on end like people do when they watch tv and second, is that the number of people who are truly addicted has to be lower than 40% because if that number was higher, we would have heard about allot more extreme cases like our friend in Korea. I must say that I really dislike it when people who are extreme get compared to people that are not extreme because then the race is on to find out just what line has to be crossed in order to be classified as "extreme" or addicted. People with jobs and families who play WOW without neglecting responsibilities at home or work are not addicted and if they are, their addiction is in check. I would like to pose this question: why are human beings always in such a hurry to lable someone as troubled or addicted; especially when it comes to fields of interest where the person doing the labling has no experience? I can venture a guess that may not be popular with some individuals but I am going to say it anyway. I think the medical industry is in a hurry to diagnose "problems" because as soon as the public starts to believe their theories, the cash starts rolling in for treatment. Religious organizations have been using this tactic since the beginning of time and look how rich they have become. Sane mike expressed concern for the youth of the world who become addicted to video games because they may leave the real world behind in favor of the vitual world. I understand the point he is trying to make but I think that television is much worse for children than video games because there is no interaction and television tends to make kids want to impersonate their "heros" whereas in video games they are playing the hero. Lets forget television for the moment because it is easy to say what is worse that video games. What is better? I have read articles on people who were addicted to working out, eatting, reading, writing, drinking, smoking, cars, sex, cosmetic surgury, and now video games so I ask you all, what is "normal" and who sets the standard?
I have no proof either that not 40% of all humans are addicted to heroin. I just suppose that the number must be a lot smaller.
What you said makes no sense...
The doctor didn't say 40% of the human being are addicted to WoW. He said 40% of WoW players are addicted to it.
If you want to compair it that way then you should say: "I have no proof either that not 40% of heroin users are addicted to it".
So do you still stand by it?
What you said makes no sense...
The doctor didn't say 40% of the human being are addicted to WoW. He said 40% of WoW players are addicted to it.
If you want to compair it that way then you should say: "I have no proof either that not 40% of heroin users are addicted to it".
So do you still stand by it?
# posted by : 12/8/06 13:11
: 12/8/06 13:11
I have no proof that not 40% of the users of Coca Cola are addicted to it, if you like that formulation better. I am absolutely sure that less than 40% of the users of WoW are not "addicted" to WoW, by any serious definition of "addiction".
Why are you so obsessed with addiction, Cimerian? All your comments are about that issue. You don't happen to own an addiction treatment center in want of customers, like the good doctor above?
Why are you so obsessed with addiction, Cimerian? All your comments are about that issue. You don't happen to own an addiction treatment center in want of customers, like the good doctor above?
Well first not all my comments are about addiction. Please check better things before coming up with your statments.
Second, I have being talking about addiction in one post where you end with "Damn addiction!" and in another where de title is "Defining addiction". So I am no more interested in it than your are.
Third, please, for the third time, understand that what I am saying in this post is not directed to addiction itself, but rather to the fact that you criticise a person for doing something and a few line after you yourself fall in the same mistake. And yet you just can't admit it...
So now you try to focus the thing on "how I am all about addiction"? I guess you just can't see you're doing the same thing the guy did, so there's really no point in continuing this...
Second, I have being talking about addiction in one post where you end with "Damn addiction!" and in another where de title is "Defining addiction". So I am no more interested in it than your are.
Third, please, for the third time, understand that what I am saying in this post is not directed to addiction itself, but rather to the fact that you criticise a person for doing something and a few line after you yourself fall in the same mistake. And yet you just can't admit it...
So now you try to focus the thing on "how I am all about addiction"? I guess you just can't see you're doing the same thing the guy did, so there's really no point in continuing this...
# posted by : 12/8/06 21:36
: 12/8/06 21:36
what I am saying in this post is not directed to addiction itself, but rather to the fact that you criticise a person for doing something and a few line after you yourself fall in the same mistake. And yet you just can't admit it
Two men observe a flock of 52 sheep. Says the first man: "There are 400 sheep in that flock." Says the second man: "Sheep running around are difficult to count, I don't believe there are 400 of them, and although I can't exactly count them, I see there are much less of them." Says the first man: "Your estimate is as bad as mine, and you are in denial and can't admit it."
What I'm trying to tell you is that doing an "order of magnitude" estimation is possible with just having annecdotal evidence. By playing World of Warcraft for so long, and hanging out with WoW players for so long, both online and in real life, I can do an order of magnitude estimate of the number of serious WoW addicts, and state that they are "existing, but rare". That is *not* the same as saying there are "40 percent" of them.
But if you are more interested in proving people wrong than in discussing MMORPG, you might want to head over to f13.
Two men observe a flock of 52 sheep. Says the first man: "There are 400 sheep in that flock." Says the second man: "Sheep running around are difficult to count, I don't believe there are 400 of them, and although I can't exactly count them, I see there are much less of them." Says the first man: "Your estimate is as bad as mine, and you are in denial and can't admit it."
What I'm trying to tell you is that doing an "order of magnitude" estimation is possible with just having annecdotal evidence. By playing World of Warcraft for so long, and hanging out with WoW players for so long, both online and in real life, I can do an order of magnitude estimate of the number of serious WoW addicts, and state that they are "existing, but rare". That is *not* the same as saying there are "40 percent" of them.
But if you are more interested in proving people wrong than in discussing MMORPG, you might want to head over to f13.
So I'm only suppose to comment what you want me to comment?
If you don't like having people making comments, just kill the option... But don't tell people to go somewhere else because they have a different opinion.
If you don't like having people making comments, just kill the option... But don't tell people to go somewhere else because they have a different opinion.
# posted by : 13/8/06 12:00
: 13/8/06 12:00
I would like you to voice your opinion on addiction. Unfortunately you didn't say anything about what you believe yet, you only told me repeatedly that I was wrong, and SirBruced what I write word by word. I allow any sort of opinion on this site. I just don't allow every form of expression. Because if I did, I would soon find this site plastered with O RLY birds and insulting remarks on how winning an argument on the internet is like winning the special olympics. I wouldn't want to turn off the option to comment, because most comments on this site are interesting. I technically can't "ban" anyone from here either. But I *do* have the possibility to delete comments without a trace, and I'm already doing that to spam comments.
Please, tell us, how many people do you think are addicted to WoW, what do you base that opinion on, and what is your definition of addiction?
Please, tell us, how many people do you think are addicted to WoW, what do you base that opinion on, and what is your definition of addiction?
I have no idea about how many people are addicted. A didn't really care about it, until I first read your "Damn Addiction!" comment.
Having seen the "Warcrack" reference and knowing that the game creator is on Times list of the 100 people with more influence this year, I did start wondering about things.
Reading that other post with the doctor I just though you were making the same mistake he was. You think what you say is true because you know other WoW players. Allow me to recommend you the buddhist story about the blind men and the elephant, about that.
Maybe I can't accept your judgement because I'm a scientist and my mind is used to work this way. People can say whatever they want, but it doesn't mean it's true. That's why in science, we ask for proofs and don't believe things coming out of nowhere.
I agree that MMORPG can be compaired to TV and miniature trains or whatever else. But it may just mean that all are addictions... Why are the media concerned about it? Because it's new, and like every new thing, it sells. It's that simple.
However, I do see another aspect that you cannot find in other "hobbies". While playing MMORPG you actually live someone else's life. On this point it's a little different from other hobbies, and even other game genders. It's even different from simple RPG, because in MMORPG you are actually in a new world, but still interact with other human being.
Therefore, I started wondering to what point people actually prefer their online "life" to their physical one. Do you live you physical life so you can enjoy your online one, or do you live your online life as part of enjoying your physical one?
Do you know the japanese cartoon ".hack//SIGN". It basically tells the story of serveral people playing a MMORPG. But in the cartoon, people actually go into a virtual reality world to play it. One thing that really surprised me was that one of the caracters was playing the game, not because she liked doing quests, killing monsters or other people, but for the simple reason that she had to live in a wheelchair in the real world, but while playing she was able to walk and run like anyone else...
For me the addiction thing is not really the important thing. What I start wondering about is if MMORPG are going to turn into (or already are) a kind of refuge from the society we live in? Can people just go to another world to avoid problems at work/family/friends/etc?
In conclusion, I'm sorry I can give you no answer, but only a question: "Is there a line after which people don't "play" the game, but rather "live" it? That, is what I was wondering about...
Having seen the "Warcrack" reference and knowing that the game creator is on Times list of the 100 people with more influence this year, I did start wondering about things.
Reading that other post with the doctor I just though you were making the same mistake he was. You think what you say is true because you know other WoW players. Allow me to recommend you the buddhist story about the blind men and the elephant, about that.
Maybe I can't accept your judgement because I'm a scientist and my mind is used to work this way. People can say whatever they want, but it doesn't mean it's true. That's why in science, we ask for proofs and don't believe things coming out of nowhere.
I agree that MMORPG can be compaired to TV and miniature trains or whatever else. But it may just mean that all are addictions... Why are the media concerned about it? Because it's new, and like every new thing, it sells. It's that simple.
However, I do see another aspect that you cannot find in other "hobbies". While playing MMORPG you actually live someone else's life. On this point it's a little different from other hobbies, and even other game genders. It's even different from simple RPG, because in MMORPG you are actually in a new world, but still interact with other human being.
Therefore, I started wondering to what point people actually prefer their online "life" to their physical one. Do you live you physical life so you can enjoy your online one, or do you live your online life as part of enjoying your physical one?
Do you know the japanese cartoon ".hack//SIGN". It basically tells the story of serveral people playing a MMORPG. But in the cartoon, people actually go into a virtual reality world to play it. One thing that really surprised me was that one of the caracters was playing the game, not because she liked doing quests, killing monsters or other people, but for the simple reason that she had to live in a wheelchair in the real world, but while playing she was able to walk and run like anyone else...
For me the addiction thing is not really the important thing. What I start wondering about is if MMORPG are going to turn into (or already are) a kind of refuge from the society we live in? Can people just go to another world to avoid problems at work/family/friends/etc?
In conclusion, I'm sorry I can give you no answer, but only a question: "Is there a line after which people don't "play" the game, but rather "live" it? That, is what I was wondering about...
# posted by : 13/8/06 13:42
: 13/8/06 13:42
I've been addicted to various things over the years, video games being my first love. I am addicted to WoW (to some degree) because I'm writing this at work instead of actually working, and no I'm not taking a break from work, I just got in and haven't even started working yet.
For me, WoW is not another life, it's a game I play, but my Guild is another story. We have a small, very social Guild, and I've never met any of the people in real life, but I enjoy chatting with them and consider most of them friends, even if I've never really met them. WoW and MMORPGs have a social side to them which makes them very appealing, and very addictive, to people starved of social contact. Tobold touches on this on his latest post about EQ dying because of it's low population. People go where there's other people because they need that social interaction. MMORPGs bring that social interaction to people who, for whatever reason, do not (cannot) go out into the real world to meet people and make friends.
Having written that, I'm not sure I can say WoW itself is addictive. It's a lot of fun to play, yes, but if there was another game I could play that was as enjoyable as WoW AND if I could play it with the people in my Guild, I'd be there.
Society and people are addictive...uh oh...where does that line of thought lead?
For me, WoW is not another life, it's a game I play, but my Guild is another story. We have a small, very social Guild, and I've never met any of the people in real life, but I enjoy chatting with them and consider most of them friends, even if I've never really met them. WoW and MMORPGs have a social side to them which makes them very appealing, and very addictive, to people starved of social contact. Tobold touches on this on his latest post about EQ dying because of it's low population. People go where there's other people because they need that social interaction. MMORPGs bring that social interaction to people who, for whatever reason, do not (cannot) go out into the real world to meet people and make friends.
Having written that, I'm not sure I can say WoW itself is addictive. It's a lot of fun to play, yes, but if there was another game I could play that was as enjoyable as WoW AND if I could play it with the people in my Guild, I'd be there.
Society and people are addictive...uh oh...where does that line of thought lead?
Society and people are addictive...uh oh...where does that line of thought lead?
To the obvious, but wrong, response of "you should go out more". But I would say that in some respect online friendships are superior to real life friendships. In real life you mostly hang out with people that by accident are geographically close. Online you can be more selective, and choose friends with the same interests as you have.
I totally agree with the statement that the "addiction" is transferable to the next big game. So no need to put a warning label on WoW, if anything there should be an identical warning label on all online games, chat rooms, web "spaces" etc. that offer basically the same experience of online social interaction.
"Is there a line after which people don't "play" the game, but rather "live" it?
Very good definition of addiction. And if you say that life is where your social interaction is, maybe be really "live" online. But for me that is at the most a parallel life, my main life remains solidly anchored in reality.
To the obvious, but wrong, response of "you should go out more". But I would say that in some respect online friendships are superior to real life friendships. In real life you mostly hang out with people that by accident are geographically close. Online you can be more selective, and choose friends with the same interests as you have.
I totally agree with the statement that the "addiction" is transferable to the next big game. So no need to put a warning label on WoW, if anything there should be an identical warning label on all online games, chat rooms, web "spaces" etc. that offer basically the same experience of online social interaction.
"Is there a line after which people don't "play" the game, but rather "live" it?
Very good definition of addiction. And if you say that life is where your social interaction is, maybe be really "live" online. But for me that is at the most a parallel life, my main life remains solidly anchored in reality.
<< Home
