The act of gaming is one that has become more widespread in recent years as proliferation has started to stretch over the globe. I've mentioned before how gaming is currently the most profitable form of entertainment (as an industry) and that is a distinction that will only grow as we move into the next decade and the prevailing stigma surrounding the world of gaming starts to die down. As more and more people have begun getting into the world of gaming, it has become more readily apparent that many of the presumed 'ill effects' of gaming. (i.e. increased predilection towards violence and anti-social behaviours) have proven to be mere figments of fiction. However, there is one accusation that has been levelled upon the world of gaming that has not only stuck, but recent received an official classification by the World Health Organization, and that is of it's addictive properties, leading to the establishment of 'Gaming Disorder'.
Much ado was made about this classification when it was first issued, but the principles behind the 'disorder' are simple enough; gaming is a commodity that is capable, in excess, of invoking symptoms similar to non-chemical addiction. That's something that anyone could have told you for free, but I suppose having a label assists the filing process for Doctors and Therapists. Folk were still disgruntled to hear about the establishing of 'Gaming Disorder' and demanded to know what effects this may have on the industry. Since then, however, we've heard little to nothing in realm of notable public blowback towards the perception of gaming and, as the dust settles, we are left with no other distraction from the issue and are now forced to confront the question, 'Is gaming addictive? And if so then how bad is it?'
Now, obviously, I am no expert on the subject of gaming addiction, (in fact, at this point nobody is.) but I have been around the world of gaming and participated with the community enough to offer my own glimpse into these matters. As of how such matters have effected me, I'm not so sure, if clinical objectivity is a necessity for casually diagnosing such a disorder then I am clearly the least qualified person to determine. Regardless, I intend to take a look over some of the anecdotal stories of relevance that I have heard on this topic with some rough approximation of objectivity, and so I hope that we come to something interesting and valid by the end of this.
Before I proceed, I wish to make it readily apparent that I, as of the writing of this article, have intentionally done no more than preliminary readings into this topic for the sole purpose of providing another 'more researched' blog down the line. This blog is intended to an approach from a purely anecdotal angle, (as most of my other entries are, you'll notice) with myself focusing on the ways that game developers feed into addiction. So, in other words, don't expect quotations and heavy research into my following words as I wanted to approach the topic as blind as possible for the good of the topic. That being said, as always I should remind you that I am biased, take that into account at all times.
When someone says 'addiction' in relation to gaming my initial first thought goes to the big boogie man of the gaming world, EA, and the cash-hungry, Games-as-a-service, model of game that they popularized. That is primarily because if we distill the key identifying symptom of an addiction, the dependency on the substance in question, then the main goal of 'Games-as-a-service' is clearly to be as addictive as possible. Whilst there was a time, somewhere between the arcade age and where we are now, where developers and publishers worked together to secure that one-time entry fee to their games, now it much more lucrative for those folk to work all the wily tricks that they can to establish a steady stream of regular payment from their customers. How do they do that? With, what is colloquially know as, hooks. (Or 'recurrancy incentives' if we're being fancy which, judging by my inexplicable verbosity today, I suppose we are.)
We see this concept materialize in our games through the ways in which modern online games ape the actions of Mobile games, MMO's and gambling stations. We see hooks that inspire us to revisit the game as often as possible, (Daily quests and rewards) hooks that make us equate our time with the game as valuable and thus seek to elongate it, (timed challenges, sales in stores, and the mere act of spending money on the game in the first place. The more you've invested into the game, the more valuable it becomes in your subconscious) and Hooks that keep us coming back because we've never seen the end. (New content as often as possible for as long as possible.)
All of these little clever tips and tricks work together in order to create a dependency between the player and the game; which, off the top of my head, is the threshold at which the hobby tips into the beginning of an addiction. Unfortunately, at least for those companies who wish to readily exploit such tactics, non-chemical addictions rarely come accompanied with the 'life threatening' side effects that can tie people into other addictions, but they sure can effect and manipulate one's mood in a way that would encourage them to stick around. 'Exclusivity offers' and 'timed events' can feel exclusive to those that aren't there to participate, and many of these games company literally bank on people fearing the feeling of missing out more than spending their time and money in a non productive way. (I know where I usually land on with such decisions.)
But does any of that make 'Game-as-a-service' addictive, or at least, in a manner voracious enough to encourage labelling by the WHO? Possibly, but I still feel that such would probably be insufficient to justify it on it's own. Afterall, the fact that games are slowly evolving in a way that intends to suck more and more money out of their players is a natural evolution for any profit-based-industry. Which would mean that the driving force behind the label of 'addictive gaming' runs deeper than the greedy machinations of unscrupulous cooperate entities. ('Players gonna play', as they say.)
In that case, why don't we look at one of most addictive common traits of gaming; collectibles. Now don't get me wrong, I'm using the term 'collectable' as more of a catch-all for any type of 'collect them all' type of list. Similar to how collectors will dedicate their free time to the acquisition of every type of a certain specialty item, Like Stamps, Classic cars or rare stuffed Fish, (I've met odd people in my time) some people can feel the allure of completing things just as strongly from the digital world. I suppose a more apt term might be 'compeletionism' as it comes from one's desire to complete everything that the game has to offer, even if it only in a certain regard. And I believe that this has some addictive qualities to it.
Most prominently in the way that people can find themselves coming back to a game that they don't particularly like or enjoy with some desire to 'complete it'. This is something that Online games like 'looter shooters' can take advantage of by constantly updating items and adding new ones so that players never quite get to the end. That desire to 'finish collections' is by no means unique to gaming, but it can be realized in this medium and result in financial trouble or merely excessive quantities of spent time. For my part, I have an issue with playing through series in the middle and feel the need to play every game leading up to the entry that I'm interested in. That led to me pushing my way through such titles like 'Splinter Cell: Double Agent' which I now hate myself for.
Although a better type of game that can be addictive for people is a genre that I'm going to label as hobby games. Those that settle into someone's everyday and become a staple in their life in the way that another hobby might. More specifically, I'm referring to the types of games like 'Second life' or 'World of Warcraft' (Or even 'Minecraft') which are so deep and/or offer so much scope of play that one can dedicate a huge portion of their free time to it on a regular basis without exhausting their possibilities. Ideally, this is what a lot of people want out of their gaming experiences, but driven to excess it can be actually quite destructive on folk's personal and/or social lives.
During the heyday of 'World of Warcraft' there was a lot of chatter about 'gaming addiction' and South Park even did an episode directly targeted at it. That is because this was around the time that we were hearing about people who were falling into disrepair due to prioritizing the game over all else. (You'll often hear Joe Rogan talk about this period when disparaging gaming.) Self neglect, breaking down of relationships and general anti-social consequences actually became a reality around this time, and although these situations were minority instances, people tend to remember the worst moments a lot more than the good ones. Compare such examples with the troubles of junkies and you may find some similarities, albeit to a generally much lesser degree.
We've heard stories similar to those days popping up again, recently, due to another rising habit: addictive gameplay loops. The Battle Royale genre in particular has been blowing up in the past couple of years due to it's accessibility and quick match turnover, both of which is just enough to draw players in and encourage them to stay. Fortnite specifically, has seemingly been a hotbed for stories of general personal woe at the hands of unfortunate self neglect. We've heard about children who's grades have suffered considerably since they started prioritizing gaming over their personal lives and even those who avoid school altogether. (Although that could just be a personal choice) Could these destructive habits be serious enough for the hobby to be considered dangerously addictive? Well it all comes down to how wide spread these issues are, or more appropriately, how wide spread the perceived issue is.
I have no doubt that the vast majority of folk who partake in regular sessions of Fortnite and other Battle Royales do so in some sort of moderation, afterall the damn things are frustrating, however if enough of a fuss is raised about such games then institutions who manage such situations are inclined to act. Personally, I don't find myself sold on the accusations that gaming itself is a hobby the encourages and inspires addiction, but I will concede that there are certain addictive aspects to it. Perhaps my opinion on that will change once I sink more hard research into the topic for my next blog on it, but I won't hold my breath. (We'll see what we see.)
No comments:
Post a Comment