Jump to content

NEW VIDEO: Has gaming disorder been cancelled!?

Sign in to follow this  
Cam Adair

How to Convince a Friend to Quit Gaming

Recommended Posts

This is something I've been running into lately.

Every time I post about video game addiction, I'm met with a number of strangers who give me the usual: video game addiction doesn't exist (it's passion/timesink), video game addiction is extremely rare, you can't prove that it exists, here's an article that says video games are totally fine, you must be anti gamergate.

I'm not sure what the best way of approaching the subject would be. Just a mention of it does in fact, as you say in the video, trigger people. And that's totally normal and to be expected.

I used to think your approach was too mild and not aggressive enough, but now I'm starting to wonder if it isn't the only viable way to get anywhere. I am still not happy with it though; I feel that someone needs to tell these people straight up that their gaming culture is SHITSHITSHIT. Maybe I'm wrong. I do think raising hell can serve as a good way to draw attention to the issue.

Edited by Marchosias

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ZjpHk7N.jpg

Today on Twitter.

And what they're saying is technically true; it's just that it's put in such a brash manner that the effectm is non existent or opposite. It's kind of like the way fat shaming is most often done; fat people are ridiculed and demonized instead of seen as people who have a legitimate problem and could benefit from help. That doesn't mean their destructive behavior should be supported, but neither should they be bashed as a form of entertainment.

Perhaps  it's not so surprising that it's gamers who often engage is such bashing.

PS: the dude's name is almost Adderall, heh.

Edited by Marchosias

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I've been running into lately.

Every time I post about video game addiction, I'm met with a number of strangers who give me the usual: video game addiction doesn't exist (it's passion/timesink), video game addiction is extremely rare, you can't prove that it exists, here's an article that says video games are totally fine, you must be anti gamergate.

I'm not sure what the best way of approaching the subject would be. Just a mention of it does in fact, as you say in the video, trigger people. And that's totally normal and to be expected.

I used to think your approach was too mild and not aggressive enough, but now I'm starting to wonder if it isn't the only viable way to get anywhere. I am still not happy with it though; I feel that someone needs to tell these people straight up that their gaming culture is SHITSHITSHIT. Maybe I'm wrong. I do think raising hell can serve as a good way to draw attention to the issue.

I think you will start to see some more aggressive stuff coming from me over time but it's been a calculated strategy to set a foundation of not attacking the gaming community first while we establish credibility as a community and then there's some more aggressive stuff I can do in the future. Unfortunately a % of our community would not be with us today if they came on the site and saw us as anti-gaming. So there's a sensitivity we need to navigate with a lot of intention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there are three elements to target: gamers, gaming media, and game companies.

Each can be approached in a different way, and I think you can definitely be more aggressive towards the media and gaming companies; gamers are more likely to listen and respond to such criticism as well. As far as addressing gamers directly goes, I suppose any sort of tough love should be administered in a very limited way. But again, I do think there's time and place for it.

The gaming media has been the target of Gamergate for two years now, so maybe there's a way to build on that somehow.

Not much has been said, to my knowledge, about companies that produce games though. About how they intentionally implement certain mechanics that promote addictive behavior, so there's a lot of room there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say I'm not all that sure what this picture is getting at anyway - I mean gaming is pretty much universal among teens now, if not among males of university age also, at least it feels like that. How many jocks do you know who DONT buy the latest Fifa/NFL/whatever sports game when it comes out? Call of Duty got a lot of people into gaming who otherwise would not have been too.

Sure there's still a cliche around playing MMOs and RPG games, but imo gaming is more universal now than ever, obviously statistically that's leading to more problem gamers too.

I think the last picture is showing those on the anti-GamerGate side of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there are three elements to target: gamers, gaming media, and game companies.

Each can be approached in a different way, and I think you can definitely be more aggressive towards the media and gaming companies; gamers are more likely to listen and respond to such criticism as well. As far as addressing gamers directly goes, I suppose any sort of tough love should be administered in a very limited way. But again, I do think there's time and place for it.

The gaming media has been the target of Gamergate for two years now, so maybe there's a way to build on that somehow.

Not much has been said, to my knowledge, about companies that produce games though. About how they intentionally implement certain mechanics that promote addictive behavior, so there's a lot of room there.

I'm working on doing another study here soon partnered with a game development company where we hope to show positive benefits from game companies trying to identify those who are addicted and encourage them to get support with a quick prompt, while allowing the 95% of other gamers continue as they wish. Once we have this case study of a good partnership I think we will be able to start changing the tide within game development companies. Currently they are able to claim ignorance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Massive emphasis on "able to claim".

They could justify it before because their was a lack of scientific evidence. That is changing and changing fast, so in the next 12 months I project they will come to a decision point of either being ahead of the curve on this or being forced to care 18-24 months from now when it's officially recognized and so forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...