A. itself become an addiction
and
B. is already restricted by both the laws of physics and related intended functional constraints of the components (you can’t force a diode to suddenly become a transistor, etc.), I can’t reorganize, in my Mom’s garage, the arrangement of microcomponents inside the integrated circuits on the motherboard, for example; and more prohibitively, I can’t arbitrarily undo Maxwell’s equations and basic principles of circuit analysis

I guess my point is that, even if I’m not fully addicted to a game, I’m still constrained by it…I can’t legally claim the entirety of the ‘work’ I put into the game as my own, even if I feel that I’ve invested a large amount of my creative engagement building a character that is particularly ‘mine.’ This would be (aside from the good point about immediate tangibility) very close to plagiarism of an academic article, aside from the fact that ‘pure’ academicians do not work for corporations, and game designers usually do…which sort of leads back to the profit incentive…but I’d be lying if I said that many academicians aren’t motivated by salary incentives anyway, and that there aren’t ethical considerations to be made about other incentives (prestige, fame, etc.) What of the professor who spends all of her time at work away from her family? Someone once told me that Einstein was actually a dick to his wives. Does this mean that there was a correlation between Einstein’s work and the way he treated his wives? Could he have still developed his theories and treated his wives with more respect? Even if he couldn’t have, does that make his theories any less valuable? Who’s to judge? I think it really is a matter of balance and time. (In situations of close knit gaming friends, one is inclined to question whether family can be constrained to its traditional meaning…whether a kinship group can include a group of gaming friends, what role the specific constraints of the games have on the behavior of the friends, etc. Here the ethics become confused. It seems like a ‘gamer cop-out’ at first, in that, presumably, parents are providing the means of physical subsistence and may be disrespected or mistreated by gamers who don’t want to be distracted…but what if Mom is upstairs watching TV anyway? the addictions then are interdependent, and no one person is wholely at ‘fault.’ and what about older independent gamers, or even if younger, what about sharing food while gaming? Finally, what’s so ethical about buying food in the same capitalist market that the games are made, food that’s probably produced by farmers and factory workers that are payed shit wages? Or is this critique a cop-out as well, since in many locations it may be the only available food?)
And as far as addiction, I will admit that for years, actually, I would play air guitar and vehemently insist on the privacy of the act, bound to the imaginary dimension of channeling the music of other people as my own. It was a kind of catharsis. In what ways was this damaging, and how should I react to the following conclusions?:
A. Degenerated relations with my family
B. Was, like your account of WoW players, an escape from social ‘reality’
There are some assumptions here that I think will have some useful parallels for gaming:
that the guilt is wholely that of the adictee or the adictor (myself and the musicians), and not partially other external problems (other people (family or not) with their own ‘addictions’: work, gambling, cigarettes, vicious philosophical thought loops, literature, film, theology, alcohol, religion (perhaps even ethics itself))
That ‘guilt’ is even a helpful word in such a complex situation
That part of the problem is not already systemic, already built into capitalism, and that concepts like ‘addiction’ and ‘pathology’ are not already normative terms given probably a little too much authority by professional psychologists, lawmakers, doctors, and sociologists who may, paradoxically, be ‘addicted’ to their own professions or otherwise staple them to some fixed and vague transcendental professional principles like ‘honor,’ ’servitude,’ or more palatable (to me) principles like sincerity, not being overly anal, and sense of humor.
That labeling oneself an ‘escapist’ does not tend to sort of be a self fulfilling prophecy…coudn’t it be that it’s exactly by embracing, if gently-critically, our addictions and sticking up for ourselves in complex intersubjective situations (virtual or not) that we gain the self-respect and strength to build our bonds with outhers within or outside of our ‘cliques’?
Finally, art, games, literature, and all that would be boring without complex and often negative human experiences like inadvertently not eating, feeling like a rectangle of well organized light has just taken standard notions of modern alienation to a new level, and making one feel socially inept when taking a break to eat a box of Nerds candy. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be critical, but I think these types of experiences can be in a strange way valuable. Why should we bottle them up simply because culture at large (lost in its own but mainstream-approved practices like clothes shopping and tourism) looks down upon them, dismisses them, or devalues them?

Hats off to successful game designers. You’re not perfect, and you probably suck in a lot of ways, but so do I.

What I’m trying to do is to create a game where players really get something out of the game, which will help them in their lives. As said earlier, some people have addictive personalities. I made my own researches on the subject and I can tell you that there is really something going on here.

Someone like me, with a brain wired unlike most people (i’m gifted) will NOT find entertainment from what most others can be satisfied with. Furthermore, we are hypersensitive, and this is what we have to deal with everyday. The good thing is the intellectual stimulation we get from playing (which is intense), and the bad thing is when there is nothing else to balance it.

But in reality, it is not a problem. If you look at geniuses, they do have that “passion” if you want to call it like this. But to be honest, it’s much more than that, it’s really an obsession. Once your mind is infused with something, it grants you the long term endurance and dedication to learn about the subject of interest and potentially master it to unprecedent levels.

And this insight can then be shared with others. It’s exactly the processus by which people leave their name in history (Mozart, Einstein, etc…). Recently, I studied chess. I found that Steinitz is exactly the kind of person I’m describing. He lived for chess and the contribution he made, although didn’t grant him a nobel, greatly enhanced the understanding we have of the game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Steinitz).

That’s why, following that path, I will add my contribution to the advancement of game design. So, in the end, instead of trying to take responsability for an addiction you didn’t create (nature did), we shall make sure that the time they spend on the game help them growing up as mature and responsable persons.

Off topic (only slighty, I’m talking about my philosophy here). I do believe that certain game mechanics are bad, in the sense that they do not create situations in which you get something out of the game after playing, and have very little replay value. Example : the pointless grinding in WoW. If you compare to chess, you learn things in chess that help you in your life (no turning back after you made a mistake). That’s what a game designer’s responsability is about, and I’m really pissed off by the lack of quality and serious of nowadays games.

Really though, when it comes to the responsibility issue…I believe in personal responsibility. To your question: Is McDonald’s responsible when people overeat? NO, McDonald’s is only responsible for one thing (in this example)…making unhealthy food! The person overeating is responsible…they make the choice, they CHOOSE McDonald’s..if there was no more McDonald’s…then people would go to Wendy’s…and if there was no fast food at all, I bet people would make their own. McDonald’s just makes it convenient for people to get their ‘fix’. Is that wrong? Probably a little in the gray area, but the choice is still on the person.

Now, you can say…well, it’s ADDICTION, the person isn’t really making the choice anymore, it’s all autonomous…well, that’s true, and as someone mentions, there are people with addictive personalities….I’m such a person. I’ve been that guy, the one who burns pasta, and spends hours doing something without eating (forgetting to eat)…But I can tell you this…it didn’t matter WHAT it was that I was doing…It could have been playing WOW, or any other videogame (which was usually the case), it could have been doing drugs, or it could have been losing my self in some ‘healthy’ activity…the root of my problem had nothing to do with the addictive nature of the activity, but more as the REASON for wanting to escape in the first place.

Less than a year ago, I’ve played WOW, and I really enjoyed it and can see how addicting it could be…but I realized that I don’t have time for that sort of investment and decided to quit playing so I can focus on school. (but Kudos to Blizzard for making such a fun game)

Lets look at the worse sort of addiction…Drug Addiction…One of the things anyone will tell you when you’re dealing with someone who is addicted to drugs is…You can’t make them quit, it’s their choice, it’s in THEIR power..their responsibility. You can be supportive and all sorts of things, but at the end of the day, it’s all their choice (not the drug dealers…they have their own set of things they need to take responsibility for, but not take responsibility for the person who is using)…and usually you don’t cure addiction by getting that person off the substance (because they’ll just go right back on it or on to something else)…you have to fix the issues that would make them want to escape in the first place.

If you want to fix the issue that is the root of the problem, you’d have to try and fix society as a whole (which is impossible) and no one said saving the world has to be your JOB…it can be your hobby.

Another side note…the bigger your audience, the more likely you’ll get some crazy fanatics, and they just come with the territory. Was star wars a bad movies because there were people who would see it 150 times and create a religion after it? NO, because those people come with the territory of having millions of people like your stuff. Is star wars responsible for those people?

NOw, on to OUR responsibility as Game Designers…Here is why I decided to make games…because games have the potential TO BE addicting. If a kid has a problem in life…and he wants to escape…he’ll find a way. NOw, you can list all the ways to escape from reality…from drug use to becoming a fanatic (religious among others)…where would videogames land on that list? Personally, I feel like its’ one of the better choice for escaping reality. I know this sounds like the same argument that drug dealers use..if they didn’t buy it from me, the would have bought it somewhere else…but playing videogames kept me out of a lot of trouble growing up…and I’ve learned a lot from playing them…not as much as I could have (with that sort of time investment), but it was problem the best choice that I could/would have made. Now, I could have done other things that would have made me more productive or learn more, but I believe that is our “responsibility”…to give people a good (better) reward for their time investment…than has been done in the past.

I believe that as we strive more to achieve that status of being “Art” and creating more meaningful experiences, really, we’re just trying to give people a better reward for their time. If you were to think of it on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs…we’re trying to fulfill or at least make them THINK about some of the higher needs…such as meaning of their existence…and what Games like WOW are doing, they’re satisfying some of the lower needs…such as feeling a part of a community or feeling ’special’(level 60 nightelf roxxor noobs) or needed (“help, need mage for quest!!!”). Sure it’s not the meaning of life, but WOW is filling needs all the same….these same needs can be met with things like…joining a gang…giving in to peer pressure…joining the football team….but we all know that when people are given the choice, they usually dont’ choose the best one…so to me, videogames IS the best choice that people WOULD choose.

So, back to the topic of addictive games…WHY NOT! Why not make something enjoyable that will reach a wide audience and can positively affect people for as long an amount of time as possible. I think it’s our GOAL to make addictive games, something that people will feel is valuable to invest their time into because there is some sort of reward…and for the people who get REALLY addicted to it…well, they come with the territory…it’s a part of how the world work…with millions of users/players…you’ll get a few who are a little TOO into the game…but I’d rather them be too into a game, then too into porn, or eating, or drinking, or any of the other BAD choices that exist to escape reality.

Sorry for such a Long response.

First, you compare the hours we developers spend developing, with the hours players spend playing. You say the difference lies in “creating meaning”, but I feel differently.

When we develop, we are playing and learning. It’s fun, and sometimes I code a game for myself without thinking about anyone else. Raph Koster’s book sez that computer game play = learning, specifically learning-by-doing, which is fundamentally different from learning by book or film.

So while I can see that developers appear to create more meaningful product then game players, I don’t buy that they are all that different.

You also talk about how games are profoundly ephemeral, compared to movies and books. Well, is Casablanca worse because it’s served on YouTube? Paper and celluloid are just mediums. I agree with you that it’s all about the meaning and experience, but I don’t agree that games are fundamentally different than books just because games aren’t printed on paper.

Finally, I don’t think there’s any reasonable way to compare game developers with McDonalds. You MIGHT be able to compare them with Crayola or Legos, but even that obscures the value of computer games. I believe Shane’s “addiction” to WoW, and the amount of profound learning he did within that game, probably CAN be associated with his current career, so I see Shane as an example of why NOT to fear game addiction.

Game developers need to make games that people enjoy. It’s the only way people will buy them. Additionally, people will generally only pay their hard earned money on a game they can see themselves playing more than every once in a while. So, right off the bat, as far as I understand it, all game developers are very strongly urged to create a game that will swallow a chunk of someone’s life. It doesn’t have to be a giant chunk like WoW or anything, it just has to be a chuck large enough to justify the purchase and return entertainment value to the customer.

The instinctual reaction to your argument is to wonder if game developers now must find some way to make a game that is good enough for people to buy it, but not _too_ good because that would be harmful to people’s lives. I don’t think that’s the best reaction, but it’s there and without further exploration into the details of the problem, it’s as far as some people will go and they’ll just toss up their hands and say, let’s forget about the whole thing.

Game developers who want to save people’s live have an additional problem here. Some people have addictive personalities. They can take a game as simple as Mah Jong Quest, or Breakout or hell, even Paper Rock Missile Launcher and spend inordinate amounts of time playing them, to the detriment of all other things in their lives. We can’t help those people. They have a way of living that we aren’t going to impact. So how do you segment the population into groups that you feel you can save and groups that you can’t? There is no clear line on what level of fun and quality a game must have before it becomes addictive. Different games are different levels of addictive for different people.

Luckily, there are a few things out there which are more easily identifiable as things which are more likely to have a level time commitment which could be deleterious to someone’s health, wealth and relationships. Right off the bat, one could say that large raids and dungeon instances in games like World of Warcraft are too big for people’s own good. And…. that’s about where I stop. Even calling for an end to such ludicrously lengthy required game sessions seems patronizing and limiting to the industry. Even these potentially damaging long sessions have value for the player.

I am having trouble identifying any strong guidelines for games so that they are addictive enough to buy, but not addictive enough to ruin people’s lives. I don’t know if it’s possible to say any one feature or angle is wrongly addictive. The stick approach rarely works with gamers. The carrot, however is more often effective, but in the end, the player will find the game that fits them.

As far as carrots and incentives go, a developer could reward people for not playing too many consecutive hours, and provide benefits for not doing things that could be perceived as farming. World of Warcraft already have a system in place to ameliorate long sessions of monster slaughter. It’s called Rested and Non Rested XP. People, for the most part ignore this carrot. Either they just play the same character and get less than maximum experience from their actions, or they just make another character and play that one until it’s unrested. Some players have gone far enough to codify a solution of using about 4 characters as once, so that as you play each one to unrested xp, the others will recharge enough so that you could play close to nonstop with one of your characters and still get optimal experience.

I’m interested in seeing this discussion continue, but I don’t see many good answers here. I also believe that games are only a part of the problem. Stepping back and looking at society as a whole will give you a better understanding of what is actually going on here. I believe that games are only one of many things out there that people will use to escape from their lives.