October 06, 2006

An Open Letter to My Children About Video Games

There have been reams of research and numerous papers written about the dangers of excessive video gaming. There have also been a few, sporadic observations touting some of the benefits conferred by time spent playing video games. It seems almost blatantly obvious to me that both are correct to some extent, and both have valid points. While it is a useful and productive exercise to weigh the costs and benefits of most activities, I think the existing analyses overlook one primary consideration.

We’ll get to that in a moment.

First, let’s take a quick look at the state of the argument.

On the negative side, we see the enormous negative potential for desensitizing oneself to violence inherent in war games that require the successful player to mow down reams of opponents with never-ending supplies of ammunition[1]. We see the deleterious effects of escapism, cultivating anti-social attitudes as kids lock themselves away for hours spent in solitude in front of the computer or TV-game-console screen. We see the diminution of a child’s traditional circle of friends, as time spent outdoors or at friends’ homes is reduced, and even neighborly visits to those friends’ houses are rendered meaningless as kids simply play video games together.

Alone, but together.

And the roster continues. We see the ascendancy of the geek, as computer hacking skills developing and deploying cheat codes are more highly prized than athletic ability, intelligence, personality or character. Personal hygiene goes by the wayside along with responsibility, and gamers even forget to eat when fully engaged in their virtual world.[2] We see the hyper-aggressive behavior required to survive and succeed in the game context bleed into the real world, as gamers coming offline are surly, aggressive, short-tempered and mean[3].

On the positive side, we have a shorter list of benefits that accrue from playing video games. First, we have all heard that eye-hand coordination, reaction times and fine motor skills are better among this generation than in previous years. A level of comfort with technology and familiarity with computers has replaced a – perhaps fear is too strong a word, perhaps not, but at least a trepidation – about new machines and new software.

And there have even been some studies that suggest that the refined ability to operate in a virtual world where the rules are different – and frequently even the laws of physics are different – has enhanced kids’ ability for abstract thought, breaking the bounds placed on our thinking by the confines of conventional reality. I have no doubt that kids are mentally more adaptable, more flexible and more capable of sophisticated abstract conceptualization than in previous generations as a result of exposure to video games.

By most evaluations the jury is still out, the verdict is mixed. Still, when I stack up the costs and the benefits, not only is the list of negatives longer, but the degree of negativity in those factors far outweighs the positive benefits that could be derived from excessive video gaming. The negatives are more negative than the positives are positive, and there are more of them.

These typical parental rants and occasional academic raves ignore, however, what I believe is the most important point of all. I would place its economic value conservatively at $500,000[4], so it’s worth paying some attention to. Its actual value is considerably higher, since an understanding of it confers upon one a capability to extract from life itself a richness and flavor that are, in comparison with the bland and tasteless alternative, priceless.

I’m talking about TIME.

It flies like an arrow, it is money, and it heals all wounds. It’s on my side (yes it is), a stitch in it saves nine, and it is God's way of keeping everything from happening at once. It’s free, but it’s priceless. You cannot own it, but you can use it. You cannot keep it, but you can spend it. Once you have lost it you will never get it back.

As you get older, I promise you this: You will come to realize that time is the scarcest commodity and the most precious resource you have at your disposal. You will wish you had every wasted moment back, to spend that precious resource more frugally and allocate that resource more productively. You will not get a single moment of it back.

Video games have several characteristics that make them thieves of time.

First, they are insidiously addictive. Addictive is obvious.[5] Everybody knows what that means. Once you do it, it is easy – and tempting – to do it again. Once you are doing it, it is not easy to stop. Once you’ve started to do it regularly, your usage increases.

But note that I said insidiously addicting. A computer is, after all, primarily a productivity tool. There is a sense that any time spent behind a computer terminal is time that is being used, not wasted. But over the last ten years the nature of the beast has changed. I don’t have facts and figures to back it up, but surely today the number of computers used as entertainment consoles – for games, music, movies and that gaping black hole of information, news, commentary, pictures and video known as the Internet – rivals the number of machines deployed strictly for business or educational purposes. You can, most assuredly, waste time at the PC or in front of a TV gaming console.

Video games are also insidious in that they chip away at your time and your life, rather than undertaking a full frontal assault. Like a solid baseball player who hits for contact they aren’t swinging for the fences, but just looking for that 1-2 hours per day of your time. By the end of the game, they have amassed enough hits that they lead the league in batting average, and the video game owns your life.

Second, the newer games are entire virtual worlds that you can explore. This conveys an illusion of freshness, of newness, that keeps the game interesting in repeated sessions. This is a trick. Generally, the actions and movements of your character in the game change very little. All that has changed is the background. Sure, your enemies look different and there’s a new weapon on Level 11, but most of the game is exactly the same. This is the ½ hour docudrama that is stretched out to become a two-hour movie. No matter how good those 30 minutes of action and dialogue may be, it’s still a looooong movie. I haven’t seen a game released in the last five years that isn’t entertaining and worth playing purely for the entertainment value. But I haven’t seen a game released in my whole lifetime that I would be willing to sacrifice even 0.01% of my allotted time on this planet for. And I never will.

Third, they are, usually entirely and even in the best of cases 90%+, content free. Note here the contrast to that seasoned former champion of escapism, the book. Back in his heyday, the book was king. In days of yore (say pre-1990), it was the idyllic dream of most working businesspeople and homemakers that they would have
more time to read
.

Books take you places and teach you things at such a pace that you could never replicate that experience in the physical world, and if like me you are a science fiction fan, those physical worlds don’t even exist. Most of what I learned about science and math was at least based on the groundwork laid by Larry Niven, Poul Anderson, and other sci-fi luminaries in their magnificent books. We didn’t spend a lot of time in physics classes discussing the mechanics of supernovae, neutron stars, quasars and black holes, or the speed at which a matter-antimatter reaction would displace a physical mass. Those science fiction writers sure did, though.

I learned the basics of political systems in Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series. The classics taught me to love the language, both written and spoken through masters of the craft like Bill Shakespeare. Biographies take you into the lives of interesting and important people, where you learn from their mistakes and contemplate emulating their successes. Mysteries and adventure stories teach reasoning and deduction, and familiarize you with exotic locales and cultures. The point, hopefully rather obvious by now, is that you learn from books while you are being entertained. The same is not true of video games, unless you count knowing that the special killing move is L-L-R-U-U-D-R-D, or knowing the proper sequence of sounds necessary to access the mazerunner in the Selenitic age as “learning”.

Video games are self-contained universes. The knowledge that you gain there is useful only in the context of the game. So while there might be some redeeming value from an enhancement to your self-worth by raising your hero’s level to 10 in Warcraft III (I hope not), that’s not going to get you an “A” in science, a higher SAT score, or even improve your social standing (except among a very limited group whose opinion of your social standing should probably be the least of your concerns).

And today, these games are complex.[6] It takes in excess of 100 hours of play to finish all the levels of a typical new game, and many, many more hours to “master” it. And that is a waste of time.

Fourth, the newer games are MMPORGs (massively multiplayer online role-playing games) that offer a facsimile of interaction that encourages a gamer to consider his activity as social and engaging, rather than solitary and antisocial. This is another trick.

Interaction through a computer terminal or TV game console is not human interaction. It is machine interaction. It is filtered, so that your interaction is character-to-character, or persona-to-persona, or avatar-to-avatar[7]. If the player with whom you are interacting is a stranger to you, you have no idea what they look like, or who they really are.[8] It is the equivalent of wrapping yourself up in a giant black trash bag and going out to “meet people”.

This is particularly sad, since as I have gotten older I’ve figured out that what really shapes you and sticks with you and determines the quality of your life are (1) what you believe and stand for, (2) the people that you know and love, and (3) the experiences that you have. The popularity of MMPORG dating games and massive online social structures perpetuate this myth that video games provide
social interaction, as indeed that has in some cases become the stated purpose of the game.[9]

But, hard as it is when you’re in that “under 25” age category, ask yourself what memories you are making. What, in the years to come, will you remember from your gaming experiences? (Can you even imagine an old man, lying on his deathbed and muttering his final words, “I wish I had played more video games”?) Your time is limited, whether you can perceive that yet or not. Don’t spend it. Invest it.

Actually, to call video games thieves is an insult to thieves. Thievery assumes a purpose; a robber takes your possessions to consume them or sell them. Video games are more like joy riders of time. They just take it, and burn it.

This time-based argument came to me at a conference about 10 years ago. A speaker went up to the podium and he was preparing to give his presentation, which was on his laptop. It had to boot up. He muttered something about a “Microsoft moment” and we waited about a minute and half before his PC was ready to roll. I thought about how many people experience that “Microsoft moment” each and every day, often several times a day, and did a back-of-the-envelope calculation of the loss of productivity in the USA alone. I don’t remember the number I came up with, but I remember it was staggering. Like those stories of the thieves who used a computer program to round down all the fractional pennies on every currency transaction at a major bank, and accumulated millions in mere days. This was billions of dollars.

I realized then that Microsoft had stolen more from me than a few boot-up minutes each day. And the tools of their larcenous trade were Freecell, Spider Solitaire, Hearts and Minesweeper. I began paying attention to how much I played those games at home and at work (usually while on the phone). After a week I was appalled and I deleted the programs from my laptop at work. I left them off my laptop for over a year, and my productivity went way, way up. I’ve since gotten another laptop and it came with the games installed, but now I am extremely sensitized to the time wasting potential and I would guess that I average less than 10 minutes per day, and most days I don’t play them at all.

So this is not a condemnation of video gaming, but an indictment of excessive video gaming. How much is "excessive" will vary from person to person, but hopefully the TIME criterion will help weight the decision toward less time spent gaming. Everybody needs to waste some time, from time to time. (Personally, I think occasional afternoon naps are a gift from God.) But watch the accumulated total time with the video games, it's a creeping infestation on your life. Don't rely on us - your Mom and me - to watch the clock and call time when you're gaming. If you lose track of time when you're gaming, I'll buy you a timer to sit right next to the PC. You need to understand the magnitude and severity of the potential problem, and head it off at the pass.

My hope for each of you is that this letter will generate a similar kind of epiphany to my own, which will cause you to examine your own video game and computer game usage habits and scale it back. If, through our talks and this letter which I am posting so you can come back and review it from time to time, I am responsible for shaving an average of 10 minutes a day off that total time, then between four children that’s a total of about 14,600 hours I just bought back for you guys, or over 600 24-hour days. Six hundred days of living and learning, love and compansionship. That’s a good day’s work, in my book!

I can say it no better than Philip Dormer Stanhope, the 4th Earl of Chesterfield, who wrote it succinctly in his Letters to His Son[10], “I recommend you to take care of the minutes, for hours will take care of themselves.” Those minutes count. They are the building blocks of the hours, and the hours comprise the days. And days, of course, are what our lives are made of.

You may have to work a little bit to overcome the video game habit, but it’s worth every ounce of effort. So be prepared for it. Look for constructive and interesting things to do with those blocks of time, skills you can master, topics you can learn about, people you can meet, places you can go. If you can’t figure one out, come see me. I’ve got a list a mile long. Read a book. Learn calligraphy. Practice piano or guitar. Take a walk. Knit yourself a sweater. Join a club. Paint a picture. Find some pithy topic that concerns you and write an open letter to your children, if and when you have some. Any of these are far, far superior in their life-enriching qualities, in the development of your own character and personality, than playing another video game.

Love,

Dad




[1] http://pub.ucsf.edu/today/cache/feature/200608312.html

[2] http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=59697

[3] http://www.apa.org/releases/videogames.html

[4] Assuming a bell curve distribution of video game consumption starting at age 5 and ending at retirement at age 60 with average time-per-day ranging from a low of 30 minutes to a peak of 2 hours (between the ages of 14 and 21), and a reasonable college graduate salary of $40,000 with annual increases of 5%, the actual economic cost of the lost time is $522,185,19.

[5] http://www.twitchguru.com/2006/08/08/world_of_warcraft_players_addicted/

[6] http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/guide.html

[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_(virtual_reality)

[8] http://www.stanford.edu/~sdouglas/Online%20Dating/persona.htm

[9] http://thesims2.ea.com/

[10] http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/c#a1187

Posted by John at October 6, 2006 10:54 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Dad, This response is a little belated, but you wrote a lot, and I'm writing a lot. First of all, let me say that I agree with 90% of what you have written. It is not so much the video games themselves, as the love of video games, that is the root of quite a bit of evil. Excessive video games rob many kids today of a proper social life, vast amounts of time, an attention span, and as a result of the previous two, a capacity for schoolwork.

The point where my opinion differs is in the comparison to books. The ratio of benefits to drawbacks of video games may be small, but I submit that it is about the same with books. The specific benefits and drawbacks of books may be not be exactly the same as those of video games, but these lists are similar in length and importance, and in fact mostly similar in content. Consider your biggest complaints about excessive video games: the ascendancy of the geek, a general decline in attitude and demeanor, the addictiveness that results in extreme loss of time, the escapist nature that leads to dissatisfaction with the real world, and a lack of human interaction.

All of these elements, if they are not exactly the same for books, have their counterparts. The geek was not created by video games, he was changed. The last iteration was an individual who developed fluency in the languages invented by JRR Tolkein for the Lord of the Rings series. Today it is the one who has mastered alternative gaming worlds. In my experience, I have no better attitude after reading a book all day than after spending all day on a video game. Remember, we are limiting the issues to excessive amounts of each.

Books may not envelop your visual and auditory senses the way that video games do, but they certainly have the capacity to be no less addictive. This is because the alternative reality you are presented with in a book is generally much more well thought out - and often for no constructive purpose (what purpose does the intricate world of Harry Potter serve, other than drawing kids to spend hours and hours with their heads buried in 600 page tomes?). How many times have you set a book down at a time that was determined by the book, rather than your own time constraints? And how many times have you heard us, your kids, ask if we can just keep playing until we reach the end of the level? While video game creators have mastered the visual effects and the reward system that holds the current generation hostage, authors of novels have long since mastered the art of tension. The result is that both mediums have the ability to take over your life.

Gamers can be exposed to video game content at an unlimited rate, whereas the exposure to alternative worlds of books is tempered by individual's reading speed. Nevertheless, the previously mentioned escapism possible in books can certainly cause similar dissatisfaction with reality, if not as pronounced.

But books are far worse when it comes to the last issue - human interaction. Discussion about a book after the reading is no less possible (or common) as with video games, but there are no multiplayer books. You are spot on about the pseudo interaction present in MMORPGs, but I'm talking about two friends sitting next to each other, talking each other through sections and finding teamwork crucial as they fight through levels of Halo together. Cooperative modes in games, where two players progress through the storyline as though in single-player mode, is becoming ever more common in games today. And even the more common and older head-to-head competitive play is much more like the healthy competition found in sports than the loner nature of the excessive reader. But socializing over video games, when done excessively, is no substitute for more a social life based on more constructive activities.

Of course the Mortal Kombat-type games and the Harry Potter-type books are bad (in the context of this comparison, the statement that reading Harry Potter makes kids better readers is the same as the statement that Mortal Kombat makes kids better with video game controllers), as is an excess of any video games or books. They both have positive benefits, though, right? And surely the benefits to be had by books far outweigh those available from video games? Not quite. As far as results in those who utilize the media, the best of video games share very much in common with the best of literature.

You learned about social systems from the Foundation series, and about the flexibility and creative use of the English language from Shakespeare? So did I. But I also learned about tax policy, classes, city planning, and many aspects of local politics from Sim City 2000, and gained the useful skill of touch-typing from the numerous games scattered throughout the Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing system.

You have pointed out that books have, and use, the capacity to cram more useful information into a smaller space than the capacity that is exercised in even educational video games. You are absolutely right. But you know the one about giving a man a fish and teaching him to fish? In that line of thought, I think that the mental adaptability brought on by multi-sensual exposure to the radically different worlds of some video games deserves more attention than you gave it.

Today, some of the most difficult and specialized fields require a somewhat bizarre skillset that demands that mental adaptiveness. In particular I am thinking of the area of 3D computer-generated animation. The makers of cutting-edge programs such as Maya, zBrush, 3DStudioMax, and Blender are realizing that productivity of specialists can be greatly enhanced by departing from the traditional button and menu driven point-and-click interface. Noting the absolute mastery possible over radically different control systems, they are branching out further from the traditional interfaces and streamlining them more for specific purposes. Like a gamer who has remapped his whole keyboard, inverted his mouse, and bought a joystick just to streamline Counter-Strike.

Remember trying to explain to mom that Super Street Fighter II was not just a "button pushing contest"? I am feeling a little bit the same way. There are some games that seem like that to me, too, but that is because the streamlined nature of the control system and the complexity of the game is beyond what I have experienced. My friend at work who is productive with Maya and zBrush is my age, but for a long time he stayed on top of the newest games, and the result was that he had already been exposed to interfaces further from the norm than zBrush, and he caught on very quickly. This redeeming quality is difficult for you to appreciate, because as you were growing up it was nearly useless. But the world is changing, and with it the entertainment media.

While you say a lot of good things in this letter, don't be like so many in your generation touting the value of the book and proclaiming the loss of all value in modern media. Steven Johnson wrote a book called Everything bad is good for you in which he takes the opposite tack, pointing out the values of video games and newer TV shows and making the case that modern media is better than books. In it he wrote a letter from a parent in a hypothetical situation that video games are a longstanding tradition, and only the current generation of kids have started reading books.

"Reading books chronically understimulates the senses. Unlike the longstanding tradition of gameplaying - which engages the child in a vivid, three-dimensional world filled with moving images and musical soundscapes, navigated and controlled with complex muscular movements - books are simply a barren string of words on the page. Only a small portion of the brain devoted to processing written language is activated during reading, while games engage the full range of the sensory and motor cortices.

"Books are also tragically isolating. While games have for many years engaged the young in complex social relationships with their peers, building and exploring worlds together, books force the child to sequester him or herself in a quiet space, shut off from interaction with other children. These new "libraries" that have arisen in recent years to facilitate reading activities are a frightening sight: dozens of young children, normally so vivacious and socially interactive, sitting alone in cubibles, reading silently, oblivious to their peers.

"Many children enjoy reading books, of course, and no doubt some of the flights of fancy conveyed by reading have their escapist merits. But for a sizable percentage of the population, books are downright descriminatory. The reading craze of recent years cruelly taunts the 10 million Americans who suffer from dyslexia - a condition that didn't even exist as a condition until printed text came along to stigmatize its sufferers.

"But perhaps the most dangerous property of these books is the fact that they follow a fixed linear path. You can't control their narratives in any fashion - you simply sit back and have the story dictated to you. For those of us raised on interactive narratives, this property may seem astonishing. Why would anyone want to embark on an adventure utterly choreographed by another person? But today's generation embarks on such adventures millions of times a day. This risks instilling a general passivity in our children, making them feel as though they're powerless to change their circumstances. Reading is not an active, participatory process; it's a submissive one. The book readers of the younger generation are learning to "follow the plot" instead of learning to lead."

Don't take this the wrong way, but your letter reminded me of this one.

Posted by: Travis Parker at November 3, 2006 09:31 PM

Well said. At the grand old age of 22 you’ve presumably put away many of the tools of youthful idleness and you now have a wife whom I am certain will constrain any tendencies you might have toward excessive video gaming. My diatribe was therefore not aimed at you. I’m well aware of the shortcomings of my perceptions, colored as they are by the caveman conditions of the pre-Internet era in which I was raised. As Thomas Edison said, “Maturity is often more absurd than youth and very frequently is most unjust to youth.”

I acknowledge and even concede most of the points you raise, and with your greater experience in the video game arena you describe the benefits of the kinesthetic engagement in more detail than I can. There is no doubt that video games are more engaging (in the sense of the senses, so to say), more stimulating in both the physical and (at least in range if not in depth) mental aspects, and offer more potential for social interaction (in whatever stilted and crippled form it may take), than books.

However, I’ll stand by my thesis for three reasons:

1. Your comparison of video games to books is one-to-one.

On that basis, you’re right. The average video game will kick the average book’s butt all over the playground.

In the actual consumption of these entertainment media, however, the comparison should be one-to-many. Video games are designed to be played and replayed a huge number of times. Books are designed to be read once.

Certainly there are abuses as you note, in the fixation on a particular book or series such as Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, but those occur in every entertainment field, from comic books to TV shows (think “Star Trek”) and movies. They are the exceptions not the rule, and such behavior almost constitutes a type of sickness.

You have only to look around your home at your video games and your books and ask in the case of the former, “How many times have I played that?” and in the case of the latter, “How many times have I read that?”

The practical implication of this is that the range of material to which a consumer is exposed in a given period of time is significantly greater in the realm of the printed word. In the collective time which you and brothers have spent playing video games over the years (modest in comparison to your peers, I know, due to the draconian oversight under which you suffered), you could have read the collected Great Books (http://books.mirror.org/), and I would emphatically argue that it would have been better for you for a wide range of reasons.

So in that sense, it is the dimension of time that I am emphasizing. For a given period of time spent playing video games versus reading books, and given the balance (or imbalance) in the variety of materials consumed, books are better for you.

2. Time remains the most compelling reason for concern. The dimension of time was directly called out in my diatribe, and nothing that you said countered that argument. Most of the debate, if you can call it that, around the issue of whether video games are net beneficial or net detrimental to our health focuses on the intensity of a single instance of game-playing. For me, watching you guys for years through the distorted lens of a concerned parent, the amount of time that is consumed in playing the same game over and over is the single most critical issue. And it is one that is seldom called out, so I wanted to do so, as grist for your respective analytical mills.

Certainly time spent reading books is, from the standpoint of disengagement with the world of real people and real joy and real problems, no better than time spent playing video games. But video games are qualitatively different, and not in a good way.

Imagine if you will (cue Twilight Zone music) a book that is 50 chapters long. You start to read it and it’s a rollicking ride, very entertaining. You get to Chapter 35 and something happens in the book that causes you to go back and look something up in Chapter 2. But Chapter 2 has changed! Lisa’s character is now named Josephine, and there’s this guy named Luke who wasn’t even in the story the first time you read it. So you read forward on the new story line from Chapter 2. When you get to Chapter 24, you need to refer to back to Chapter 10, and the story line has changed again! So you start reading the book again from Chapter 10, tracking the new dialog, new characters, new action, new outcomes.

While admittedly overstated and simplistic, this hypothetical book shares many characteristics with video games. The actual content and storyline doesn’t change much with each iteration, but there’s this kind of ... artificial newness that deludes you into engaging with the same material over and over again.

Not that it’s a trick, mind you, as you, the willing dupe, nod your head and say, “Cool, the characters have changed again.” You are a willing participant in your own delusion. You get the engagement in the process of reading without the benefit of new ideas, new perspectives, new content. And it is that artificial newness that I find insidious. It is, however, the nature of the beast.

3. Books teach you things; video games don’t.

I’m trying to remember a single time when you or any of your brothers went down to the family room, saying, “Hey Dad, I’m going to work on my mental adaptability through multi-sensual exposure to the radically different worlds of video games”, and I’m having a hard time recalling it. I can remember when you picked up a book on the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, though, and learned about them. (I remember talking to you at great length about the Colossus of Rhodes, and how the Greeks ever got that statue up.)

My point is that simply that while the benefits to be derived from large amounts of time spent video gaming are real, and arguably even more valuable in today’s digital world than in years past, they are side effects. The real purpose of video games is purely entertainment; the educational content is virtually non-existent.

I read Johnson’s satirical essay written in defense of video games several years ago, and found it very amusing. Every aspect of books that he sets up for skewering on the point of his pen is accurate. However, in a delicious bit of irony I would note that you started that section of your comment with “Steven Johnson wrote a book”, not “Steven Johnson created a video game”. When you have ideas to convey, arguments to put forth, facts to list and learn, books are the medium of choice. I’m certain that you don’t want to take the video game side of the argument in comparing the educational value of the two media.

This issue is complex. Any attempt to render it as “video games bad, books good” is going to fail. That certainly wasn’t my intent. I’m no Luddite, and I have no video-gaming-banning tendencies, just as I’m sure you don’t plan on acting out Fahrenheit 451 any time soon. My goal was simply to sensitize you guys to the time wasting potential – and time-wasting reality – of video games.

I am a firm believer in Bertrand Russell’s observation that “Time you enjoy wasting is not time wasted”, and everybody ought to have a healthy dose of that in their life. But the understanding needs to be clear in the case of video games that it is time wasted, that the medium is specifically designed to envelope you and keep you engaged (fostering the disconnect of your sense of elapsed time and leading to unplanned large blocks of time just evaporating), and as such it needs to be controlled. I assure you that if I saw the same amount of time invested in books, assuming they were not educational or fact-based books, I would put on my silver-backed gorilla suit and lumber down the mountain to beat my chest about that as well.

As it is, the fact that you wound up capable of expressing yourself so eloquently, found a wonderful girl to marry, and avoided prison means my work is done. I think I’ll go have a banana.

Posted by: Dad at November 3, 2006 11:27 PM

Yes, in the time I spent playing video games as a kid I could have read all the greatest books and that would have been much better for me. In the time I spent reading Goosebumps books I could have written a symphony. Would I have? No. Therefore from here on out, consider 'reading' as refering to reading something useful, and 'games' to mean games having some educational content. No use comparing the best of one to the worst of another.

Yes, in a given period of reading one is subjected to much more information than in the same amount of time spent playing video games. But I disagree with your assertion that this means time better spent. Books contain none of, and no counterparts to the teach-a-man-to-fish qualities found in video games. From an educational standpoint, at their very best (as evidenced by every textbook ever written) they are pure information. It is a little more complicated with games.

Games can combine the replayability and engagement that you so deplore (as evidenced by your use of words like 'insidious') with informational content to create a far more engaging educational environment than books ever can. So they might not learn pieces of information as quickly, but kids will enjoy educational games far more and come back to them and seek out other similar games entirely of their own volition.

Another educational benefit of the engagement of games is the retainability of the information gained from them. It is a much better mental link to have the reference to a piece of information be "that was what I had to find out for the bearded guy in the hut" than "page 73". Games also have the ability to convey concepts visually, audibly, and interactively - much stronger possibilities for retention than what is offered by books, even if it takes longer. BTW, I just flew by the seat of my pants for this paragraph - I'm not nearly serious enough about this discussion to go and find research.

"Books teach you things; video games don’t." "The real purpose of video games is purely entertainment; the educational content is virtually non-existent." I know you know better than this. I think you're just trying to get a rise out of me, a fairly new employee of an educational multimedia company. Since I have started working there, from working on these games I have learned a ton about the Hungarian revolution of 1956, the TI-84 Silver Edition calculator, the California state budget, chemistry, anatomy, and the nature of time itself. Being around these games all the time has been an awful lot like being in school.

The fact is, there is plenty of educationally beneficial and educationally useless stuff out there in both mediums, and the garbage is where children of both of our generations spent the majority of their time (think comic books, Dad). It's not about methods or formulas, it's about the fact that kids will usually make the wrong decisions. That's what was so good about your original "diatribe". I just would have liked to see it extended to include other forms of media, because it's not unique or any more relevant to video games.

Posted by: Travis at November 5, 2006 01:16 AM

Agreed. I think we're on the cusp of a change in the way that technology is employed in learning, and you're making a valid point that books may be superceded as the preferred - or best - way to gain knowledge and information. There are substantial advantages to a multimedia approach, and it has been proven time and again that different people learn best in different ways. A multi-sensory environment for information delivery offers more ways to present the information, more cues and context for recalling it, and the possibility for a more engaging learning experience.

We're not there yet, though, so most of my arguments apply. And I doubt a video game about physical chemistry or Newtonian mechanics is ever going to surpass the latest iteration of Halo or CounterStrike in unit sales, so the cautionary notes still apply as well. In fact, the environments modeled in video games are likely to get more realistic and more engaging in all the senses (smell-o-vision!), and so the dangers I've pointed out will increase. Kids, as you note, will make bad decisions.

But the message is more than that. I'm not saying, "Don't make bad decisions." Or at least, not only that. I'm also saying, "Kids, watch how you use your time. Video games can consume too much of your life if you don't pay attention to it, because they are so effective at engaging our full attention." And I'm also saying, "Parents, watch out for how much time your kids allocate to playing video games. This is a temptation we did not have as kids, and it's a potent one." And to modify those messages as per your notes, I would add, "Pay special attention to the *types* of videos you spend time on. Some have meaningful content, some don't. Some teach skills for engagement, research, or investigation, some just teach mass murder or reckless driving." While there are certainly different classes of video games and degrees of abuse, this argument is more than "too much of anything is bad". Video games bring some new techniques to time-wasting that improve the temptation and increase the risks.

I wasn't aiming a dig at you with the comment about "video games don't [teach you things]", and you're right to call that out. Since you are past the age of prime susceptibility to the temptations of excessive video gaming, I wasn't really aiming that comment at you. Frankly, I didn't think of this from the standpoint of educational video games. You - in your new job - are at the forefront of the efforts that will change these negative perceptions, and what is emerging are whole new classes of video games -- in fact, we may not even be able to isolate them as "video games" any longer as the overlap with commericals, videos, movies, story illustrations, photographs, drawings, diagrams, and music continues to widen. I'm not sure what the emerging templates for thinking about and evaluating such new media content might be, but clearly I'm going to need to learn a few!

Posted by: Dad at November 5, 2006 05:15 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Song of the Week

Song: Crow Jane
Artist: The Derek Trucks Band
Album: Songlines

read the full entry

About the Author

is a software evangelist in the San Francisco bay area. His clients are worldwide financial services firms.

Here on Keelhauling he keeps his five year list of bookmarks, and chronicles the decline of modern civilization with snappy wit and pithy commentary.

More about John »

Must Reads


Search Archives



1,000 Words

greece.jpg Title: Billie Holiday
Artist: William P. Gottlieb
(from the Golden Age of Jazz collection)

iTunes Rotation

KTTunstall_small.jpg

Eye To The Telescope
K.T. Tunstall
EMI International (IMPORT in the USA)
January 25, 2005