Search Unity

"Gaming Disorder" Now A Recognized Illness According To World Health Organization

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Arowx, May 25, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Arowx

    Arowx

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Posts:
    7,135
    Kotaku article https://kotaku.com/gaming-disorder-now-a-recognized-illness-according-to-1835026321

    So will we need to add session gamaholic detection and management systems to our games?
     
  2. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    Literally nobody said this.
     
    Aiursrage2k and Joe-Censored like this.
  3. TenKHoursDev

    TenKHoursDev

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Posts:
    1,090
    Sure. If we want to creep our responsibilities as game developers into the private lives of our customers... it seems that a lot of people today expect authorities (psychiatric, governing powers, or private orgs) to take make our decisions "do whats best" for us...

    I get it. Some people are unable to control their compulsions. The focus ought to be on those people instead of the companies which exist to make money... the problem is those companies are much more visible and easily blamed than those who refuse to take responsibility for their own.
     
  4. Arowx

    Arowx

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Posts:
    7,135
    I'm saying it could become a requirement of future games or would it be better as part of the game portal/console/operating systems e.g. Steam/Xbox/Windows/Playstation/Google Play/IOS.
     
  5. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    Where do you think the addictive qualities in games come from?
     
  6. Antypodish

    Antypodish

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2014
    Posts:
    5,853
    Nothing new.
    Plenty games has that already for years.
    Just few examples.







    If I go for a smoke, which is different addition, will be better for me?:)
     
  7. BIGTIMEMASTER

    BIGTIMEMASTER

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Posts:
    2,567
    I dunno why it needs a special name. Its the same disorder that makes you eat food and fap seven times day. Maybe a warning label like cigarettes coupled with education can keep more people from spiraling out of control. Sure why not? Society doesn't need more addicts of any kind.

    And people do need help. Acting like everybody is an island unto themselves is just posturing.
     
  8. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    Game 'addiction' is just another form of escapism for people who don't have a life that they otherwise find satisfying. The 'illness' is simply boredom/depression driven by fear of failure, like pretty much every other psychological 'illness' out there.

    Just another empty term to fill medical journals with.
     
  9. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    Please, Dr. Billy, tell us more.
     
    Kiwasi, BrandyStarbrite and AcidArrow like this.
  10. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    I'm no doctor, but I have a lot of experience around the miserable consequences of licentious psychological 'illness' diagnoses and treatments. We don't need another brand name for people who find it too difficult, for one reason or another, to face the very real challenges of life.

    On the topic of what devs should do about it, it would be a shame if games were required by law to buffer society's shortcomings by treating the symptoms of its members.
     
    FMark92, Ne0mega and deliquescator like this.
  11. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    So basically you don't have anything to support this claim, you just don't like psychologists, got it.
     
    AcidArrow likes this.
  12. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    No actually, I'm just not interested in having a debate with you about the medical industry on the forum. I have nothing against psychologists in general, but they are trained in a model that simply isn't effective a lot of the time, and can have very bad effects. I could debate all day about it, but I'm not going to do that here.

    I just hope this addition to the medical terminology doesn't end up cluttering game developer's lives with the requirement to treat symptoms so someone else doesn't have to deal with the cause.
     
  13. BIGTIMEMASTER

    BIGTIMEMASTER

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Posts:
    2,567
    Bingo.

    And just for the record, a person doesn't have to be a SME or have fancy licenses to have an opinion on things. Not like any of that crap really means anything, anyhow.

    I had a terrible wound on my knee. Was in hospital for 6 months. Followed all the doctors orders, but the wound wouldn't heal. Finally, out of frustration and a gut instinct, I did the opposite of what they were prescribing. Wound healed in a week.

    What was the solution? Stop putting stuff on the thing and leave it be. When it comes to wound trauma, these were some of the best and most experienced doctors in the world. All that training and experience, and such a simple solution escaped them.

    Someone touts titles and years, I immediately think they're most likely unreliable. People who know don't talk like that.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2019
    FMark92, Ne0mega and SparrowsNest like this.
  14. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    Pro tip: developers lives will get cluttered with this because that's the source of games that are exploiting addiction to the point where this classification needs to exist in the first place.
     
  15. TenKHoursDev

    TenKHoursDev

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Posts:
    1,090
    Hmm. "Titles and years" are closely aligned to "credentials and experience" something tells me just the opposite of what has been quoted. I'm just saying it doesn't hurt to listen to those with both credentials and experience. You wouldn't want homeless Joe giving you medical advice would you?
     
  16. APSchmidt

    APSchmidt

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Posts:
    2,500
    I mainly agree with that but sometimes, addiction can have very disturbing consequences on people's lives. This is not to be taken lightly.

    On the other hand, if I saw a message like the ones that were posted here in my favourite game(s), I would wreak havoc on the games publishers' forums! How much time I put in a game is none of their business. :d
     
    Billy4184 likes this.
  17. Arowx

    Arowx

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Posts:
    7,135


    Just thought this informative video might help enlighten people confused by addictions.
     
  18. BIGTIMEMASTER

    BIGTIMEMASTER

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Posts:
    2,567
    Credentials and Experience mean nothing if the advice coming out the mouth isn't valid. I don't care who is saying something, if it's true it's true. If it's not, it's not. Plenty of people who do something for ages and never learned jack from it. When they speak of titles and years, what they really want is auto-respect. Sorry, everybody gets the exact same amount of respect from me by default.

    Those that have learned something don't need to tout credentials or experience. It will be obvious when they speak whether or not they know something.

    Homeless Joe can say whatever he wants. If something he says sounds valid, I'm gonna investigate further.
     
    Ne0mega likes this.
  19. Ony

    Ony

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Posts:
    1,847
    Some game (and other) developers these days put millions of dollars into research specifically designed to addict players. They hire professional behavioral scientists to create mechanisms that will ensnare and trap vulnerable people into making decisions based on their addiction. The factors that create those addictions are designed into the fabric of the games, by people who know exactly how to push your buttons, and have spent years honing those scientific skills.

    But, I mean, your average person (especially a child) is totally prepared to deal with such an onslaught, so screw them. If they get addicted, it's clearly their own fault, and we should continue to allow corporations to do whatever they like for as long as they like, because they are clearly innocent of any wrongdoing in this regard.

    Ding!

    (1, 2, 3, 4)
     
  20. MitchStan

    MitchStan

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Posts:
    516
    Thank you, Ony, for pointing this out so clearly.
     
    Ony and angrypenguin like this.
  21. BrandyStarbrite

    BrandyStarbrite

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Posts:
    1,164
    Yeah. That is so creepy.
    And the fact that stuff like that is happening, is really creepy and scary.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2019
    Ony likes this.
  22. Antypodish

    Antypodish

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2014
    Posts:
    5,853
    Maybe opposite to what topic represents, but I have very positive experience, in what gaming has more positive effect than negative. Specially young kids can learn a lot, by having fun. Even before they can even speak.
    Also using games for mental trauma/disorder people, as part of treatment.
    Very little is spoke about positive effects. Only shouting bad things, bla, bla, bla.
     
    TenKHoursDev and BrandyStarbrite like this.
  23. MitchStan

    MitchStan

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Posts:
    516
    Toddlers playing games on a tablet before they can even speak. I’m sure that’s just excellent for the development of the 6 month old brain and mind body connection.
     
    deliquescator and Ony like this.
  24. TenKHoursDev

    TenKHoursDev

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Posts:
    1,090
    Maybe we ought to question why a parent is letting their child play with such an obviously dangerous technology?

    I can think of at least three other things (firearms, firecrackers, a vehicle) that I would not allow a 6 mo old or any child under the age of 12 use.

    There has to be a limit as to where your responsibility as a parent ends and the government/private company begins.

    In the broader philosophical sense then if not well then we run the risk of living in a society where such organizations control our lives and make the decisions for us. If this really bothers you go about an create a solution to the problem instead of pushing your responsibilities on others.
     
    Ne0mega and deliquescator like this.
  25. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    14,570
    It's important to keep in mind that what we as technically minded individuals find obvious may not actually be obvious to anyone else. Loot boxes and other addictive systems are a relatively new concept so it's only somewhat recently that we started making people aware of the dangers, and even then only the people that pay attention to those topics.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
    deliquescator, Ony and Antypodish like this.
  26. bobisgod234

    bobisgod234

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Posts:
    261
    I think if companies spend money on professionals to find ways to addict players to their game, those companies bear at least some of the responsibility if people get addicted to their game.
     
    BrandyStarbrite and Ony like this.
  27. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    Well put, my main problem is the idea of diagnosing it as an 'illness'. I'm certainly not saying that addiction in itself doesn't exist, that would be silly.

    Children's game playing obviously need to be supervised by parents, a game developer shouldn't have to do that for them.

    For adults, obviously games that are designed to be addictive can hook people in specific circumstances, but the question of what a developer should do about it is questionable. At a certain point adults need to take responsibility for themselves, even if they are susceptible to addiction.

    If they had said "we're going to introduce an addiction rating system to make it clearer to parents and gamers which games are more addictive" the premise at least is reasonable, though I would like to hear how it would be done.

    PS how about tackling social media while they're at it?
     
    Ne0mega likes this.
  28. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    12,069
    We can debate philosophically what should be for eternity. Practically, however, the answer is pretty clear cut: if you're a parent and you genuinely want to look out for your kid(s) as you should, then you need to be paying attention for yourself wherever and whenever possible.

    Even if we could trust companies / governments / etc. to do this for us, a) everyone makes mistakes and b) that expectation provides vulnerabilities which can be exploited and c) even if you generally agree with their stances I doubt that you will always 100% agree with them.

    Plus, effective parenting isn't about just plonking kids in front of "safe" stuff, or about making sure they're only ever exposed to stuff you agree with. If you want them to grow as critical thinkers in their own right then discussing things with them is pretty important, and to do that you need at least surface level awareness of the stuff they're engaging with.

    So all in all, philosophy aside, outsourcing the filtration of what your kids are exposed to might be a nice theory, but in practice I just don't see the value.
     
    TenKHoursDev, Ony and Billy4184 like this.
  29. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    12,069
    To clarify my previous post, I'm not suggesting that governments and companies should not also be involved to some degree. What I'm really saying is that it should be both. Broad authorities should enforce compliance with general rules (as they mostly do), but that will never get the whole job done, so parents or caregivers need to take it from there.
     
    Kiwasi likes this.
  30. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    There's a pretty good litmus test though, which is measuring how fast it is draining one's bank account and time.

    If one has no clear concept of their time investment or financial situation (or are too scared to look) well things aren't going to turn out well.
     
  31. bobisgod234

    bobisgod234

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Posts:
    261
    I don't know if that's a very good litmus test. Addiction in general has more negative consequences than just financial, that may not be so immediately obvious or easy to quantify into a number.
     
    Ony likes this.
  32. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,487
    This. We have regulations around gambling and alcohol and porn. Gaming should be no different.

    This is a BS argument. Every other industry has a responsibility to protect children from harm from their products. This includes age restrictions (18+, Not suitable for children under 3, and so on). It often includes actual physical guards (anything mechanical or electrical). There are also point of sale restrictions (alcohol, pornography, cigarettes). And then there are a whole set of laws that back these standards up. Then there are education campaigns run to make sure parents are aware of what these things mean. Finally its actually possible to get fined or imprisoned by the police for violating these laws.

    As a parent, its pretty obvious when I'm doing something that is going to harm my kid. Its made obvious to me when my kid is engaging in an activity that needs supervision.

    If games do harm to kids (which "obviously needs to be supervised by parents" implies) then it should come with the same set of obligations on game developers as there are on the maker of any other product that could harm kids.
     
  33. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    If you read my previous posts, I specifically said that, as an example, an 'addiction rating system' would be at least worth considering. Informing parents and gamers about the possible dangers is potentially a good idea, so that they can make informed choices as responsible adults.

    But the idea of building a game around someone's possible addiction to it is just silly in my opinion.
     
  34. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,487
    That's what the mobile market has been doing with microtransactions for years...
     
    Ony and Antypodish like this.
  35. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    Tell me, would it be possible to say you were addicted to something if it consumed >2 hours per day and >$20 per week?
     
  36. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    Yes, if it gets in the way of other things you're supposed to be doing to a particularly detrimental degree. That's literally what this classification is about.
     
    Ony and bobisgod234 like this.
  37. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    Because it's profitable to do so. It's not surprising that game developers will go to certain lengths to get people playing and spending on their game. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with it unless they are deceiving people in some way. That's why we all have the ability to say 'no' and not play it. If one cannot say 'no' to something they don't want then they need some sort of personal intervention to give them back their choice and responsibility.

    I'm all for better information and clarification, but not absolving people of personal responsibility.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
  38. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    4,632
    In what way? There are all sorts of hobbies that consume more than 2 hours of people's time daily.

    Sorry, addiction is real but at a certain point people's lives are their own responsibility, and nobody should have to (or even be able to) take control of it for them.
     
    Ne0mega and TenKHoursDev like this.
  39. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    How about you rtfm

    https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en#/http://id.who.int/icd/entity/1448597234

    Sorry, but you have no idea how addiction works outside of chemical dependence.
     
    pk_Holzbaum and bobisgod234 like this.
  40. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    12,069
    By this logic advertising in general should also be much more strongly regulated than it is. I have no argument with that...

    That is exactly what is already being done, though, from the exploitation perspective. See @Ony's post, where she even included references!
     
    Ony and Kiwasi like this.
  41. Antypodish

    Antypodish

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2014
    Posts:
    5,853
    Don't worry, it took more than century for addicting cigarettes, to start putting health warnings. They are not any different than games, in a sense of addiction. Same with alcohol. To the point, now we can see labels, like alcohol is harmful for health. Which is false information in general, as if air is harmful to health (at normal dose).
    If we get anything like such warrings on games in the next century, that will be lightning fast, in comparison to other products. But industry likes to milk their customers to the limits.
     
  42. TenKHoursDev

    TenKHoursDev

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Posts:
    1,090
    To avoid delving into the topic too much I'll give you the short version of what we're all talking about here. Regulation is both against competition and free markets. When established companies seek to regulate their industry they directly prevent competitors from entering the market. A valid case is that of hairstylists. It costs $23k annually to attend a beauty school in my area (don't ask how I know that :p) , and then there is the license you need to be certified just to cut hair. I don't pay even half that much for my tuition for my degree in CS, the technical field we're indirectly discussing regulating...

    Aside: If you want to discuss this further please slide into those DMs... we'll have a good talk about this without annoying any mods (or anyone else)...

    I get this is a very rousing topic but many of us are rehashing details in minutia... please bring something new/interesting to the discussion.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
    angrypenguin likes this.
  43. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,487
    Except why would I? What incentive does a dev have to not extract the most value from their game? Most of the industry isn't in this to be nice. They are in it to make money. Even if someone is in this to be nice, they will quickly be ousted by someone making money.

    This is definitely a case of "tragedy of the commons". Any dev that uses exploitative techniques will make more money. Thus allowing them to continue to make more games. Any dev that doesn't use exploitative techniques will quickly be left behind.

    The free market does a great job of making money. The free market does a terrible job at managing the exploitation of common resources. That's why we have regulations around the environment, hunting/fishing quotas, selling drugs and so on.
     
  44. APSchmidt

    APSchmidt

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Posts:
    2,500
    I would probably be dead by now, hadn't I discovered computers and video games. :)
     
  45. AcidArrow

    AcidArrow

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Posts:
    5,880
    It certainly is possible but a lot of devs won’t do it.

    Our industry has used “addictive gameplay” as a positive marketing term for many years.

    There is a whole culture of game devs (and sometimes platform holders themselves) that think “optimizing engagement”, “maximizing retention” and “monetizing whales” are supposed to be positive goals when creating a game. So, maybe, hopefully, this classification might help clarify some things.
     
    Ony likes this.
  46. Antony-Blackett

    Antony-Blackett

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Posts:
    1,282
    Public transport is addictive.
     
    TenKHoursDev and angrypenguin like this.
  47. TenKHoursDev

    TenKHoursDev

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Posts:
    1,090

    I'm literally playing devils advocate here, I do not understand why some people are so opposed to this >_<
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
  48. Antony-Blackett

    Antony-Blackett

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Posts:
    1,282
    I'm a bit anti this because it's easy for health experts to focus on the negatives without correctly weighing the positives. Yes some people get addicted and yes it is detrimental to them. But, those addictive properties of games for some people are just what makes it a fun and positive experience for many many others. To restrict and dampen some experiences in video games through regulation might have an overall adverse affect on the mental health of the population.

    I as well am playing a bit of a devils advocate here as well. But to blindly restrict or regulate without understanding the entire problem space can be just as irresponsible.
     
  49. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    5,976
    Since I guess nobody else is going to read the actual description and instead speculate entirely on what they think the term means:

    Description
    Gaming disorder is characterized by a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behaviour (‘digital gaming’ or ‘video-gaming’), which may be online (i.e., over the internet) or offline, manifested by:

    1. impaired control over gaming (e.g., onset, frequency, intensity, duration, termination, context);
    2. increasing priority given to gaming to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other life interests and daily activities; and
    3. continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences. The behaviour pattern is of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning.
    The pattern of gaming behaviour may be continuous or episodic and recurrent. The gaming behaviour and other features are normally evident over a period of at least 12 months in order for a diagnosis to be assigned, although the required duration may be shortened if all diagnostic requirements are met and symptoms are severe.

    Exclusions
     
  50. Antony-Blackett

    Antony-Blackett

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Posts:
    1,282
    Tldnr

    Edit: Last troll from me for a while. :p
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.