Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 236 posts

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#131

Post by crummy »

slazaro wrote: post #127
Drakim wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only ones I can think of is Dark Souls and Resident Evil 6, as other players can invade your single-player game to try to kill you.

How is it a single-player game then? I think I'm out of touch with newer games...

Imagine it's kind of a shared singleplayer experience. You play a game by yourself against computer controlled enemies, but you might see notes left from other players, and the ghosts of their last moments. Later you can use special items to hop into a game (co-op) or invade a random player's game (pvp).

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#132

Post by mattlondon »

slazaro wrote: post #127
Drakim wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only ones I can think of is Dark Souls and Resident Evil 6, as other players can invade your single-player game to try to kill you.

How is it a single-player game then? I think I'm out of touch with newer games...

They're single-player in that you play on your own, but you play on your own with a lot of other people playing on their own. So you could be on a server doing your own thing, and if you see another character whilst playing, that could be a human person doing their own thing, or it could be a NPC doing their own thing (but with the option of interacting with other human players - chat/trade/fighting etc)

It is essentially a single-player experience but on a shared playing area.

If that makes sense!

Its kinda cool, but this forced you-can-only-quit-when-we-say-so thing is not cool. Why you cant just safely despawn when you pause or exit I don't know. I guess it is there for "realism"

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#133

Post by cbm-vic-20 »

gehwartzen wrote: post #67
contravariant wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth "Gaming" is broad enough to capture pretty much any 'non-chemical' activity that can be addicting. There's a somewhat grey area between "Gaming" and "Gambling", but I think it's fair to consider "Gambling" a subset of "Gaming" where the games actually pay out money (or something of monetary value). This probably doesn't match the WHO definition though.

There are people that spend most of their available hours staring at screens of graphs while trading various tokens in order to achieve the highest score... but of course we call them professionals not addicts.

Hey, leave Eve Online out of this.

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#134

Post by ericdykstra »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #85

I started playing Starcraft and watching it about 2 years ago. I’ve always had an obsessive mind and had stopped playing games since high school. It’s reached a point where I almost dedicate every free moment to playing. Games are incredibly addictive and it can be hard to stop. Back when I didn’t play I never understood why people play games so much. Games used to be only for geeks and boys but now everybody plays t…

Starcraft and RTS is general is a great game that rewards higher-level strategy thinking, attention management, and a number of other skills. Becoming proficient is no joke, and pros need to spend more of their time practicing than traditional sports because there is less of a physical tax from practice.

But it's just like any hobby. If it's not your profession, you need to make sure you're not putting your long-term health or the health of your relationships or other responsibilities aside just for quick shot of pleasure or adrenaline.

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#135

Post by sdiepend »

gehwartzen wrote: post #67
contravariant wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth "Gaming" is broad enough to capture pretty much any 'non-chemical' activity that can be addicting. There's a somewhat grey area between "Gaming" and "Gambling", but I think it's fair to consider "Gambling" a subset of "Gaming" where the games actually pay out money (or something of monetary value). This probably doesn't match the WHO definition though.

There are people that spend most of their available hours staring at screens of graphs while trading various tokens in order to achieve the highest score... but of course we call them professionals not addicts.

There are people that spend most of their available hours playing video games against other players to get the most kills, wins, ... but of course we call them esports athletes.

For some people it's a job that generates income for others it's an addiction that impairs proper functioning.

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#136

Post by sdiepend »

bitL wrote: post #116
icebraining wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"experts in psychology and financial planning say the number of professionals offering to treat money disorders has multiplied in the last few years." https://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/health/25iht-25money.1647... As for career, workaholism is certainly considered a dysfunction.

> for career, workaholism is certainly considered a dysfunction You meant a pre-requisite for a promotion, right?

To the clueless level https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#137

Post by ericdykstra »

mattlondon wrote: post #132
slazaro wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it a single-player game then? I think I'm out of touch with newer games...

They're single-player in that you play on your own, but you play on your own with a lot of other people playing on their own. So you could be on a server doing your own thing, and if you see another character whilst playing, that could be a human person doing their own thing, or it could be a NPC doing their own thing (but with the option of interacting with other human players - chat/trade/fighting etc) It is essent…

Let's say your in a game with PVP, are you saying you should just be able to "safely despawn" to avoid a fight that you think you're going to lose?

Just because you personally have a problem with the way some games work doesn't mean every single game designer needs to shape their programs to your preference. If you don't like it, play a different game.

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#138

Post by nvarsj »

cirgue wrote: post #125
announcerman wrote: post #107

Is obsessing over things related to real life like social ties, money, career, or anything else that will surely pass after you die a disorder? If it isn't then why not?

Because activities related to those things create sustained material security and personal fulfillment. Your efforts at building a strong network of friends pay dividends for decades, the equivalent amount of time playing video games has no bearing on your life a year from now.

It's certainly possible to build "a strong network of friends" by playing games. Many people game specifically for that reason, or at least a large part of it.

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#139

Post by bitL »

sdiepend wrote: post #136
bitL wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for career, workaholism is certainly considered a dysfunction You meant a pre-requisite for a promotion, right?

To the clueless level https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

:D I wish it weren't so truthful...

Re: ‘Gaming disorder’ is officially recognized by the World Health Organization

#140

Post by announcerman »

cirgue wrote: post #125
announcerman wrote: post #107

Is obsessing over things related to real life like social ties, money, career, or anything else that will surely pass after you die a disorder? If it isn't then why not?

Because activities related to those things create sustained material security and personal fulfillment. Your efforts at building a strong network of friends pay dividends for decades, the equivalent amount of time playing video games has no bearing on your life a year from now.

So in your opinion all efforts that result in the optimization or improvement of something decided as relevant by yourself are worthwhile?
Post reply on HN