Getting bored with gaming

[Sulaco]

Don't get me wrong, video games are great...but they are the "saturated fats" of human activity.

If that's true, then movie and TV watching, the two largest "downtime activities" are straight rat poison.

 

[zinfamous]

If that's true, then movie and TV watching, the two largest "downtime activities" are straight rat poison.

no, not at all. the problem with video games is that they can trigger more serious addictive habits--the instant gratification fulfillment you get with certain games.

some of this can be done with TV, but there are few to zero video games out there that really challenge you to think beyond that 10-40 min learning curve required to figure out how to play an individual game.

especially today--most games are designed around fetch missions that see you going from place to place essentially repeating the same motion again and again.

as much as I love a game like Fallout, it is essentially a long string of fetch activities.

I think there are some small puzzle games out there that do offer stimulation beyond simple, meaningless, instant gratification, but there is simply no video game--ever--that requires the brain activity of, say, chess.

Sure, TV has its own addictive nature, but when you get into film, you can either choose to stupidify yourself and latch on the the same kind of worthless instant gratification by limiting yourself to worthless crap [insert Michael Bay], or watch stimulating, thought-provoking fare. The bulk of TV programming doesn't offer you this choice, but you do have it with film. ...and you certainly don't have that video games.

add in MMO's that, after a certain point, you convince yourself that you have to be online, doing something, for a certain amount of time, and often these events involve you waiting on a timer to determine when a quest is finished, when you can enter, whatever...seriously, imagine how eye-opening it would be if we had video of people sitting at their desks playing these games for as many extended sessions as they play them.

 

[Bonesdad]

If that's true, then movie and TV watching, the two largest "downtime activities" are straight rat poison.

I don't really count watching TV or movies as an activity, but I don't think there is much difference between the activity of PC Gaming and watching TV. BUT...at least with gaming you are directly interacting with the story, instead of passively watching it unfold. Edit: but I do agree that a few movies and TV shows are definitely more mentally challenging/stimulating than any video game.

And I take exception....I believe football and bike riding are superior to gaming at hand eye coordination. With each you are in 3D, and the outcome of your actions are immediate and real.

 

[jlee]

I think there are some small puzzle games out there that do offer stimulation beyond simple, meaningless, instant gratification, but there is simply no video game--ever--that requires the brain activity of, say, chess.

Shens. :awe:

 

[Sulaco]

no, not at all. the problem with video games is that they can trigger more serious addictive habits--the instant gratification fulfillment you get with certain games.

some of this can be done with TV, but there are few to zero video games out there that really challenge you to think beyond that 10-40 min learning curve required to figure out how to play an individual game.

Have you ever played a strategy game? And no, StarCraft and Company of Heroes do not count.
Basically, Paradox Interactive (and really a myriad of other lesser known companies) just invalidated that entire point. Sure the junk outweighs the substance, just like with movies and television, but there is still a massive world out there of games requiring real thought beyond "Fallout" and "MMOs".
Please try Pride of Nations, Victoria II, Hearts of Iron, Combat Mission, etc, and then revisit that statement.

The bulk of TV programming doesn't offer you this choice, but you do have it with film. ...and you certainly don't have that video games.

Don't have what, exactly? Choice? I can "choose" to not play the IGN "FPS-of-the-minute" and play any of the many, many deeper, more complex games out there anytime I want.
I'm not sure what you're trying to argue by saying you don't have that choice in videogames. But if you believe that, you need to expand your horizons, as they say.

 

[LokutusofBorg]

I would argue that even StarCraft requires chess-level analytical skills. It puts a focus on APM, but some chess matches have time limits per turn.

There are easily tons of video games that make you use your brain as much or more as chess does.

 

[boneycat]

What we need is Postal 3! Something about pissing fire in the 2nd one made me laugh...

 

[HeXen]

i am looking forward to Hard Reset cause its about damned time for a good cyberpunk game.

What we need is Postal 3! Something about pissing fire in the 2nd one made me laugh...

whwat happened to it, did it get canned? i remember seeing many vids of it running in 3rd person on source engine

 

[brandonstale]

i never get bored with games, since i was a kid playing game become to be my habit until now... many game came out and many more to come, plenty of selections and you really enjoy ofcourse its your choose of game, well if your kinda game is boring then that's make sense

 

[pontifex]

I haven't really been playing much myself. I used to be able to sit and play games for hours on end. now i find myself playing for maybe an hour and getting bored.

not many good games out lately (and by good, I also mean games I'm interested in, not just quality).

I'm really like Deus Ex: Human Revolution at the moment though.

 

[Dankk]

there is simply no video game--ever--that requires the brain activity of, say, chess.

Sorry, but I don't think that's true at all. What kinds of games do you play? Ever played a strategy game before? I'm not talking about Civilization or Starcraft either. I'm talking about Europa Universalis, Victoria, or even Alpha Centauri. These are games that consist of in-depth warfare, trade, economy, and diplomacy, typically involving very tight strategy on both micro and macro levels.

I'll be damned if any of those titles don't give me more intellectual stimulation than a game of chess.

when you get into film, you can either choose to stupidify yourself and latch on the the same kind of worthless instant gratification by limiting yourself to worthless crap [insert Michael Bay], or watch stimulating, thought-provoking fare. The bulk of TV programming doesn't offer you this choice, but you do have it with film. ...and you certainly don't have that video games.

Again, this is an outright falsehood. So... you've never played a thought-provoking video game before? Again I have to ask, what types of games do you play then? Some of my most profound and thought-provoking moments have come from video games (and movies as well... I don't want to imply that either entertainment medium is superior to the other, which seems to be what you're doing).

Some titles I can think of off the top of my head are The Witcher, STALKER, Bioshock, and Indigo Prophecy. Typically they are games with very well-written storylines and narratives. Sometimes they involve making complex moral decisions with no clear consequences. (Games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect don't count; their "moral decisions" are usually just "Hey thur, I'm Commondor Shophord, I can choose to be good, neutral, or evil, herp derp.")

That's part of what I love about video games though. As an interactive medium, it's more diverse than any other form of entertainment. You have you're mindless shoot-em-ups, and your simple puzzle games, all the way down to your intricate RPGs and sci-fi epics with some in-depth commentary about the human condition.

30 years ago you would've had a point. Nowadays, current technology gives us video games that are equally as intelligent and thought-provoking as what movies are capable of.

It sounds like you're unaware of many of the games we have out today. Either that, or you're an old man who refuses to accept that video games have reached the same quality as movies, all while telling kids to get off your lawn.

 

[TheSlamma]

What has really taken it's toll on me is the people when you go on pub servers (griefers). Back when Quake 1 and Unreal 1 were hitting the market you went online and you could have good matches, now it's exploits galore or people who clearly don't pay a mortgage or have a job that just play all damn day and the skills matching crap doesn't work at all or just want to make the experience miserable.

 

[Northern Lawn]

I just think there are so many games now that when a good one comes out that raises the bar we just get spoiled. Recently I got addicted to Bad Company 2 (500 hours) then I got bored and couldn't find a game till I started in on Defense Grid (over 100 hours) now I'm back to being bored and waiting for a good game. Shogun was crap, Deus ex was crap... waiting for BF3 I guess.

 

[brandonstale]

if you get bored of playing game by yourself why don't you try play with your friends?
the more the happier, things will be different if were accompanied while playing...

 

[GullyFoyle]

The author makes some interesting observations about how games are perceived by different age ranges in this article: 5 Ways to Tell You're Getting Too Old for Video Games

 

[Texashiker]

The author makes some interesting observations about how games are perceived by different age ranges in this article:

I have always enjoyed deathmatch style games that require thinking and planning.

But as I grow older, I think I am enjoying FPS strategy/teamwork games (l4d, l4d2) more then say team fortress classic and fortress forever.

Being in my 40s, I think my flinch reflexes have relaxed over the past 15 years. I find it more and more difficult to keep up with the kids that play flinch based games, or games that include weapons for flinch reflexes.

While watching youtube video that about sniper skills, I do not understand how people can be making headshots when I can not even see the person. The shooter is acquiring the target, aiming and getting a headshot in a fraction of a second. I can not compete in reflex based games like that anymore.

But what I can do, is work as a team, plan attacks, observe the enemy and exploit the enemies weaknesses.

Where kids want to get in there and shoot it out, I am planning a coordinated attack with my team.

What is aggravating is when you have people that do not have mics, and refuse to work as a team. In other words, its aggravating when a team has a mix of kids and adults

 

[zinfamous]

Sorry, but I don't think that's true at all. What kinds of games do you play? Ever played a strategy game before? I'm not talking about Civilization or Starcraft either. I'm talking about Europa Universalis, Victoria, or even Alpha Centauri. These are games that consist of in-depth warfare, trade, economy, and diplomacy, typically involving very tight strategy on both micro and macro levels.

I'll be damned if any of those titles don't give me more intellectual stimulation than a game of chess.


Again, this is an outright falsehood. So... you've never played a thought-provoking video game before? Again I have to ask, what types of games do you play then? Some of my most profound and thought-provoking moments have come from video games (and movies as well... I don't want to imply that either entertainment medium is superior to the other, which seems to be what you're doing).

Some titles I can think of off the top of my head are The Witcher, STALKER, Bioshock, and Indigo Prophecy. Typically they are games with very well-written storylines and narratives. Sometimes they involve making complex moral decisions with no clear consequences. (Games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect don't count; their "moral decisions" are usually just "Hey thur, I'm Commondor Shophord, I can choose to be good, neutral, or evil, herp derp.")

That's part of what I love about video games though. As an interactive medium, it's more diverse than any other form of entertainment. You have you're mindless shoot-em-ups, and your simple puzzle games, all the way down to your intricate RPGs and sci-fi epics with some in-depth commentary about the human condition.

30 years ago you would've had a point. Nowadays, current technology gives us video games that are equally as intelligent and thought-provoking as what movies are capable of.

It sounds like you're unaware of many of the games we have out today. Either that, or you're an old man who refuses to accept that video games have reached the same quality as movies, all while telling kids to get off your lawn.

I've been playing PC games for over 2 decades, and I've certainly played Alpha Centauri and the related. I like Economy management and all that, I much prefer strategy to FPS, but my point still stands.

What does the kind of strategy you glean from these games do for you in the real world? I think the type of problem solving you gain from chess is actually absorbed--with video games, you have no need for imagination--colors, graphic representations of what you are doing, this literally shuts off certain brain centers as those calculations are no longer needed.

I don't mean to suggest that games are not capable of complex strategy--they certainly are. My point is that there is nothing to gain from any of it, ...aside from applying to other similar video games.

It is simply due to the nature of video games and the type of primary response that they trigger--instant gratification, that they provide no real use for an individual. This is where the term "mind-numbing" comes from.

It is an argument of how your brain responds to and more importantly--retains the information from stimulus. With video games, everything is given to you, you're only input is to learn and manipulate the system within the game, and then you can essentially shut off and proceed. This is basically the "learning curve" which you certainly recognize from game to game. Once you've hit that threshold, you are completely shut down. It doesn't mean you can't enjoy it, that it is no longer fun or challenging, just that the primary activity that could possibly be beneficial is no longer active.

This is what....30 minutes with the average game; up to 2-3 hours for more "serious" games?

 

[12andy]

I'm sure most of us have seen this, but for those that may have not:

Good chuckle once in awhile, let alone a rude awakening.

As of late, my interests have shifted towards a more "life-like" form of FPS gaming = paintball. Getting into airsoft now (very expensive for Canadians, thus the scene is nowhere near as big as it can and should be).

Personally, for those that enjoy the FPS genre, you owe it to yourselves to try these activities. Such an adrenaline rush that can only be matched by very few things out there, IMO.

 

[Sulaco]

I've been playing PC games for over 2 decades, and I've certainly played Alpha Centauri and the related. I like Economy management and all that, I much prefer strategy to FPS, but my point still stands.

What does the kind of strategy you glean from these games do for you in the real world? I think the type of problem solving you gain from chess is actually absorbed--with video games, you have no need for imagination--colors, graphic representations of what you are doing, this literally shuts off certain brain centers as those calculations are no longer needed.

I don't mean to suggest that games are not capable of complex strategy--they certainly are. My point is that there is nothing to gain from any of it, ...aside from applying to other similar video games.

I'm sorry, but I think you might just be talking out of your ass here.

Please tell me how Chess offers valuable life lessons that can be applied elsewhere in daily life, but an in-depth strategy game cannot? I actually learned more from my days of playing Fields of Glory on DOS and about the Napoleonic era than most high school and college age kids, which helped enormously on later tests and studies. So, right there, your last point is disproved.

Again, I don't believe you've played many of those games to which we are referring, or else you'd see the fallacy here.
Playing something like Europa Universalis, Victoria 2, or Hearts of Iron, you learn something at least about the real-world history, about actual historical military and geopolitical strategy (in the case of something like Hearts of Iron), diplomacy, supply chains, and economics.

And it's not just the major geopolitical and warfare simulators, even something like Sim City can teach something about fundamental zoning, taxation, and expansion.
Heck, Flight Simulator taught plenty about real world aircraft, travel times, and flight physics.

 

[zinfamous]

I'm sorry, but I think you might just be talking out of your ass here.

Please tell me how Chess offers valuable life lessons that can be applied elsewhere in daily life, but an in-depth strategy game cannot? I actually learned more from my days of playing Fields of Glory on DOS and about the Napoleonic era than most high school and college age kids, which helped enormously on later tests and studies. So, right there, your last point is disproved.

Again, I don't believe you've played many of those games to which we are referring, or else you'd see the fallacy here.
Playing something like Europa Universalis, Victoria 2, or Hearts of Iron, you learn something at least about the real-world history, about actual historical military and geopolitical strategy (in the case of something like Hearts of Iron), diplomacy, supply chains, and economics.

And it's not just the major geopolitical and warfare simulators, even something like Sim City can teach something about fundamental zoning, taxation, and expansion.
Heck, Flight Simulator taught plenty about real world aircraft, travel times, and flight physics.

lol. ok there, champ.



I'm not talking about rote fact memorization, which you might as well read a freaking encyclopedia for (Still better than your video game for the same "knowledge")

I'm talking about applied problem solving skills--the ability to think and make decision. Yes, applied problem solving.

feeding your brain constant streams of various types of info--video, colors, noises, text, is oversaturating. You simply don't need to absorb any of it, because it is all done for you with a video game.

Playing games like Chess, or pool, interacting with others, you have a lot more active processing going on, so it is far more likely to be retained.

Video games trigger instant gratification, in quite a few studies, you see the same type of endorphin-stimulant response that addicts get with alcohol and other drugs.

Sure, there are plenty of in-depth strategy games out there (I already acknowledged this) that will offer you some historical perspective, and even problem solving--but only after you've figured out that game mechanic--the learning curve. after that, it's basically just "Oo, pretty colors! or "Head shot! Time to teabag the noob!" etc...

This is rather basic...

 

[Arg Clin]

There's certainly no shortage of crap out there. Seems to me the market could handle much more quality titles like Dragon Age Origins, The Witcher, Mass Effect, GTA.

Borderlands is fun for coop, but for singleplayer we need some more titles with real story content like those above.

 

[Sulaco]

Video games trigger instant gratification, in quite a few studies, you see the same type of endorphin-stimulant response that addicts get with alcohol and other drugs.

Again, this is all a nonsensical straw man, since I doubt you can find a single "study" which evaluates an actual strategy game against any of the things you listed. What you're condescendingly throwing out are comparisons of social activities vs FPS and whatever the popular game-of-the-moment is. No one is arguing that the majority of those types of games are stimulating, but your assertion that in-depth strategy games are inferior to a game of chess or "pool" is quite simply laughable.

Sure, there are plenty of in-depth strategy games out there (I already acknowledged this) that will offer you some historical perspective, and even problem solving--but only after you've figured out that game mechanic--the learning curve. after that, it's basically just "Oo, pretty colors! or "Head shot! Time to teabag the noob!" etc...

This is rather basic...

Yes, because "Head Shot!" and "Time to teabag the noob!" are so applicable to Europa Universalis, and everybody plays The Operational Art of War for "the pretty colors!".
Again, statements like that pretty much prove you've never played anything more in-depth than a Sid Meier strategy game, and simply don;t understand what you're talking about.

 

[Dankk]

Video games trigger instant gratification, in quite a few studies, you see the same type of endorphin-stimulant response that addicts get with alcohol and other drugs.

Uh oh. Better not tell Fox News about this.

Although for all I know, they already know that fact, and have probably spun it to hell and back a million times over.

it's basically just "Oo, pretty colors! or "Head shot! Time to teabag the noob!" etc...

"Time to teabag the noob"? I'm pretty sure the only people who say that are 12-year-olds playing Halo or Cawa Dooty on their Xbox. Most gamers, even FPS gamers, aren't that retarded.

 

[aigomorla]

If you never tried Hunted: the Demon's Forge its pretty fun with a buddy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl10tC6oiUY

its like gears of war, so its not really open, and its only a 2 player coop, but it is most definitely interesting.

Dead Island is No fun single player... coop and it changes the game entirely.
Once again, if u have a buddy to play with, its a worthwhile buy... only if u have a constant buddy to play with.

Im lost in tropico... sim games have got to me...

 

[mirandu04]

Just quit RIft (a mmorpg that was pretty nice). and OMG i am so bored. it's so hard to go back seeing movies and TV series.