Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by XCSme 2124 days ago
Weren't there multiple studies showing that games gained experience is useful for the real world?

* Social - How many people have learned to trade and avoid scams IRL by playing RuneScape? No RuneScape player would have falled for the recent "double your BTC" Twitter scam. * Strategy- From all kinds of games (chess, strategy, fighting games, shooters, etc.) * Working in teams - MOBAs, Rocket League, Shooters. You start flaming your team, you lose. * Health - I know people that hate doing exercise, yet they played hundreds of hours of Table Tennis in VR and losing weight. * Self-esteem - Games allow people to clearly know when they are really good at something. They also make it easy to see progress. So, you might feel like you suck at everything IRL, but you find that one game that you are good at and then people even respect you for that and look up to you. * Mental health - Might be for escapism but also could help you express your anger or other feelings in a game instead of the real world This list could go on forever.

> They're self contained This is so, so wrong. I don't know if you are a gamer or not, but gaming communities are huge. Once you start playing a game, you will want to discuss it with others, learn from others, share your experience with others. Not only that, but through a game, the game developers communicate to you in a sense that no other experience can (books, movies). Yes, the "bits" that make up a game are self-contained as any other physical object, but the story behind them and what they express spreads way further than themselves. I think "real" software is a lot more self-contained, plus most of it is created to hinder value creation, not to actually create value.

1 comments

> Social - How many people have learned to trade and avoid scams IRL by playing RuneScape?

This may be true, but RuneScape players do not seek out the game to improve that skill. They don't think, "well, I'm pretty crappy at trading and dealing with scammers. I guess I'll go play RuneScape, even though it's not fun at all, to improve that skill."

The other examples in your paragraph are in the same vein. I am not saying that playing games does not have positive benefits. I'm saying that most players do not choose to play games primarily for those benefits.

> I know people that hate doing exercise, yet they played hundreds of hours of Table Tennis in VR and losing weight.

My point exactly. If all they cared about was losing weight, they would exercise and play Table Tennis at the same rate. The reason they play VR tennis is because it's more usable.

> I don't know if you are a gamer or not, but gaming communities are huge.

Not much of a gamer these days, but I worked at EA for eight years.

You're taking umbrage at what I said because games are clearly close to your heart, but read a little closer. I'm not attacking games. I'm doing the opposite. I'm pointing out that games must be fantastically designed because people will choose to sink hours into them regardless of whether they provide practical benefit or not.

Let's say a study came out that showed that RuneScape actually did not improve your real-life trading skills. Do you think that would significantly affect how much people played it?

Hmm, so your point is that the main reason play games is for entertainment and not to improve a specific skill. But, does it matter? If it was not for games, they wouldn't have improved those skills at all, as they were not actively looking to improve them, or are doing deliberate practices is too boring or intense for some.

> If all they cared about was losing weight, they would exercise and play Table Tennis at the same rate.

They did care about losing weight, but going to the gym or exercising was not something that they did before or were ever planning to do, simply because they didn't consider it to be an enjoyable activity. My point is, if it was not for VR Table Tennis, they wouldn't have lost that weight. Same with other skills, if it was not for the games that were facilitating the development of certain skills, most likely most would never aquire those skills, which, for the most part have clear real-life applicability and benefits.

I think it's the same like saying tracking steps taken using mobile's device gamification feature has no real-world benefit. Yet, my dad actively started walking more just to reach the daily steps goal. If it was not for that goal, he wouldn't have started walking more.

> Let's say a study came out that showed that RuneScape actually did not improve your real-life trading skills. Do you think that would significantly affect how much people played it?

There are certainly games and gamification features that make it really easy to learn a specific skill. That being said, most people play games because they like it, not to actively improve a skill. In this RuneScape example, no, I wouldn't care about the studies, but while playing the game I would definitely be happy to see me getting better are trading (eg. selling fish next to the fishing spot at a cheap price, or travelling a long way to the bank and sell it at a higher price, or even creating huge stocks of fish and then waiting for a price increase before selling). I think games are really good at making people find new skills and things they are good at, without them actively looking to improve in any way. Once you find a skill that you enjoy (eg. trading), you can go further, outside the gaming world, and actively look to improve that skill or use it in the real world.

> I'm pointing out that games must be fantastically designed because people will choose to sink hours into them regardless of whether they provide practical benefit or not.

People sink hours in anything regardless they provide a practical benefit or not: games, books, netflix, hobbies in general. There are many different type of games, from those that directly play with your dopamine system and have the dreaded in-app-purchases monetizaton, to those that tell a good story or are highly competitive and make you feel good for defeating others. People have various reasons to play games, and one of them could be the well-designed game loop, but this one is usually the most relevant part in the addictive pay-to-win games mentioned before.