12 ms·

I think it's less about the screen time, and more about what's on the screen. Echoing some of the existing comments: Games and sites today are vastly different

I think it's less about the screen time, and more about what's on the screen. Echoing some of the existing comments: Games and sites today are vastly different than they were 20 years ago. Games like Civilization, Quake, Diablo, C&C, Mortal Kombat, Tony Hawk etc... were definitely addictive. But modern games like Fortnite and Clash of Clans are not engineered the same way. They are specifically designed to function like a slot machine. I was an avid "gamer" growing up. I wasn't always the most responsible with it. Probably overdid it a lot. But I can see with my own child, this is a different ball-game altogether. Not sure what the fix is either, other than ruthless enforcement of quotas.

kartan 8y ago
> They are specifically designed to function like a slot machine. I work in the gambling industry, making literally slot machines. Slot machines are heavily regulated and there is a lot of "engagement" tricks that can not be used in the gambling industry. The kind of trick that Candy Crush will use. The dangerous side of gambling is for people that think that they can "win money". But the games themselves are kind of boring by design. Regulations force us to make them boring. (And that is a good thing, I will not work on this industry otherwise). The future of on-line games and mobile games is regulation. Micro-payments, push-notifications, etc. cannot be used without limits. People have right to their mental health more than companies have to higher profits.
- danesparza 8y ago
  You've gotten me wondering: Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? Is that a state-by-state regulation? A federal regulation? And does the regulating code specifically mention physical machines? Thanks in advance for satisfying my curiosity.
  - gbear605 8y ago
    I’m not entirely up to date, but my impression was that as long as the rewards are not redeemable for cash, it’s fine.
  - medobs41 8y ago
    Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? I can answer for the US: Games aren’t subject to regulation because for the past few decades one party has made it their goal to destroy regulatory power to allow the wealthy to enrich themselves. One party in the US has been completely captured by billionaires and corporations. This started in the 1970s around the time the Koches founded the Koch Institute (now Cato), and the Scaife, Bradley, Olin, and other rich families started using big money to influenfe politics. Continued through Reagan, his tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks (including rolling back Fairness Doctrine which allowed Limbaugh to fill the airwaves with propaganda). Then Gingrich, then Murdoch who kicked off Fox News. Now the US has one party that is a coalition of billionaires for funding and white identity politics for votes— and the only thing that party cares about is the wealth of their billionaire donors. We’re not going to have any regulations to protect people until we fix US politics and media. (Good read on the history by respected historian: https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/50/divided-we-stand/ https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/50/divided-we-stand/ )
    - scarmig 8y ago
      That's generic and not really convincing except to the already converted. Getting into the concrete example of casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, on the other hand...
    - manfredo 8y ago
      This does not hold to to scrutiny. The case that was appealed to the supreme Court that establishes that video games are protected by the First Amendment was challenging a law championed by a California Democrat, but was mostly overturned by liberal justices. What video games have to do with "white idntity politics" is beyond me. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Ass%27n https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merch...
    - briandear 8y ago
      And yet the tech industry overwhelmingly supports Democrats? Partisan politics has nothing to do with the topic at hand. But, if you want to go there, I might suggest that Cato is a libertarian organization and libertarianism is about the rights of the individual to make their own choices rather than having the state dictate those choices. Bringing the Koch brothers into a debate over addictive screens is just silly.
  - manfredo 8y ago
    Video games are protected by the first amendment right to free speech and expression. Slot machines are gambling devices that take in and pay out money. The two aren't really comparable. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the regulations on slot machines only apply when they're used in real money gambling. Presumably, if someone built a slot machine that didn't take in or dispense tokens, and could not be used in gambling in any way, it wouldn't be subject to those regulations. But obviously this is a moot point since a slot machine without a payout is just a glorified random number generator.
    - Retric 8y ago
      Not necessarily. Right now the industry is largely unregulated, but that's more a question of enforcement than any sort of real legal protection. In the US you can't build a slot machine that accepts money and dispenses tokens that have value. That's often how things operate in Japan, but the same model is generally illegal in the US. It's questionable if spending real money on virtual currency to buy "loot boxes" that randomly give things of value is legal. And if that's legal, it's not obvious if changing the rate of rewards is legal.
      - manfredo 8y ago
        In game items don't have value. If they did, then effectively all games with RNG mechanics would be banned. Heck, even the original Rogue would fall under that umbrella.
        Retric 8y ago
        Depends on the game. In multi player games where people can exchange items, people will pay real world money for other players items. EX: People buying WoW gold.
        ThrowawayR2 8y ago
        > "buying WoW gold" IIRC, Blizzard doesn't profit from that directly and explicitly prohibits it in their ToS.
  - mediaman 8y ago
    This is actually a rapidly developing area of law. There is a lawsuit brought by Washington State that is arguing that virtual credits, in connection with games of chance, constitutes "something of value" that is covered by the state's gambling laws. If the state wins, it could result in an expansion of regulation of this type of mobile game. Here's an article with some more detail. https://www.geekwire.com/2018/game-show-network-hit-online-gambling-lawsuit-latest-case-targeting-gaming-companies/ https://www.geekwire.com/2018/game-show-network-hit-online-g...
    - btbuildem 8y ago
      That's interesting! Even though they are not legal tender (and cannot be exchanged for goods and services etc), the argument is that they are still OF VALUE for those who hold them.
  - kartan 8y ago
    > Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? The regulations were designed for casinos before video games became so popular and way before mobile games and micro-transactions even existed. Example of gambling regulation for New Jersey: https://www.nj.gov/oag/ge/docs/Regulations/MergedRegulations110413.pdf https://www.nj.gov/oag/ge/docs/Regulations/MergedRegulations... > Is that a state-by-state regulation? Yes. Delaware, Nevada, New Jersey and Pennsylvania allow gambling. But I guess that at any moment local or federal regulations could be created. > And does the regulating code specifically mention physical machines? There is specific regulations for casinos, for on-line gambling, for jackpots, sports betting, etc. e.g. CHAPTER 69O INTERNET AND MOBILE GAMING from the linked PDF Example of definitions: * "Authorized Internet or mobile game" means any game authorized by the Division for use with an Internet or mobile gaming system. * "Client terminal" means any device that is used to interact with a gaming system for the purpose of conducting server-based gaming activity. * "Data warehouse" means a system of one or more servers located in New Jersey for the purpose of storing transactions received from the primary gaming equipment. * "Dormant account" means an Internet gaming account, which has had no patron initiated activity for a period of one year.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
    > Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? Slot machines are regulated because they fall under the category of gambling and video games don't meet the legal definition of gambling. (Although, I'd agree that it's starting to seem more and more as if they should.) There's a pretty good explanation of the criteria at https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1146&context=grrj https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti... but the brief summary (from the article) is "Gambling consists of three elements: consideration, prize and chance. If any one of those three elements is missing, the game is simply not gambling (Rose, 1986))." By looking at those criteria, there's a lot of ways video game companies can defend themselves. The strongest one IMO being that, from a legal standpoint, there is no prize. You "win" things or get drops but the TOS of all games say that the player does not own them (or anything else in the game) in any legal sense. The analogy would be more like a carnival ride where you are paying for the experience rather than the expectation of getting anything material in return.
    - a13n 8y ago
      > the TOS of all games say that the player does not own them Yet loads of people sell their in-game items (that they got through chance) for real money. So in a sense, they do own them.
      - setr 8y ago
        Usually despite being banned by the TOS, as a black market kind of operation. More problematicly, im not sure how youd stop it from extending to say WoW gold-selling, or even cartridges with 100% saves on them. People will attribute value to anything for any number of reasons, but I’m not sure you can make regulation on anything beyond “encouraging” such behavior. (And I would assume these companies already actively discourage it; you’re not supposed to be able to get money back out of the system!)
        intended 8y ago
        I see that definition expanding. We're well past the point where virtual entitites are imaginable by the general populace. Getting a virtual gun, creates an actual advantage in the game your are playing online. While ultimate ownership of the code may be fraught, but practical day to day ownership and usage is not (unless you are fighting a particularly contrived case).
  - GVIrish 8y ago
    > You've gotten me wondering: Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? Probably because the problem is not perceived as bad enough to get regulated yet. The industry was getting dangerously close to this when there were all those cases of kids racking up huge bills through in-app purchases on iPhones, but that has died down enough that it's not on the radar anymore. I think if the games industry gets too aggressive again, regulation will sweep in.
  - dv_dt 8y ago
    Certain forms of video game dynamics: e.g. some loot box mechanics have recently been identified as being covered by gambling regulations in some nations. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-04-25-now-belgium-declares-loot-boxes-gambling-and-therefore-illegal https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-04-25-now-belgium-de...
  - SN76477 8y ago
    Great idea! If a game has micro transactions, then treat it as gambling. Problem solved.
  - agumonkey 8y ago
    Paying in games is extremely recent.
- MildlySerious 8y ago
  Can you recommend any literature on the topic of these "tricks"? If you're not in the industry, awareness is probably the best weapon against these practices.
  - kartan 8y ago
    > Can you recommend any literature on the topic of these "tricks"? I am talking about basic stuff like: * Push notifications reminding you that you should play the game. * Let you win some money but then lose it unless you make a payment. * A bar that fills faster at the beginning and then starts to fill slower. So it looks like you are closer to a goal that you actually are. * Show a deck of cards that instead of the 52 standard cards, expected by the players, has another configuration that makes you lose more often. etc. Any mobile games video - like https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014450/Behavioral-Economics-and-Social-Games https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014450/Behavioral-Economics-a... - has a lot of forbidden techniques for on-line gambling.
    - wool_gather 8y ago
      Even more basic than this -- games as far back as the original Zelda use it (and I'm sure further) -- is intermittent variable reward[0]. This little cognitive meathook has been almost weaponized at this point. [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Intermittent_reinforcement_schedules https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Intermittent_rei...
  - rchaud 8y ago
    I'm not who you're responding to, but I like this longread from the Verge about the specific design of slot machines that fuel addictive behaviour by users: https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/6/8544303/casino-slot-machine-gambling-addiction-psychology-mobile-games https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/6/8544303/casino-slot-machin...
    - kartan 8y ago
      > As a result, modern slots pay out on approximately 45 percent of all spins, instead of the 3 percent of traditional slots. I do not get this. slots pay out (RTP Return To Player) is around 90%. The article mixes volatility with RTP. > Lower-volatility games often have greater appeal in 'locals markets' than in destination resort markets like Las Vegas or Atlantic City This looks correct. > During "flow," time speeds up (hours feel like minutes) or slows down (reactions can be made instantly) and the mind reaches a state of almost euphoric equilibrium. Most sensible regulations force you to send reminders to the players that interrupt this flow. On-line betting usually has harder regulations, as to play in a casino you need to physically get there but on-line is always available. Usually in high regulated markets each spin should last at least 3 seconds. This is so you cannot get a fast continuous flow, but the pace is forcefully slowed down. Physical casino slots and on-line slots are slightly different as products and regulation wise. > "People only have so much leisure time and there’s a lot of activity on iPhones" Slot machines are competing against Candy Crush (and Royal Charm Slots from the same company), Netflix, YouTube, etc. > Eyal criticized slot machines for what he said was a business model dependent on addicted players — "that industry, I have a problem with," he said. And the solution is to regulated it in a way that the most addictive aspects are not possible to implement. Or to prohibit it completely, not just to move it underground. If anyone expects that the industry is going to regulate itself they are for a hard ride. No industry does that for real.
- sigi45 8y ago
  Sry what? You have no issue working in that industry because those games are 'boring'? But you do not have any issue that you create something which is literally boring and only there for other people to put there money in and play never again (because it is so boring) or lose everything?
  - kartan 8y ago
    > You have no issue working in that industry because those games are 'boring'? Not because they are boring, but because they are less addictive than they can be. So they are "boring" in comparison. If we were allowed to use all tricks that mobile and on-line games do it will be really bad for society as it will create more addiction. It is like Coca-Cola. Even that so much sugar makes it problematic, I find it better that at least does not include cocaine like it did in 1891. Does that make Coca-Cola good? No, it does not. But I find that makes it a lesser evil. Even that cocaine-less Coke is more "boring" nowadays, it is the right thing to do.
    - sigi45 8y ago
      I don't know. I have never seen anyone buying more coca cola on a weekend than i would be able to afford with my salary. I have seen people putting shit ton of money into those machines and they lost easily 100,- Euros per Hour? I'm sure there is always a white/gray/black thing going on but i do put a slot machine at the very end of black not in gray or white at all. Coca Cola and the water stealing and the addiction is btw. an additional example for something not that good, it does not make a slot machine any better.
- OpenBSD-reich 8y ago
  I'm waiting for you guys to implement a separate "screen" or "application" on all slots, which is a cryptocurrency or Forex or CFD (or even pretend "securities") client hooking up to the casinos' central exchange system, and the casino takes no positions long or short but just charges a very small % tx fee on each transaction. If it's cryptocurrency, then have 1:1 conversion between cryptocurrency and the various chip species each representing said currency (like Doge chips, Litecoin chips, Bitcoin chips, Ethereum chips, etc) so the incentive to trade on the slots is that the player can then gamble the objects of trade directly. The keys (or casino crypto exchange authentication data) can be stored on smart card and can be carried around by the gambler. Then it's a matter of having various slots and tables which accept these other cryptos in addition to their existing dollar variants. It's like having Euro machines and tables, Renminbi machines and tables, etc.
- entee 8y ago
  I'm curious to know some examples of what is and isn't permitted. The flashing lights, interesting but not too interesting ding-dong-boom sounds, the loud massive amping up when you win something, all that is allowed and I believe (though don't quite have a source at hand) that these are provably enticing hooks. I'm sure there are things that aren't, but I'm curious as to what. I'm also curious about want Candy Crush does that a slot machine can't by regulation? Is it a level of interactivity?
  - nyghtly 8y ago
    For one, it's illegal for children to play on a slot machine.
  - kilburn 8y ago
    The most basic thing Candy Crush does that slot machines can't is adapt its behavior to the user. Candy Crush can (and does) let you play freely, only to popup the "insert coin to get help" when you are stuck. It also adjusts the game play to your level (by advancing to harder levels) so that you are always challenged and possibly get stuck. If you advance by paying, you probably will need to pay more to get further (if you failed an easier level without help you will probably fail later levels without such help). In an imaginary world, a slot machine could have a camera to track who is playing. It would let you play for free the first few times, even give you some money, but leaving you one "advance" short of the stronger payments. After some rolls, you are prompted to insert coins to get extra advances. Of course, the machine keeps the payment structure favorable to itself, but tricking you into inserting more and more coins, all the while getting you hooked into the game. It could even adjust the payment structure to be more and more in its favor the more "hooked" it detects you are. Regulation that prevents the above: 1. Slot machines cannot track users by any means. 2. The payment distribution has to fit certain parameters (think X% of money given back within N rolls)
    - tdeck 8y ago
      Casinos themselves kind of do this though, right? They give you a card with a balance to pay for games and load winnings, and sometimes they just add extra money to it if you've had a bad day to keep you playing. At least that's what I recall reading somewhere.
- sizzle 8y ago
  Very cool profession, where can I learn more about the tech behind the gambling industry, got any good recommendations? Are any start-ups shaking up the traditional slot machine gambling industry? Is it still run by shadowy Mafia types like we see in movies?
- Coincoin 8y ago
  Funny thing is some games are designed to be boring but still addictive, so that you will pay to skip playing the boring game. It totally blows my mind that people will pay to not play a game.
tejohnso 8y ago
Can you explain how overdoing it with Quake and Diablo is not the same ball-game as overdoing it with Fortnite?
- i_cant_speel 8y ago
  I think Fortnite is just a bad example. It's one of the few games where you don't feel at a complete disadvantage when you choose not to spend money on it.
  - atom-morgan 8y ago
    Yeah, if anything I think Fortnite does a good job of avoiding gambling and preserving the integrity of free-to-play. Loot crates, which are basically slot machines, don't exist. You buy what you see, a skin. They make a lot of money from skins but once again, there's no in-game advantage. It's purely cosmetic so at the end of the day even if you don't give Epic a dime you're still on a level playing field with everyone else.
    - otterpop 8y ago
      I agree, Fortnite handles this pretty well. The only thing I would describe as somewhat manipulative would be their store. Having a rotation that only lasts a day or two rather than allowing players to purchase the items that they want evokes a feeling of "If I don't purchase this skin now, how long is it going to be before I get another chance?" I have a few friends who stockpile skins that they think are "alright" just in case they want to use them in the future.
- castlecrasher2 8y ago
  A simpler example is Battlefield 1942 vs Battlefield 5, 1, or any of the recent entries: the first had zero unlocks; everything was available, and it was a game for the fun of it. In the newer entries, the unlocks and other bars you fill provide a sense of achievement and progress, and maybe that just gives players with fun objectives to do while playing but the cynic in me sees people gloating about 1000 kills with the Kolibri and thinks it's more about preying on addictive tendencies.
weeksie 8y ago
While I think your point is totally on the mark I am going to chime in like a pedantic pain in the arse and mention that Civ has been addictive as fuck since the early 90s when I ruined at least a month of my life playing just one more turn. But yes, I agree with your point in the general sense!
naravara 8y ago
>Not sure what the fix is either, other than ruthless enforcement of quotas. Or just not letting kids get into those games. At some point my wife pointed out that I had a problem disengaging from certain types of games (for me it was MOBAs specifically). They are super-addictive. It never really got in the way of anything and if I had anything else to do I would go do that, so it wouldn't really qualify as "addiction" in a DSM sense. But the issue is what it does when you don't have anything to do. They have a way of swallowing up basically ALL of your free time. And I didn't feel happier or better off for having spent my time that way, it felt more like compulsion than desire. I see a lot of young people on the internet being enslaved by compulsion like this, engaging in somewhat problematic consumption of video-games, porn, or social media. I decided to just uninstall and stop playing those sorts of games, but I was also a grown-up with life experiences, hobbies, social connections, and responsibilities before I ever started. I knew what I was missing with "real life" by letting myself sink into that so it was easy enough for me to stop, I had other, more edifying sources of dopamine to go after. Kids, often times, either don't have enough freedom of movement to go do those things or just plain don't know what else there is out there. It's the same reason drug and gambling addiction tends to take hold among people with depression.
- ip26 8y ago
  The other problem with MOBA's, at least for me- wins feel easy & shallow, the reward is small, while losses are a struggle & kind of crushing. So inevitably I sign off feeling unhappy & unfulfilled.
gaius 8y ago
Echoing some of the existing comments: Games and sites today are vastly different than they were 20 years ago. In the old days, the focus was on playability. Games were fun. But a new genre has emerged particularly in mobile gaming that does something strange: it compels play even when it isn't fun anymore. In the old days when a game stopped being fun, you would stop playing. But these games, when they stop being fun, you make an in-game purchase...
- ConceptJunkie 8y ago
  I played Candy Crush for a while a few years ago. It's a fundamentally fun game, and the trap is that every once in a while I'd hit a level that I couldn't get past ( at least without being really, really lucky). So you I'd paid to get past it and move on to more fun. I spent maybe about $5 on it before ultimately getting tired of it. My rationalization was the game was legitimately fun and I didn't mind throwing the developers a little money for providing a decent little game. But I've seen so many similar games where the game itself wasn't fun at all, even though the rewards were still enticing. The Simpsons Tapped Out comes to mind. And in those cases I realized the game play itself wasn't interesting or fun and quickly quit. Basically, any game that has timers in it will fall into this category because the timers are there solely to make sure you keep coming back and have a compelling reason to do it often.
- matheusmoreira 8y ago
  > it compels play even when it isn't fun That's the power of positive and negative reinforcement. They want to shape the behavior of players. They want players logging into the game multiple times a day, every single day. So they rate limit the player's game with "stamina" or whatever euphemism for a timer they come up with. Player was having fun playing the RPG with friends, only to run out of "stamina"! The choice is to stop and wait for the timer to reset or pay money to reset it. Then the player starts waking up at 3 in the morning because that's when the timer resets. The simple timer reinforces a schedule and creates the behavior the game developer wants players to have.
  - gaius 8y ago
nabla9 8y ago
I think the difference is how quickly you get the reward is and how the reward is gained. It also relates to the way the money is made. In 'old school' game you receive reward after period of effort. You have to perform better and push yourself. Game is designed to be fun but selling the game once is where the money is. Good game is measured by the short peak experiences, not by the average feeling. Another (more advanced but evil) way to design addictive game is when it the difficulty and reward frequencies are optimized to keep you playing for as long as possible. You are offered cheats or the difficulty automatically adjusts to optimize the time you spend with the game. The goal of the game is stretch the interest over time just above the threshold where you would quit. In the end the game just removes lows from the boring moments.
tspike 8y ago
Yes. It's irritating to me to hear screen time constantly discussed as a monolith. For example, I have no issue with my son playing Zelda: Breath of the Wild. He gets to poke around and experiment and explore and it has sparked a lot of imaginative play, curiosity and interesting conversations. Likewise, it's fine if he wants to watch the videos we've taken of our family, it helps him to remember relatives we don't get to see very often. Conversely, I have ZERO tolerance for advertising. I am increasingly convinced that marketing is the source of a majority of modern society's ills and I don't want it anywhere near his brain until he's able to properly comprehend its purpose.
- rchaud 8y ago
  Advertising to kids happens through Youtube and Instagram, not those ugly Adsense iframes that can be spotted a mile away and at this point fall under "banner blindness" for a lot of users. I'm not a gamer so I don't know much about Zelda, but the sort of hypnotic hold some Youtube/Insta personalities have on kids is astonishing. They will parrot their talking points, talk about them relentlessly with friends and buy whatever they're shilling, be it makeup, game guides, phone skins, what have you.
  - tspike 8y ago
    Yep.. YouTube is off limits. He's still little so social media isn't in the picture yet, will burn that bridge when I come to it.
  - 2snakes 8y ago
    Just tell him to use Chrome/Firefox and Adblock Plus.
    - Pharmakon 8y ago
      Better to use uBlock Origin, which won’t let through “acceptable” ads. If you really want to protect the kid, and are willing to set it up or teach them, uMatrix is good too.
gattr 8y ago
I remember reading an analysis saying it's the "persistence" features in games that have the strongest potential for addition. E.g. you could play Counter-Strike all night, but the only thing you bring out is your improved skills. Unlike MMORPGs and similar where you "develop the character" and "accumulate equipment" (these days, also for real money).
thrmsforbfast 8y ago
> Not sure what the fix is either, other than ruthless enforcement of quotas. Buy older computers (1980s/early 1990s) that don't provide access to those games or the internet.
- tomjen3 8y ago
  No reason at all to do that, you can give the kids a great machine that they can use for the internet and games, but strictly limit when it is connected. I don't know if modern laptops can do this (modern ultra-portables can't because everything is soldered in), but I recently took the wifi card out of my (ancient) T61, it required only taking out screws[0] and disconnecting the daughter board, so that I would have a machine without always-on-internet. Haven't had much use of it, but sitting in front of it, I have caught myself starting up chrome... [0] sadly I failed to keep track of which goes where, but that is also the only issue.
pokemongoaway 8y ago
Haha! You're arguing old games bad new games good?! Is that not NPC behavior worse than the NPCs of Quake? I think those old school games had more depth, but I'm guilty of having not played any new ones for more than a minute or so.
celticninja 8y ago
Know how I managed to stop my kids playing Fortnite? I let them play 'proper' games. So now they want to play Halo or Zelda BOTW instead, they knew about Fortnite because all the kids talk about it but the actual gameplay isn't that original, the graphics are cute and cartoony to appeal to kids but kids will still appreciate a good game. They love the cutscenes so they can follow the story and the understand that there is a story arc I have also been explaining how although the game is free Fortnite makes money, and how a game like Halo is paid for in comparison.
balabaster 8y ago
"I just wanna spend $20 on my skins for Fortnite" Right... the game is designed to hook you in, that's games, they've all done that since the year dot. You're invested. Except now, in order to continue getting the same high, you need to spend money. They're purposely engineered this way. Just like drugs. I grew up as the public internet took it's first breaths. When you had to figure out just how to get an internet service provider before you could even get started. In the era of IRC and Newsgroups and that was about all. Nobody even understood what websites were. Google didn't hit its stride until 3 or 4 years after I started using it. Things were different back then. These days everything is designed to hook you and keep you coming back and when those hooks are no longer enough to keep your eyes on it, it hooks you to pay something to get more of a high. My kids have just come off a two week iPad ban yesterday, and already one of them has fallen off the rails and was unable to get out of bed for school this morning. Their behaviour was significantly improved by the time they came off their ban than it was the day the were banned. I'm seriously considering removing iPad use on a more permanent basis.
- empath75 8y ago
  > Except now, in order to continue getting the same high, you need to spend money. Interestingly, that’s going back to video gaming’s roots in the arcade.
- intended 8y ago
  In your case, don’t wait.
gameswithgo 8y ago
How is fortnite more like a slot machine than doom or mortal kombat?
- solean 8y ago
  It's really not, feels like a case of "the things I did when I was young were good, but the kids these days..."
  - cthalupa 8y ago
    Mortal Kombat and Doom didn't have loot crates where the cool looking items were all low chance to be had upon opening and the loot crates can be bought with real money?
    - mdrzn 8y ago
      Neither have Fortnite Battle Royale. You can buy the skin you want in the shop, for a predetermined amount, and there's no hidden fees.
isodude 8y ago
Quotas is not recommended, but playing games up to 1.5h each day is positive, anything beyond that is contra productive. Being involved changes a lot, making agreements, talk about feelings and evaluating. So like you would with any activity. Let they play but add mandatory walks i.e., or mix up with physical actvities. I mean, kids don't have THAT much time at hand to spend after school.
eksemplar 8y ago
I was an avid gamer, and today I have a wonderful family and I manage 70 people, but I’m not sure my screen time really did me that much good. I don’t think it did me that much harm either, but I would probably have been better off being a normal kid. I think modern games absolutely do harm, I don’t think they should really be called games either, because they are build for addiction to make you play their built in slot machines. My children never had smart devices because nobody under 15 should ever touch a smart device. They grew up much healthier than their peers and I think it was the strict rules on technology that did most of the work. I’m not against technology or smart devices by any means, but it’s hard to use both in a healthy manner and children are really bad at making the right decision. I mean, you wouldn’t give your kid free reign in the candy store, so why would you do it on their smartphone?
- dorchadas 8y ago
  > They grew up much healthier than their peers and I think it was the strict rules on technology that did most of the work. I'm noticing this among my cousins, at least among social health. I've got one cousin who just entered 7th grade this year, and might be the only person in her class without a phone. One of her best friends just got one at the beginning of the year. Those two are among the only two who actually know how to talk and have a conversation; other kids have no clue how to read tone of voice to tell jokes, or have any clue how to read facial expressions, etc. They honestly say what they want, when they want, without regards to people and then can't interpret that someone is upset. I've noticed it especially in regards to my 11 year old cousin, who's now had his phone for 3 years. He doesn't pick up on tone in jokes, and so unless the joke has an obvious punch line, he doesn't really get it. He has a lot of one-word conversations, often in a brusque tone, because he just wants to watch Minecraft videos. Often, the first thing he'll do when he gets to my grandmother's from school is go to her bedroom, lock the door, and just watch videos. No interaction whatsoever, and good luck trying to get him to talk. I also see it to a much more dangerous degree among my high school students. The lengths they will go to to be on their phones during class (and not even to chat; merely to be on them) is, quite frankly, alarming. I fear for our future, and am looking at dumb phones for myself now (I'll keep my dual sim smartphone for when I travel outside the country and exercise because music)
qubax 8y ago
> I was an avid "gamer" growing up. I wasn't always the most responsible with it. Probably overdid it a lot. But I can see with my own child, this is a different ball-game altogether. People said the same thing about WoW and Everquest and pretty much every video game. Go back far enough people said the same thing about nintendo and gameboy. Every generation thinks they are unique. You aren't unique. Your father thought the exact same thing as you are thinking right now. The more things change, the more they stay the same. > Not sure what the fix is either, other than ruthless enforcement of quotas. How about being a parent rather than blaming games. It's always human nature to blame others for one's own failings. Now it's social media and smartphone games. Before that it was people were blaming video games, simpsons, south park, mtv, etc for violence, dumbing down kids, etc. In 10 years, it'll be something else. Maybe virtual reality or sex dolls. Who knows. The same complaints, different products.
- dorchadas 8y ago
  Eh, I think we are seeing quantifiable differences in the effects that current games and social media are having on people, across all age spans. There is very much a difference in how kids are nowadays, and it is definitely a whole new world (or perhaps a Brave one, even).
village-idiot 8y ago
The location and ubiquity matter. You didn’t carry your N64 with you.
andrei_says_ 8y ago
Screen time focuses the senses on a small square and demobilizes the body while putting the brain in a comfortably numb, trance-like state. It robs a child’s body and brain from developing social and motor skills in a 3D world. Time spent in the trance state is habit forming and is in general stolen from time spent exploring the world, and letting the brain learn from full bandwidth experiences. So yes, It is the screen. Children’s real life unstructured full-bandwidth play is learning on steroids. All systems engaged, constant observation, endless questions, simulations etc. think social simulations, physical and motor skills challenges, puzzles. It takes life to prepare human brains for life.
- closeparen 8y ago
  Can't you say the same thing about a book?
  - 80mph 8y ago
    I would say no. Reading involves more use of one's imagination. Certainly, there are books that can easily put me to sleep after a few sentences. But when I'm reading my favorite genre (mysteries), my imagination is constantly at work. I cast the characters in my head using real-life actors and actresses, and a movie begins playing in my mind. That's the power of a good author.
    - georgeappiah 8y ago
      If you'd say "no" to reading a book because it engages more use of one's imagination, how is reading a dead tree book different from reading an ebook on screen? The latter is still lumped together gaming and all other uses as "screen time."
jaxn 8y ago
Unlike slot machines, these games are social. Kids are playing these games with friends. Often spinning up video calls on other services like iMessage while playing. Source: I have 6 kids between the ages of 9 and 16
matheusmoreira 8y ago
Lots of modern games are actually casinos under the hood. Way too many of them involve paying for the chance to win something. Real casinos are regulated, but the video games industry still enjoys complete game design freedom. I have no doubt video game addiction will at some point become an actual diagnosis, just like gambling addiction.
a-saleh 8y ago
> Echoing some of the existing comments: Games and sites today are vastly different than they were 20 years ago. You can still find the oldschool-style. I.e. I just played CHUCHEL adventure game alongside my 4 year old, and it is a simple ~4 hour long adventure game, costs ~10$, no micro-transactions funny business. Reminds me of my time at my grandma's house playing Neverhood :D Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe still works on modern machines. Shovel knight, Tooth and Tail, Guacamele, Into The Breach, Shadowrun, Reigns, Abzu, Magicka, Undertale ... and many more. Of course, not many FPS/high-budget rpgs? I actually am strongly considering to be the first in my family to buy an actual gaming console, once my daughter is a tiny bit older. Nintendo with its Switch lineup seems to be quite in line with the old-school mentality of "Pay once, get the game, have fun" :-)
- IggleSniggle 8y ago
  I just built a dedicated PICO-8 console (can also just run on a computer) and I couldn’t be happier with the decision. Given the games you list here, I think you should check it out.
agumonkey 8y ago
Allow me to extend the feeling to society. There's a increase of 'frequency' at the expense of depth.
austincheney 8y ago
I absolutely disagree. It is all about the screen time and only a little bit about the content. Screen time modifies your behavior. That modification is compounded as the quantity of access time increases. This change is determinate and quantifiable. You can quickly validate this with a simple experiment. Take any child and take away access to screens. Look at what they do to fill their time and how they respond to people in the first 30 minutes after screen loss and against after 2 hours. Also notice the longer term modifications to behavior after screens are removed for a week. Part of this is a component of addiction, missing social stimulus, and lack of physical activity.
koonsolo 8y ago
My kids love Minecraft, and it's pretty obvious that others do too. I'm now playing Crossout, where you can build your own car, and my son also loves building his own cars and fighting with them. I don't think you have to look at it so negative, kids actually enjoy creating stuff in games, and I think that's a good thing.

kartan 8y ago

> They are specifically designed to function like a slot machine. I work in the gambling industry, making literally slot machines. Slot machines are heavily regulated and there is a lot of "engagement" tricks that can not be used in the gambling industry. The kind of trick that Candy Crush will use. The dangerous side of gambling is for people that think that they can "win money". But the games themselves are kind of boring by design. Regulations force us to make them boring. (And that is a good thing, I will not work on this industry otherwise). The future of on-line games and mobile games is regulation. Micro-payments, push-notifications, etc. cannot be used without limits. People have right to their mental health more than companies have to higher profits.

danesparza 8y ago
You've gotten me wondering: Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? Is that a state-by-state regulation? A federal regulation? And does the regulating code specifically mention physical machines? Thanks in advance for satisfying my curiosity.
- gbear605 8y ago
  I’m not entirely up to date, but my impression was that as long as the rewards are not redeemable for cash, it’s fine.
- medobs41 8y ago
  Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? I can answer for the US: Games aren’t subject to regulation because for the past few decades one party has made it their goal to destroy regulatory power to allow the wealthy to enrich themselves. One party in the US has been completely captured by billionaires and corporations. This started in the 1970s around the time the Koches founded the Koch Institute (now Cato), and the Scaife, Bradley, Olin, and other rich families started using big money to influenfe politics. Continued through Reagan, his tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks (including rolling back Fairness Doctrine which allowed Limbaugh to fill the airwaves with propaganda). Then Gingrich, then Murdoch who kicked off Fox News. Now the US has one party that is a coalition of billionaires for funding and white identity politics for votes— and the only thing that party cares about is the wealth of their billionaire donors. We’re not going to have any regulations to protect people until we fix US politics and media. (Good read on the history by respected historian: https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/50/divided-we-stand/ https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/50/divided-we-stand/ )
  - scarmig 8y ago
    That's generic and not really convincing except to the already converted. Getting into the concrete example of casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, on the other hand...
  - manfredo 8y ago
    This does not hold to to scrutiny. The case that was appealed to the supreme Court that establishes that video games are protected by the First Amendment was challenging a law championed by a California Democrat, but was mostly overturned by liberal justices. What video games have to do with "white idntity politics" is beyond me. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Ass%27n https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merch...
  - briandear 8y ago
    And yet the tech industry overwhelmingly supports Democrats? Partisan politics has nothing to do with the topic at hand. But, if you want to go there, I might suggest that Cato is a libertarian organization and libertarianism is about the rights of the individual to make their own choices rather than having the state dictate those choices. Bringing the Koch brothers into a debate over addictive screens is just silly.
- manfredo 8y ago
  Video games are protected by the first amendment right to free speech and expression. Slot machines are gambling devices that take in and pay out money. The two aren't really comparable. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the regulations on slot machines only apply when they're used in real money gambling. Presumably, if someone built a slot machine that didn't take in or dispense tokens, and could not be used in gambling in any way, it wouldn't be subject to those regulations. But obviously this is a moot point since a slot machine without a payout is just a glorified random number generator.
  - Retric 8y ago
    Not necessarily. Right now the industry is largely unregulated, but that's more a question of enforcement than any sort of real legal protection. In the US you can't build a slot machine that accepts money and dispenses tokens that have value. That's often how things operate in Japan, but the same model is generally illegal in the US. It's questionable if spending real money on virtual currency to buy "loot boxes" that randomly give things of value is legal. And if that's legal, it's not obvious if changing the rate of rewards is legal.
    - manfredo 8y ago
      In game items don't have value. If they did, then effectively all games with RNG mechanics would be banned. Heck, even the original Rogue would fall under that umbrella.
      - Retric 8y ago
        Depends on the game. In multi player games where people can exchange items, people will pay real world money for other players items. EX: People buying WoW gold.
        ThrowawayR2 8y ago
        > "buying WoW gold" IIRC, Blizzard doesn't profit from that directly and explicitly prohibits it in their ToS.
- mediaman 8y ago
  This is actually a rapidly developing area of law. There is a lawsuit brought by Washington State that is arguing that virtual credits, in connection with games of chance, constitutes "something of value" that is covered by the state's gambling laws. If the state wins, it could result in an expansion of regulation of this type of mobile game. Here's an article with some more detail. https://www.geekwire.com/2018/game-show-network-hit-online-gambling-lawsuit-latest-case-targeting-gaming-companies/ https://www.geekwire.com/2018/game-show-network-hit-online-g...
  - btbuildem 8y ago
    That's interesting! Even though they are not legal tender (and cannot be exchanged for goods and services etc), the argument is that they are still OF VALUE for those who hold them.
- kartan 8y ago
  > Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? The regulations were designed for casinos before video games became so popular and way before mobile games and micro-transactions even existed. Example of gambling regulation for New Jersey: https://www.nj.gov/oag/ge/docs/Regulations/MergedRegulations110413.pdf https://www.nj.gov/oag/ge/docs/Regulations/MergedRegulations... > Is that a state-by-state regulation? Yes. Delaware, Nevada, New Jersey and Pennsylvania allow gambling. But I guess that at any moment local or federal regulations could be created. > And does the regulating code specifically mention physical machines? There is specific regulations for casinos, for on-line gambling, for jackpots, sports betting, etc. e.g. CHAPTER 69O INTERNET AND MOBILE GAMING from the linked PDF Example of definitions: * "Authorized Internet or mobile game" means any game authorized by the Division for use with an Internet or mobile gaming system. * "Client terminal" means any device that is used to interact with a gaming system for the purpose of conducting server-based gaming activity. * "Data warehouse" means a system of one or more servers located in New Jersey for the purpose of storing transactions received from the primary gaming equipment. * "Dormant account" means an Internet gaming account, which has had no patron initiated activity for a period of one year.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- ThrowawayR2 8y ago
  > Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? Slot machines are regulated because they fall under the category of gambling and video games don't meet the legal definition of gambling. (Although, I'd agree that it's starting to seem more and more as if they should.) There's a pretty good explanation of the criteria at https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1146&context=grrj https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti... but the brief summary (from the article) is "Gambling consists of three elements: consideration, prize and chance. If any one of those three elements is missing, the game is simply not gambling (Rose, 1986))." By looking at those criteria, there's a lot of ways video game companies can defend themselves. The strongest one IMO being that, from a legal standpoint, there is no prize. You "win" things or get drops but the TOS of all games say that the player does not own them (or anything else in the game) in any legal sense. The analogy would be more like a carnival ride where you are paying for the experience rather than the expectation of getting anything material in return.
  - a13n 8y ago
    > the TOS of all games say that the player does not own them Yet loads of people sell their in-game items (that they got through chance) for real money. So in a sense, they do own them.
    - setr 8y ago
      Usually despite being banned by the TOS, as a black market kind of operation. More problematicly, im not sure how youd stop it from extending to say WoW gold-selling, or even cartridges with 100% saves on them. People will attribute value to anything for any number of reasons, but I’m not sure you can make regulation on anything beyond “encouraging” such behavior. (And I would assume these companies already actively discourage it; you’re not supposed to be able to get money back out of the system!)
      - intended 8y ago
        I see that definition expanding. We're well past the point where virtual entitites are imaginable by the general populace. Getting a virtual gun, creates an actual advantage in the game your are playing online. While ultimate ownership of the code may be fraught, but practical day to day ownership and usage is not (unless you are fighting a particularly contrived case).
- GVIrish 8y ago
  > You've gotten me wondering: Why AREN'T certain games subject to the same regulations as slot machines? Probably because the problem is not perceived as bad enough to get regulated yet. The industry was getting dangerously close to this when there were all those cases of kids racking up huge bills through in-app purchases on iPhones, but that has died down enough that it's not on the radar anymore. I think if the games industry gets too aggressive again, regulation will sweep in.
- dv_dt 8y ago
  Certain forms of video game dynamics: e.g. some loot box mechanics have recently been identified as being covered by gambling regulations in some nations. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-04-25-now-belgium-declares-loot-boxes-gambling-and-therefore-illegal https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-04-25-now-belgium-de...
- SN76477 8y ago
  Great idea! If a game has micro transactions, then treat it as gambling. Problem solved.
- agumonkey 8y ago
  Paying in games is extremely recent.
MildlySerious 8y ago
Can you recommend any literature on the topic of these "tricks"? If you're not in the industry, awareness is probably the best weapon against these practices.
- kartan 8y ago
  > Can you recommend any literature on the topic of these "tricks"? I am talking about basic stuff like: * Push notifications reminding you that you should play the game. * Let you win some money but then lose it unless you make a payment. * A bar that fills faster at the beginning and then starts to fill slower. So it looks like you are closer to a goal that you actually are. * Show a deck of cards that instead of the 52 standard cards, expected by the players, has another configuration that makes you lose more often. etc. Any mobile games video - like https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014450/Behavioral-Economics-and-Social-Games https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014450/Behavioral-Economics-a... - has a lot of forbidden techniques for on-line gambling.
  - wool_gather 8y ago
    Even more basic than this -- games as far back as the original Zelda use it (and I'm sure further) -- is intermittent variable reward[0]. This little cognitive meathook has been almost weaponized at this point. [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Intermittent_reinforcement_schedules https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Intermittent_rei...
- rchaud 8y ago
  I'm not who you're responding to, but I like this longread from the Verge about the specific design of slot machines that fuel addictive behaviour by users: https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/6/8544303/casino-slot-machine-gambling-addiction-psychology-mobile-games https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/6/8544303/casino-slot-machin...
  - kartan 8y ago
    > As a result, modern slots pay out on approximately 45 percent of all spins, instead of the 3 percent of traditional slots. I do not get this. slots pay out (RTP Return To Player) is around 90%. The article mixes volatility with RTP. > Lower-volatility games often have greater appeal in 'locals markets' than in destination resort markets like Las Vegas or Atlantic City This looks correct. > During "flow," time speeds up (hours feel like minutes) or slows down (reactions can be made instantly) and the mind reaches a state of almost euphoric equilibrium. Most sensible regulations force you to send reminders to the players that interrupt this flow. On-line betting usually has harder regulations, as to play in a casino you need to physically get there but on-line is always available. Usually in high regulated markets each spin should last at least 3 seconds. This is so you cannot get a fast continuous flow, but the pace is forcefully slowed down. Physical casino slots and on-line slots are slightly different as products and regulation wise. > "People only have so much leisure time and there’s a lot of activity on iPhones" Slot machines are competing against Candy Crush (and Royal Charm Slots from the same company), Netflix, YouTube, etc. > Eyal criticized slot machines for what he said was a business model dependent on addicted players — "that industry, I have a problem with," he said. And the solution is to regulated it in a way that the most addictive aspects are not possible to implement. Or to prohibit it completely, not just to move it underground. If anyone expects that the industry is going to regulate itself they are for a hard ride. No industry does that for real.
sigi45 8y ago
Sry what? You have no issue working in that industry because those games are 'boring'? But you do not have any issue that you create something which is literally boring and only there for other people to put there money in and play never again (because it is so boring) or lose everything?
- kartan 8y ago
  > You have no issue working in that industry because those games are 'boring'? Not because they are boring, but because they are less addictive than they can be. So they are "boring" in comparison. If we were allowed to use all tricks that mobile and on-line games do it will be really bad for society as it will create more addiction. It is like Coca-Cola. Even that so much sugar makes it problematic, I find it better that at least does not include cocaine like it did in 1891. Does that make Coca-Cola good? No, it does not. But I find that makes it a lesser evil. Even that cocaine-less Coke is more "boring" nowadays, it is the right thing to do.
  - sigi45 8y ago
    I don't know. I have never seen anyone buying more coca cola on a weekend than i would be able to afford with my salary. I have seen people putting shit ton of money into those machines and they lost easily 100,- Euros per Hour? I'm sure there is always a white/gray/black thing going on but i do put a slot machine at the very end of black not in gray or white at all. Coca Cola and the water stealing and the addiction is btw. an additional example for something not that good, it does not make a slot machine any better.
OpenBSD-reich 8y ago
I'm waiting for you guys to implement a separate "screen" or "application" on all slots, which is a cryptocurrency or Forex or CFD (or even pretend "securities") client hooking up to the casinos' central exchange system, and the casino takes no positions long or short but just charges a very small % tx fee on each transaction. If it's cryptocurrency, then have 1:1 conversion between cryptocurrency and the various chip species each representing said currency (like Doge chips, Litecoin chips, Bitcoin chips, Ethereum chips, etc) so the incentive to trade on the slots is that the player can then gamble the objects of trade directly. The keys (or casino crypto exchange authentication data) can be stored on smart card and can be carried around by the gambler. Then it's a matter of having various slots and tables which accept these other cryptos in addition to their existing dollar variants. It's like having Euro machines and tables, Renminbi machines and tables, etc.
entee 8y ago
I'm curious to know some examples of what is and isn't permitted. The flashing lights, interesting but not too interesting ding-dong-boom sounds, the loud massive amping up when you win something, all that is allowed and I believe (though don't quite have a source at hand) that these are provably enticing hooks. I'm sure there are things that aren't, but I'm curious as to what. I'm also curious about want Candy Crush does that a slot machine can't by regulation? Is it a level of interactivity?
- nyghtly 8y ago
  For one, it's illegal for children to play on a slot machine.
- kilburn 8y ago
  The most basic thing Candy Crush does that slot machines can't is adapt its behavior to the user. Candy Crush can (and does) let you play freely, only to popup the "insert coin to get help" when you are stuck. It also adjusts the game play to your level (by advancing to harder levels) so that you are always challenged and possibly get stuck. If you advance by paying, you probably will need to pay more to get further (if you failed an easier level without help you will probably fail later levels without such help). In an imaginary world, a slot machine could have a camera to track who is playing. It would let you play for free the first few times, even give you some money, but leaving you one "advance" short of the stronger payments. After some rolls, you are prompted to insert coins to get extra advances. Of course, the machine keeps the payment structure favorable to itself, but tricking you into inserting more and more coins, all the while getting you hooked into the game. It could even adjust the payment structure to be more and more in its favor the more "hooked" it detects you are. Regulation that prevents the above: 1. Slot machines cannot track users by any means. 2. The payment distribution has to fit certain parameters (think X% of money given back within N rolls)
  - tdeck 8y ago
    Casinos themselves kind of do this though, right? They give you a card with a balance to pay for games and load winnings, and sometimes they just add extra money to it if you've had a bad day to keep you playing. At least that's what I recall reading somewhere.
sizzle 8y ago
Very cool profession, where can I learn more about the tech behind the gambling industry, got any good recommendations? Are any start-ups shaking up the traditional slot machine gambling industry? Is it still run by shadowy Mafia types like we see in movies?
Coincoin 8y ago
Funny thing is some games are designed to be boring but still addictive, so that you will pay to skip playing the boring game. It totally blows my mind that people will pay to not play a game.

tejohnso 8y ago

Can you explain how overdoing it with Quake and Diablo is not the same ball-game as overdoing it with Fortnite?

i_cant_speel 8y ago
I think Fortnite is just a bad example. It's one of the few games where you don't feel at a complete disadvantage when you choose not to spend money on it.
- atom-morgan 8y ago
  Yeah, if anything I think Fortnite does a good job of avoiding gambling and preserving the integrity of free-to-play. Loot crates, which are basically slot machines, don't exist. You buy what you see, a skin. They make a lot of money from skins but once again, there's no in-game advantage. It's purely cosmetic so at the end of the day even if you don't give Epic a dime you're still on a level playing field with everyone else.
  - otterpop 8y ago
    I agree, Fortnite handles this pretty well. The only thing I would describe as somewhat manipulative would be their store. Having a rotation that only lasts a day or two rather than allowing players to purchase the items that they want evokes a feeling of "If I don't purchase this skin now, how long is it going to be before I get another chance?" I have a few friends who stockpile skins that they think are "alright" just in case they want to use them in the future.
castlecrasher2 8y ago
A simpler example is Battlefield 1942 vs Battlefield 5, 1, or any of the recent entries: the first had zero unlocks; everything was available, and it was a game for the fun of it. In the newer entries, the unlocks and other bars you fill provide a sense of achievement and progress, and maybe that just gives players with fun objectives to do while playing but the cynic in me sees people gloating about 1000 kills with the Kolibri and thinks it's more about preying on addictive tendencies.

weeksie 8y ago

While I think your point is totally on the mark I am going to chime in like a pedantic pain in the arse and mention that Civ has been addictive as fuck since the early 90s when I ruined at least a month of my life playing just one more turn. But yes, I agree with your point in the general sense!

naravara 8y ago

>Not sure what the fix is either, other than ruthless enforcement of quotas. Or just not letting kids get into those games. At some point my wife pointed out that I had a problem disengaging from certain types of games (for me it was MOBAs specifically). They are super-addictive. It never really got in the way of anything and if I had anything else to do I would go do that, so it wouldn't really qualify as "addiction" in a DSM sense. But the issue is what it does when you don't have anything to do. They have a way of swallowing up basically ALL of your free time. And I didn't feel happier or better off for having spent my time that way, it felt more like compulsion than desire. I see a lot of young people on the internet being enslaved by compulsion like this, engaging in somewhat problematic consumption of video-games, porn, or social media. I decided to just uninstall and stop playing those sorts of games, but I was also a grown-up with life experiences, hobbies, social connections, and responsibilities before I ever started. I knew what I was missing with "real life" by letting myself sink into that so it was easy enough for me to stop, I had other, more edifying sources of dopamine to go after. Kids, often times, either don't have enough freedom of movement to go do those things or just plain don't know what else there is out there. It's the same reason drug and gambling addiction tends to take hold among people with depression.

ip26 8y ago
The other problem with MOBA's, at least for me- wins feel easy & shallow, the reward is small, while losses are a struggle & kind of crushing. So inevitably I sign off feeling unhappy & unfulfilled.

gaius 8y ago

Echoing some of the existing comments: Games and sites today are vastly different than they were 20 years ago. In the old days, the focus was on playability. Games were fun. But a new genre has emerged particularly in mobile gaming that does something strange: it compels play even when it isn't fun anymore. In the old days when a game stopped being fun, you would stop playing. But these games, when they stop being fun, you make an in-game purchase...

ConceptJunkie 8y ago
I played Candy Crush for a while a few years ago. It's a fundamentally fun game, and the trap is that every once in a while I'd hit a level that I couldn't get past ( at least without being really, really lucky). So you I'd paid to get past it and move on to more fun. I spent maybe about $5 on it before ultimately getting tired of it. My rationalization was the game was legitimately fun and I didn't mind throwing the developers a little money for providing a decent little game. But I've seen so many similar games where the game itself wasn't fun at all, even though the rewards were still enticing. The Simpsons Tapped Out comes to mind. And in those cases I realized the game play itself wasn't interesting or fun and quickly quit. Basically, any game that has timers in it will fall into this category because the timers are there solely to make sure you keep coming back and have a compelling reason to do it often.
matheusmoreira 8y ago
> it compels play even when it isn't fun That's the power of positive and negative reinforcement. They want to shape the behavior of players. They want players logging into the game multiple times a day, every single day. So they rate limit the player's game with "stamina" or whatever euphemism for a timer they come up with. Player was having fun playing the RPG with friends, only to run out of "stamina"! The choice is to stop and wait for the timer to reset or pay money to reset it. Then the player starts waking up at 3 in the morning because that's when the timer resets. The simple timer reinforces a schedule and creates the behavior the game developer wants players to have.
- gaius 8y ago

nabla9 8y ago

I think the difference is how quickly you get the reward is and how the reward is gained. It also relates to the way the money is made. In 'old school' game you receive reward after period of effort. You have to perform better and push yourself. Game is designed to be fun but selling the game once is where the money is. Good game is measured by the short peak experiences, not by the average feeling. Another (more advanced but evil) way to design addictive game is when it the difficulty and reward frequencies are optimized to keep you playing for as long as possible. You are offered cheats or the difficulty automatically adjusts to optimize the time you spend with the game. The goal of the game is stretch the interest over time just above the threshold where you would quit. In the end the game just removes lows from the boring moments.

tspike 8y ago

Yes. It's irritating to me to hear screen time constantly discussed as a monolith. For example, I have no issue with my son playing Zelda: Breath of the Wild. He gets to poke around and experiment and explore and it has sparked a lot of imaginative play, curiosity and interesting conversations. Likewise, it's fine if he wants to watch the videos we've taken of our family, it helps him to remember relatives we don't get to see very often. Conversely, I have ZERO tolerance for advertising. I am increasingly convinced that marketing is the source of a majority of modern society's ills and I don't want it anywhere near his brain until he's able to properly comprehend its purpose.

rchaud 8y ago
Advertising to kids happens through Youtube and Instagram, not those ugly Adsense iframes that can be spotted a mile away and at this point fall under "banner blindness" for a lot of users. I'm not a gamer so I don't know much about Zelda, but the sort of hypnotic hold some Youtube/Insta personalities have on kids is astonishing. They will parrot their talking points, talk about them relentlessly with friends and buy whatever they're shilling, be it makeup, game guides, phone skins, what have you.
- tspike 8y ago
  Yep.. YouTube is off limits. He's still little so social media isn't in the picture yet, will burn that bridge when I come to it.
- 2snakes 8y ago
  Just tell him to use Chrome/Firefox and Adblock Plus.
  - Pharmakon 8y ago
    Better to use uBlock Origin, which won’t let through “acceptable” ads. If you really want to protect the kid, and are willing to set it up or teach them, uMatrix is good too.

gattr 8y ago

I remember reading an analysis saying it's the "persistence" features in games that have the strongest potential for addition. E.g. you could play Counter-Strike all night, but the only thing you bring out is your improved skills. Unlike MMORPGs and similar where you "develop the character" and "accumulate equipment" (these days, also for real money).

thrmsforbfast 8y ago

> Not sure what the fix is either, other than ruthless enforcement of quotas. Buy older computers (1980s/early 1990s) that don't provide access to those games or the internet.

tomjen3 8y ago
No reason at all to do that, you can give the kids a great machine that they can use for the internet and games, but strictly limit when it is connected. I don't know if modern laptops can do this (modern ultra-portables can't because everything is soldered in), but I recently took the wifi card out of my (ancient) T61, it required only taking out screws[0] and disconnecting the daughter board, so that I would have a machine without always-on-internet. Haven't had much use of it, but sitting in front of it, I have caught myself starting up chrome... [0] sadly I failed to keep track of which goes where, but that is also the only issue.

pokemongoaway 8y ago

Haha! You're arguing old games bad new games good?! Is that not NPC behavior worse than the NPCs of Quake? I think those old school games had more depth, but I'm guilty of having not played any new ones for more than a minute or so.

celticninja 8y ago

Know how I managed to stop my kids playing Fortnite? I let them play 'proper' games. So now they want to play Halo or Zelda BOTW instead, they knew about Fortnite because all the kids talk about it but the actual gameplay isn't that original, the graphics are cute and cartoony to appeal to kids but kids will still appreciate a good game. They love the cutscenes so they can follow the story and the understand that there is a story arc I have also been explaining how although the game is free Fortnite makes money, and how a game like Halo is paid for in comparison.

balabaster 8y ago

"I just wanna spend $20 on my skins for Fortnite" Right... the game is designed to hook you in, that's games, they've all done that since the year dot. You're invested. Except now, in order to continue getting the same high, you need to spend money. They're purposely engineered this way. Just like drugs. I grew up as the public internet took it's first breaths. When you had to figure out just how to get an internet service provider before you could even get started. In the era of IRC and Newsgroups and that was about all. Nobody even understood what websites were. Google didn't hit its stride until 3 or 4 years after I started using it. Things were different back then. These days everything is designed to hook you and keep you coming back and when those hooks are no longer enough to keep your eyes on it, it hooks you to pay something to get more of a high. My kids have just come off a two week iPad ban yesterday, and already one of them has fallen off the rails and was unable to get out of bed for school this morning. Their behaviour was significantly improved by the time they came off their ban than it was the day the were banned. I'm seriously considering removing iPad use on a more permanent basis.

empath75 8y ago
> Except now, in order to continue getting the same high, you need to spend money. Interestingly, that’s going back to video gaming’s roots in the arcade.
intended 8y ago
In your case, don’t wait.

gameswithgo 8y ago

How is fortnite more like a slot machine than doom or mortal kombat?

solean 8y ago
It's really not, feels like a case of "the things I did when I was young were good, but the kids these days..."
- cthalupa 8y ago
  Mortal Kombat and Doom didn't have loot crates where the cool looking items were all low chance to be had upon opening and the loot crates can be bought with real money?
  - mdrzn 8y ago
    Neither have Fortnite Battle Royale. You can buy the skin you want in the shop, for a predetermined amount, and there's no hidden fees.

isodude 8y ago

Quotas is not recommended, but playing games up to 1.5h each day is positive, anything beyond that is contra productive. Being involved changes a lot, making agreements, talk about feelings and evaluating. So like you would with any activity. Let they play but add mandatory walks i.e., or mix up with physical actvities. I mean, kids don't have THAT much time at hand to spend after school.

eksemplar 8y ago

I was an avid gamer, and today I have a wonderful family and I manage 70 people, but I’m not sure my screen time really did me that much good. I don’t think it did me that much harm either, but I would probably have been better off being a normal kid. I think modern games absolutely do harm, I don’t think they should really be called games either, because they are build for addiction to make you play their built in slot machines. My children never had smart devices because nobody under 15 should ever touch a smart device. They grew up much healthier than their peers and I think it was the strict rules on technology that did most of the work. I’m not against technology or smart devices by any means, but it’s hard to use both in a healthy manner and children are really bad at making the right decision. I mean, you wouldn’t give your kid free reign in the candy store, so why would you do it on their smartphone?

dorchadas 8y ago
> They grew up much healthier than their peers and I think it was the strict rules on technology that did most of the work. I'm noticing this among my cousins, at least among social health. I've got one cousin who just entered 7th grade this year, and might be the only person in her class without a phone. One of her best friends just got one at the beginning of the year. Those two are among the only two who actually know how to talk and have a conversation; other kids have no clue how to read tone of voice to tell jokes, or have any clue how to read facial expressions, etc. They honestly say what they want, when they want, without regards to people and then can't interpret that someone is upset. I've noticed it especially in regards to my 11 year old cousin, who's now had his phone for 3 years. He doesn't pick up on tone in jokes, and so unless the joke has an obvious punch line, he doesn't really get it. He has a lot of one-word conversations, often in a brusque tone, because he just wants to watch Minecraft videos. Often, the first thing he'll do when he gets to my grandmother's from school is go to her bedroom, lock the door, and just watch videos. No interaction whatsoever, and good luck trying to get him to talk. I also see it to a much more dangerous degree among my high school students. The lengths they will go to to be on their phones during class (and not even to chat; merely to be on them) is, quite frankly, alarming. I fear for our future, and am looking at dumb phones for myself now (I'll keep my dual sim smartphone for when I travel outside the country and exercise because music)

qubax 8y ago

> I was an avid "gamer" growing up. I wasn't always the most responsible with it. Probably overdid it a lot. But I can see with my own child, this is a different ball-game altogether. People said the same thing about WoW and Everquest and pretty much every video game. Go back far enough people said the same thing about nintendo and gameboy. Every generation thinks they are unique. You aren't unique. Your father thought the exact same thing as you are thinking right now. The more things change, the more they stay the same. > Not sure what the fix is either, other than ruthless enforcement of quotas. How about being a parent rather than blaming games. It's always human nature to blame others for one's own failings. Now it's social media and smartphone games. Before that it was people were blaming video games, simpsons, south park, mtv, etc for violence, dumbing down kids, etc. In 10 years, it'll be something else. Maybe virtual reality or sex dolls. Who knows. The same complaints, different products.

dorchadas 8y ago
Eh, I think we are seeing quantifiable differences in the effects that current games and social media are having on people, across all age spans. There is very much a difference in how kids are nowadays, and it is definitely a whole new world (or perhaps a Brave one, even).

village-idiot 8y ago

The location and ubiquity matter. You didn’t carry your N64 with you.

andrei_says_ 8y ago

Screen time focuses the senses on a small square and demobilizes the body while putting the brain in a comfortably numb, trance-like state. It robs a child’s body and brain from developing social and motor skills in a 3D world. Time spent in the trance state is habit forming and is in general stolen from time spent exploring the world, and letting the brain learn from full bandwidth experiences. So yes, It is the screen. Children’s real life unstructured full-bandwidth play is learning on steroids. All systems engaged, constant observation, endless questions, simulations etc. think social simulations, physical and motor skills challenges, puzzles. It takes life to prepare human brains for life.

closeparen 8y ago
Can't you say the same thing about a book?
- 80mph 8y ago
  I would say no. Reading involves more use of one's imagination. Certainly, there are books that can easily put me to sleep after a few sentences. But when I'm reading my favorite genre (mysteries), my imagination is constantly at work. I cast the characters in my head using real-life actors and actresses, and a movie begins playing in my mind. That's the power of a good author.
  - georgeappiah 8y ago
    If you'd say "no" to reading a book because it engages more use of one's imagination, how is reading a dead tree book different from reading an ebook on screen? The latter is still lumped together gaming and all other uses as "screen time."

jaxn 8y ago

Unlike slot machines, these games are social. Kids are playing these games with friends. Often spinning up video calls on other services like iMessage while playing. Source: I have 6 kids between the ages of 9 and 16

matheusmoreira 8y ago

Lots of modern games are actually casinos under the hood. Way too many of them involve paying for the chance to win something. Real casinos are regulated, but the video games industry still enjoys complete game design freedom. I have no doubt video game addiction will at some point become an actual diagnosis, just like gambling addiction.

a-saleh 8y ago

> Echoing some of the existing comments: Games and sites today are vastly different than they were 20 years ago. You can still find the oldschool-style. I.e. I just played CHUCHEL adventure game alongside my 4 year old, and it is a simple ~4 hour long adventure game, costs ~10$, no micro-transactions funny business. Reminds me of my time at my grandma's house playing Neverhood :D Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe still works on modern machines. Shovel knight, Tooth and Tail, Guacamele, Into The Breach, Shadowrun, Reigns, Abzu, Magicka, Undertale ... and many more. Of course, not many FPS/high-budget rpgs? I actually am strongly considering to be the first in my family to buy an actual gaming console, once my daughter is a tiny bit older. Nintendo with its Switch lineup seems to be quite in line with the old-school mentality of "Pay once, get the game, have fun" :-)

IggleSniggle 8y ago
I just built a dedicated PICO-8 console (can also just run on a computer) and I couldn’t be happier with the decision. Given the games you list here, I think you should check it out.

agumonkey 8y ago

Allow me to extend the feeling to society. There's a increase of 'frequency' at the expense of depth.

austincheney 8y ago

I absolutely disagree. It is all about the screen time and only a little bit about the content. Screen time modifies your behavior. That modification is compounded as the quantity of access time increases. This change is determinate and quantifiable. You can quickly validate this with a simple experiment. Take any child and take away access to screens. Look at what they do to fill their time and how they respond to people in the first 30 minutes after screen loss and against after 2 hours. Also notice the longer term modifications to behavior after screens are removed for a week. Part of this is a component of addiction, missing social stimulus, and lack of physical activity.

koonsolo 8y ago

My kids love Minecraft, and it's pretty obvious that others do too. I'm now playing Crossout, where you can build your own car, and my son also loves building his own cars and fighting with them. I don't think you have to look at it so negative, kids actually enjoy creating stuff in games, and I think that's a good thing.