# Are video games a waste of precious time?



## bsd3355 (Nov 30, 2005)

People say that video games affect your "real" quality of life, but what is so good about the real world anyway? There comes a point where you should know when to put down the controller and step away into life. However, if it weren't for video games, what other passive time would we go to? Wouldn't it be under the same context of "wasted time"?

Been up all night and just wanted to write this... whatcha think?


----------



## Paul (Sep 26, 2005)

Better for you than TV, at least it engages the brain a bit.


----------



## GunnyHighway (Sep 28, 2010)

Hoth said:


> Better for you than TV, at least it engages the brain a bit.


That's what I think as well. When my parents used to tell me to get off the computer and do something else like watch TV, I saw no point in it.


----------



## NaturalLogOfZero (Sep 29, 2010)

Video games for me are just distractions. Instead of thinking, I can just ignore my life.

Good for somethings bad for others.


----------



## NaturalLogOfZero (Sep 29, 2010)

Richy said:


> I had around 50 days playtime on cod4 alone so I guess you could say thats 50 days of my life wasted. I don't regret it though, I was having a really bad time back then and it was my escape from the real world.


I did this for cod4 too..
and MW2...

super happy I refused to buy black ops.


----------



## Kustamogen (Dec 19, 2010)

I play every night for a few hours.....nothing better to do.....so its a fun distraction.

if it makes you happy I dont consider it a waste of time.


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

No. They're fun.


----------



## Jade18 (Mar 6, 2011)

I dont actually think it is
I actually learn from games
cause games are rarely made in my native language I can either play them in japanese or english
and since I know both but rarely use them its good to catch up with it and even learn some new vocabulary:boogie


----------



## Infexxion (Jun 29, 2009)

Oh I don't think so. Not to me at least. They let me go to another place, visit another world, do things I can't do in real life, and offer an escape from all the other stuff in real life I have to deal with.

In movies, you can watch and see stories unfold, but in games you 'live' them because you're in control of all the action, which adds a whole new layer of immersion if you ask me.


----------



## Tawnee (Sep 2, 2010)

I don't consider them a waste of time at all. So many things can be considered a waste of time, if you really think about it. It's all a matter of opinion. To one person video games are a waste of time. To another person learning a new language or playing the violin is a waste of time. I play video games a lot, and they make me happy. They are an escape from real life. Also, I enjoy the stories. I'm a writer. I live for good stories so getting the chance to really interact with one in a game is pretty awesome. So no I don't think video games are a waste of time at all.


----------



## Cerberus (Feb 13, 2005)

Yes and no. They are a waste of time if you're just sitting around playing half your day away every day, and if you're letting them interfer with recovering or reaching positive life goals. If you're just using them to relax on the weekends or for a little bit each day, I don't view them as a waste of time. Moderation in everything. . .


----------



## QuietBoy99 (Sep 7, 2010)

It is a waste of time if you don't manage it. I try to play no more than 2 hours a night.


----------



## CeilingStarer (Dec 29, 2009)

It's the old story of what else would you be doing anyway? Every time I quit what feels to be a vice, I just pick up another one.

I'm bored by most video games, but I'll occasionally thrash an epic RPG when it comes out. I love every moment of it. It's like a big interactive book/movie. If I wasn't doing that, I'd just be reading, or going for a walk. These things sound more productive, but they're really not. I don't really know what constitutes not wasting precious time... in this society, probably doing something that will help you make money.


----------



## Daktoria (Sep 21, 2010)

bwidger85 said:


> People say that video games affect your "real" quality of life, but what is so good about the real world anyway? There comes a point where you should know when to put down the controller and step away into life. However, if it weren't for video games, what other passive time would we go to? Wouldn't it be under the same context of "wasted time"?
> 
> Been up all night and just wanted to write this... whatcha think?


Video games don't garnish real resources, yet it takes real resources to run video games.

Therefore, they're self-destructive, and because they're so sensational or logical, they remove the incentive for you to discover sensation and logic in the real world, the real world being where real resources come from.


----------



## sarafinanickelbocker (May 16, 2010)

Is reading? Is painting? Are sports a waste precious time? I really don't think so. It's an enjoyable activity you do in your spare time. I would just be careful not to do it all day every day.


----------



## Chris16 (Nov 1, 2010)

I wouldn't put reading in the same category as gaming as far as naming other things that could be equally considered a waste of time.

I agree about some of the other things listed though. The best violinist in the world would bore the hell out of me, but he would get recognition from all of his peers who care about music. But think about it; at the end of the day he's rubbing a rod on some strings. There's no real reason to consider yourself inferior for not doing something like that, painting or otherwise.

I've seen the same type of respect given to players of certain videogames, especially if it's a competitive community. Even if you're just casual but like to play a lot you're still doing what a musician or artist would; enjoying yourself. Just make sure you actually are. If you constantly feel like you should be doing something else, or feel like you want more than just playing Call of Duty, I definitely think you should find out what that something more is.

That said, there's a certain thrill to creating something that you can't get from using what somebody else made. I think that's why videogames are not known as a healthy hobby. It's not really a contribution.


----------



## erasercrumbs (Dec 17, 2009)

I protest that time isn't really all that precious. You have a _lot_ of it to blow through before you die.


----------



## Charizard (Feb 16, 2011)

Daktoria said:


> Video games don't garnish real resources, yet it takes real resources to run video games.
> 
> Therefore, they're self-destructive, and because they're so sensational or logical, they remove the incentive for you to discover sensation and logic in the real world, the real world being where real resources come from.


By that logic, pretty much everything people do in their free time (and a lot of what they do at work or school) qualifies as self-destructive.


----------



## angus (Dec 18, 2010)

1. increase hand to eye coordination skills
2. increase problem solving skills
3. you get to blow people's heads off and drive Nissan skylines and cool s**t like that.


----------



## Chris16 (Nov 1, 2010)

Look, if your mind works in such a way that you can see yourself at old age looking fondly at the time you spent on videogames, not regretfully, you're probably good. I'm just skeptical that many people would honestly have that reaction if they spent a lot of their free time on them.


----------



## King Moonracer (Oct 12, 2010)

what else would you be doing if u had nothing to do?


----------



## uhhhbrandon (Dec 21, 2010)

If your gaming 24/7, maybe.


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

I think if you play a game less each day, and only play that game, you will enjoy it more. Maybe I am just getting old. Or maybe this only applies to single player story driven games, multiplayer you can play all day long.

TV shows are way cooler than they used to be. I actually enjoy some TV more than games now.


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris16 said:


> Look, if you're mind works in such a way that you can see yourself at old age looking fondly at the time you spent on videogames, not regretfully, you're probably good. I'm just skeptical that many people would honestly have that reaction if they spent a lot of their free time on them.


This is SAS. If I had a social life I would be out, not playing games. But I would still find time to game (with my friends, girlfriend, kids). I enjoyed growing up a gamer. At best having a social life may get me a better looking wife/girlfriend but I see no other advantage.


----------



## Meli24R (Dec 9, 2008)

If it's an enjoyable hobby than no it's not a waste of time. Life's too short to not do the things you enjoy. It's only a waste if it becomes an obsession and prevents you from living your life fully.


----------



## daniel1989 (Feb 14, 2011)

Only if it prevents you from doing more important things.


----------



## Daktoria (Sep 21, 2010)

Charizard said:


> By that logic, pretty much everything people do in their free time (and a lot of what they do at work or school) qualifies as self-destructive.


I guess. It depends on how you interpret construction versus destruction.

We could say that the world is a giant spaceship-battery and that any sort of action inherently drains it of potential. For example, carving slices of natural resources into tools and using those natural resources to access more resources degrades the amount of carving and using that can be done in general.

Doing that, though, denies the notion of taking action in the world itself, and when you play a video game, you're not carving or using anything. You're just degrading. Maybe you're learning styles of carving and using, but that's not likely. When you play a video game, your aim is to fulfill a virtual objective, not expand your mind.

Maybe you're right though. Maybe life sucks in general and it doesn't matter what objectives we aim to fulfill.


----------



## Daktoria (Sep 21, 2010)

Chris16 said:


> Look, if your mind works in such a way that you can see yourself at old age looking fondly at the time you spent on videogames, not regretfully, you're probably good. I'm just skeptical that many people would honestly have that reaction if they spent a lot of their free time on them.


The problem of course is reaching old age. Video games themselves don't allow for that. Even if you're a master programmer, you're still dependent upon other players appreciating the entertainment and paying you (or getting you advertising income). There's no inherent industrial capacity being realized to sustain life or to ponder over life.

Video games are just virtual stimulation, not even reflection. Even most RPGs emphasize "statistics" in combat over actual roleplaying now. It's the shame of the internet really since you can look up answers for everything. There's no engine out there that customizes questions and answers to establish meaningful character relationships which go beyond the result of power.


----------



## erasercrumbs (Dec 17, 2009)

Sadaiyappan said:


> TV shows are way cooler than they used to be. I actually enjoy some TV more than games now.


I'm the complete opposite. I find myself playing more video games because there's less on TV that I enjoy. With only one or two exceptions, every TV show that I like has been canceled.


----------



## Haydsmom2007 (Oct 16, 2009)

Only if you are doing it all the time. If video games were a waste of time, then so is reading. So is watching movies. So is sleeping. So is working for that matter, or going to school. I could be spending my precious time riding roller coasters instead of at stupid work!


----------



## Toad Licker (Nov 2, 2007)

If it's time enjoyed than it isn't time wasted.


----------



## Paragon (Apr 13, 2010)

All things in moderation as they say. I love gaming, although i dont get enough time for it these days. But when gaming interferes with your real life and responsibilities, that's when it's a bad thing.

It has it's good points too. Gaming is a huge culture, theres a lot of gamers around, so you've instantly got something in common with a lot of people if you game. Plus hand eye coordination, problem solving, blah blah. Depends what you play of course. Dont see anyone dissing Chess but Starcraft can be quite complex too 

I'd say hobbies that are more constructive, i.e. with some kind of beneficial outcome like exercising or playing an instrument or whatever are probably 'better', but you can do both  And sometimes you just want instant gratification videogame style. Gotta have some enjoyment else whats the point at all really?


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

Daktoria said:


> The problem of course is reaching old age. Video games themselves don't allow for that. Even if you're a master programmer, you're still dependent upon other players appreciating the entertainment and paying you (or getting you advertising income). There's no inherent industrial capacity being realized to sustain life or to ponder over life.
> 
> Video games are just virtual stimulation, not even reflection. Even most RPGs emphasize "statistics" in combat over actual roleplaying now. It's the shame of the internet really since you can look up answers for everything. There's no engine out there that customizes questions and answers to establish meaningful character relationships which go beyond the result of power.


What does video games don't allow for reaching old age mean? Define "inherent industrial capacity" to me. Video games are entertainment. There is no industrial capacity in ANY entertainment. Entertainment can educate, make you feel good, change your world view, make you smarter and a better person. Then there is also multiplayer. Games can lead to friendship.

Mass Effect does let you change the relationships in the game, and I'm not sure what you mean when you say go beyond the result of power? The player's power? I think you mean "agency" not power. No game has complete free will in which you can do absolutely anything (although something like second life comes close) but if a game was like that it wouldn't be a game and it would be a direct simulation of life. A game needs rules, it needs a setting and defined characters.


----------



## Chris16 (Nov 1, 2010)

Sadaiyappan said:


> What does video games don't allow for reaching old age mean? Define "inherent industrial capacity" to me. Video games are entertainment. There is no industrial capacity in ANY entertainment. * Entertainment can educate, make you feel good, change your world view, make you smarter and a better person.* Then there is also multiplayer. Games can lead to friendship.
> 
> Mass Effect does let you change the relationships in the game, and I'm not sure what you mean when you say go beyond the result of power? The player's power? I think you mean "agency" not power. No game has complete free will in which you can do absolutely anything (although something like second life comes close) but if a game was like that it wouldn't be a game and it would be a direct simulation of life. A game needs rules, it needs a setting and defined characters.


I think the time is fast approaching when games will be at this level (other forms of entertainment already are to be sure), but I don't think we're there quite yet. That's why I don't feel comfortable answering the question in the thread title with a no, and also why I disagree with a lot of responses here. Playing games equal to reading? Sorry, but no. Not right now. In the future? Sure.


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris16 said:


> I think the time is fast approaching when games will be at this level (other forms of entertainment already are to be sure), but I don't think we're there quite yet. That's why I don't feel comfortable answering the question in the thread title with a no, and also why I disagree with a lot of responses here. Playing games equal to reading? Sorry, but no. Not right now. In the future? Sure.


Games now have poor animation and some of the dialogue doesn't give you the emotional connection you would get in a movie or a book. But in a lot of ways games are superior to books. Books have just been around longer and been described more academically so people think that games could never > books. If we had been playing games for the last 400 years like people have been reading books and books where the newer media then people would think books were isolating you (atleast you can game with friends or online) and with books you just read line after line there is no interaction and no problem solving.


----------



## Chris16 (Nov 1, 2010)

Sadaiyappan said:


> Games now have poor animation and some of the dialogue doesn't give you the emotional connection you would get in a movie or a book. But in a lot of ways games are superior to books. Books have just been around longer and been described more academically so people think that games could never > books. If we had been playing games for the last 400 years like people have been reading books and books where the newer media then people would think books were isolating you (atleast you can game with friends or online) and with books you just read line after line there is no interaction and no problem solving.


Well, I'm not limiting reading to just leisure reading a mystery novel. I'm including all sorts of reading, current events, history, for school, etc. I actually wouldn't put reading some pleasure novel over videogames. But a person who reads_ important_ things all day can actually wind up being a better, more educated person for it. Someone who plays videogames all day? They get faster reflexes and can make important decisions slightly faster... big whoop. The growth you can attain from books severely outweighs the growth you can obtain from videogames, but again, that's only currently. I'm always the one arguing that videogames are art when the issue rises.

Don't get me wrong; I have heard about the possibility of implementing games and new technology into education, making them more like real life, the military has looked into them, etc, so I really think we're on the same page. I'm not at all an advocate of the side that likes to condescend videogames.


----------



## ufoforestgump (Nov 28, 2010)

are they for you?


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris16 said:


> I think the time is fast approaching when games will be at this level (other forms of entertainment already are to be sure), but I don't think we're there quite yet. That's why I don't feel comfortable answering the question in the thread title with a no, and also why I disagree with a lot of responses here. Playing games equal to reading? Sorry, but no. Not right now. In the future? Sure.


When you write this you make it seem like you are talking about books as entertainment. Which is why I mention video games vs books.



Chris16 said:


> Well, I'm not limiting reading to just leisure reading a mystery novel. I'm including all sorts of reading, current events, history, for school, etc. I actually wouldn't put reading some pleasure novel over videogames. But a person who reads_ important_ things all day can actually wind up being a better, more educated person for it. Someone who plays videogames all day? They get faster reflexes and can make important decisions slightly faster... big whoop. The growth you can attain from books severely outweighs the growth you can obtain from videogames, but again, that's only currently. I'm always the one arguing that videogames are art when the issue rises.
> 
> Don't get me wrong; I have heard about the possibility of implementing games and new technology into education, making them more like real life, the military has looked into them, etc, so I really think we're on the same page. I'm not at all an advocate of the side that likes to condescend videogames.


Educationally, yeah, there is no comparison right now. Books are better than video games.


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris16 said:


> Well, I'm not limiting reading to just leisure reading a mystery novel. *I'm including all sorts of reading, current events, history, for school, etc.* I actually wouldn't put reading some pleasure novel over videogames. *But a person who reads important things all day can actually wind up being a better, more educated person for it. Someone who plays videogames all day? They get faster reflexes and can make important decisions slightly faster... big whoop. The growth you can attain from books severely outweighs the growth you can obtain from videogames*, but again, that's only currently. I'm always the one arguing that videogames are art when the issue rises.
> 
> Don't get me wrong; I have heard about the possibility of implementing games and new technology into education, making them more like real life, the military has looked into them, etc, so I really think we're on the same page. I'm not at all an advocate of the side that likes to condescend videogames.


About the first part I bolded: there are historical video games, there are sports games, there are racing games in which you do learn a lot.

And the second part I bolded: When you say playing games all day gives you faster reflexes and improves the speed of your decision making that is ridiculous. It's like saying reading all day improves your reading speed. But when you say reading _important_ things you are not talking about entertainment. Video games are mainly entertainment (aside from those military simulations, driving simulators at schools etc.) so it's not a fair comparison. You can learn as much in games as you can in non-fiction. Most non-fiction takes place made up worlds with made up histories, so you are not learning anything relevant to the real world aside from the way people think (relationships, personalities, you get a "human" story) and this is similar to stories in modern games.


----------



## Chris16 (Nov 1, 2010)

Sadaiyappan said:


> About the first part I bolded: there are historical video games, there are sports games, there are racing games in which you do learn a lot.
> 
> And the second part I bolded: *When you say playing games all day gives you faster reflexes and improves the speed of your decision making that is ridiculous.* It's like saying reading all day improves your reading speed. But when you say reading _important_ things you are not talking about entertainment. Video games are mainly entertainment (aside from those military simulations, driving simulators at schools etc.) so it's not a fair comparison. You can learn as much in games as you can in non-fiction. Most non-fiction takes place made up worlds with made up histories, so you are not learning anything relevant to the real world aside from the way people think (relationships, personalities, you get a "human" story) and this is similar to stories in modern games.


http://kotaku.com/#!5636665/video-games-help-us-make-faster-decisions

I read a similar study on Science Daily but I couldn't find it (edit: it's in the end of the above link actually!); maybe it's all bogus from non credible sources, but I don't care enough to look into it. I'm just telling what I've read when I provide that example.

I completely agree about the storytelling capabilities of videogames. Obviously it's not fair to compare videogames to all aspects of reading, but I thought it was necessary as an answer to this thread. There seems to be a "what would I be doing if I wasn't gaming?" mentality to the some of the answers, and the answer is that there's a lot of productive things you could be doing.


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris16 said:


> http://kotaku.com/#!5636665/video-games-help-us-make-faster-decisions
> 
> I read a similar study on Science Daily but I couldn't find it; maybe it's all bogus from non credible sources, but I don't care enough to look into it. I'm just telling what I've read when I provide that example.
> 
> I completely agree about the storytelling capabilities of videogames. Obviously it's not fair to compare videogames to all aspects of reading, but I thought it was necessary as an answer to this thread. *There seems to be a "what would I be doing if I wasn't gaming?" mentality to the some of the answers, and the answer is that there's a lot of productive things you could be doing.*


Your link goes to a different kotaku post (atleast when I click on it). And.. The part of my response you bolded doesn't make sense with out the next sentence. I agree that playing games does improve your reflexes and decision making time but what I mean when I say it's ridiculous is that you are breaking the game down into the mechanics of what you are doing and then comparing it to what you learn content wise from books. If you talk about reading in terms of how you read mechanically then you can say a similar statement about reading all day in that it will improve your reading speed. See, you just compared the way we play games physically (sorry don't know the right word) to what we learn from the story in a book. You need to compare the story in the game to the story in the book. Or you need to compare the way you physically play a game to the way you physically read a book.

Your right there are a lot of more productive things you could be doing but then you could say the same about watching TV or reading for fun. There is always more productive things you can be doing compared to any entertainment.


----------



## Chris16 (Nov 1, 2010)

Sadaiyappan said:


> Your link goes to a different kotaku post (atleast when I click on it). And.. The part of my response you bolded doesn't make sense with out the next sentence. I agree that playing games does improve your reflexes and decision making time but what I mean when I say it's ridiculous is that you are breaking the game down into the mechanics of what you are doing and then comparing it to what you learn content wise from books. If you talk about reading in terms of how you read mechanically then you can say a similar statement about reading all day in that it will improve your reading speed. See, you just compared the way we play games physically (sorry don't know the right word) to what we learn from the story in a book. You need to compare the story in the game to the story in the book. Or you need to compare the way you physically play a game to the way you physically read a book.
> 
> Your right there are a lot of more productive things you could be doing but then you could say the same about watching TV or reading for fun. There is always more productive things you can be doing compared to any entertainment.


I see what you're saying now. But again, my major point was not to compare the two because I thought they were similar. I compared the two to illustrate my belief that one of them (reading important material) is more productive than the other (playing _certain_ videogames all day). I ended up comparing the physical part of playing a game to the benefits of reading because I was thinking about games like Unreal Tournament or Call of Duty at the time, not something story based. And the key part to all of this "all day." I'm against anyone defending gaming if it's followed by those two words.

Besides, compare the story from a game to the story of fiction? Let's be honest here. Even now ninety percent of games have absolutely horrible stories, and the ones that do have good stories still pale in comparison to the mediums that are designed for storytelling. I'm one hundred percent certain that games will eventually catch up though (hell, Half Life 2 has better story and character than most movies). Apparently point-and-click adventures are already at that level, but I've never played one.


----------



## Sadaiyappan (Jun 20, 2009)

Chris16 said:


> I see what you're saying now. But again, my major point was not to compare the two because I thought they were similar. I compared the two to illustrate my belief that one of them (reading important material) is more productive than the other (playing _certain_ videogames all day). I ended up comparing the physical part of playing a game to the benefits of reading because I was thinking about games like Unreal Tournament or Call of Duty at the time, not something story based. And the key part to all of this "all day." I'm against anyone defending gaming if it's followed by those two words.
> 
> Besides, compare the story from a game to the story of fiction? Let's be honest here. Even now ninety percent of games have absolutely horrible stories, and the ones that do have good stories still pale in comparison to the mediums that are designed for storytelling. I'm one hundred percent certain that games will eventually catch up though (hell, Half Life 2 has better story and character than most movies). Apparently point-and-click adventures are already at that level, but I've never played one.


RPGs have the best stories. I think some RPGs stories are as good as comparable fantasy or sci-fi novels. Something like Fallout comes to mind. But in a game like that some of the side stories are interesting and and get me emotionally involved but I have yet to play a game this generation in which the main storyline really makes me feel like what I have felt when I would read non-fiction when I was younger. I think this is partly because I usually don't finish my games and people keep distracting me from enjoying the games. In fact, I haven't finished almost all of the story games I have bought this generation. Mass Effect was the first game I completed, but I kept going places (a few days at my Grandmothers place, a few days at a temple function etc.) and it just distracts me emotionally then I forget part of the story and I lose all my emotional connection to the game then I just sort of go through the motions to complete it just because I bought it. It's hard to distract me from a movie because they are only two hours long.


----------



## wjc75225 (Jul 24, 2010)

I didn't really read through the thread, so some people may have touched on this. I don't believe they're a waste of time unless you obsessively play them to the point where you don't eat, sleep, etc. It's entertainment just like anything else. I think it only becomes a problem when it turns from "just for fun" to obsession.


----------



## Devdas (Mar 17, 2011)

NaturalLogOfZero said:


> Video games for me are just distractions. Instead of thinking, I can just ignore my life.
> 
> Good for somethings bad for others.


Same here


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

wjc75225 said:


> I think it only becomes a problem when it turns from "just for fun" to obsession.


It USED to be an obsession of mine when I was younger, along with cars.

Now my primary obsession is anything and everything having to do with computers.

Damn Aspergers!


----------



## AliceSanKitchen (Aug 31, 2010)

a waste of time?

 Never.

Join me my friend.


----------



## Noll (Mar 29, 2011)

Video games serve as a great escape.


----------



## ImmortalxApathy (Feb 19, 2011)

Games can rule your life. If it comes to a point where you don't take care of your needs first, Then you possibly have a problem and need to get it into check. There is nothing wrong with playing a video game as long as you are doing so in a healthy manner and not about to kill someone when you can't play.


----------



## dragongirl (Apr 6, 2011)

no never!


----------



## Zugzug (Jan 16, 2011)

ImmortalxApathy said:


> Games can rule your life. If it comes to a point where you don't take care of your needs first, Then you possibly have a problem and need to get it into check. *There is nothing wrong with playing a video game as long as you are doing so in a healthy manner* and not about to kill someone when you can't play.


Well I failed that test lmfao.


----------



## digitalWiazard5817 (Apr 14, 2011)

honestley nothing is a waste of time if you enjoy doing it. bottom line


----------

