Video game

From RationalWiki
(Redirected from Video games)
Jump to: navigation, search
You gotta spin it to win it
Icon media.svg
Stop the presses!
We want pictures
of Spider-Man!
Extra! Extra!

Video games are games played on a personal computer (PC) or a dedicated device (console). They range in complexity from watch-like devices with inexpensive LCD screens all the way up to full-immersion devices such as flight simulators and virtual reality pods, and cover every possible genre of gaming, including puzzles, action games, and major league sports fantasies. Video game consoles come in models intended to be used at home, like Microsoft's Xbox One, Sony's PlayStation 4, and Nintendo's Wii U, or handheld systems that can be played anywhere (as long as the battery isn't dead; fortunately today's handheld systems come with internal rechargeable batteries so they don't eat up AAs like older systems), such as the Nintendo 3DS and Sony's PlayStation Vita.

The first "real" video game, a tennis game created in 1958,[1] used a dedicated analog computer as a control system and an oscilloscope for output.

Moral panics[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Moral panic
Ahhh, the good old days!

Like most new technologies, video games have spent the last thirty years being accused of corrupting the youth, joining comic books, television, radio, recorded music, role playing games and comprehensive sex education on a dubious list of moral panics created by people who forgot or maybe never knew what it was like to be a kid.

Making the issue worse, moral guardians (such as the infamous ex-attorney Jack Thompson) take the "kid stuff" concept to ridiculous extremes, failing to distinguish between games marketed to children and games marketed to adults, and making hysterical judgements on the effects of video games on players.

The Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) has a very, very long list of advisories — while most deal with sex and violence content, there are applications such as electronic cookbooks that include advisories for "alcohol references" and a few other similar sillies. However, the main rating is usually more than sufficient to determine the suitability of the product for your eight-year-old child.

Moral guardians[edit]

Liberty University prohibits students playing "A" or games with ratings pending. They also prohibit games with sexual content, alcohol/drug use, or strong language listed on the back. Games containing violence are at the discretion of Resident Directors. Bob Jones University takes things a step further and prohibits music games like Guitar Hero and Rock Band, since rock & roll is essentially Satan's voice.

Outright bans are more common than many people are comfortable with. In English-speaking countries, Australia has banned several games, and at one point Greece tried to outlaw all public video gaming in a massive overreaction to a political gambling scandal.[2] In gamer circles, Germany is notorious for its censorship laws regarding violent content in games.


There are a good number of games that don't lack for sexual content, from the relatively mild partial nudity in The Sims to the explicit sexuality of the Hot Coffee scene in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.[3] Game developers and modders do things such as creating nude skins for female characters, or creating explicitly sexual third-party content, or even creating games like the highly controversial RapeLay, a literal rape simulator written and subsequently banned in Japan. Sex in video games has therefore long been a subject of both controversy and amusement. The game Mass Effect, despite being rated M (17+) by the ESRB, caused a moral panic in the conservative media because of one mild alien sex scene that would be just fine on an evening network television show; this culminated in a Fox News shitfest where feminist undertones were used to criticize it.[4]


Fanboys, as extremely dedicated gamers of a particular console, game series, or genre are derogatorily called, frequently have their own moral mishaps that sometimes even make into the media. For example, in Novermber 17, 2006, Jeff Gerstmann received death threats after awarding the high-fantasy game Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess an 8.8 out of 10 ("Great"), which apparently wasn't enough for fans of the series.[5] Given that nearly none of the fanboys knew that any review is biased, an angry tirade of fanboys messaged threats to the reviewer, and a lockdown to the Gamespot building ensued, meaning that nobody in the building got in or got out due to fears of getting lynched in the street over an opinion. Gerstmann vowed never to review a Zelda game again.

However, if that wasn't enough fanboyism for a gaming website, Gamespot in December 19, 2013 made the same unapparent mistake of reviewing a Legend of Zelda game, this time done by reviewer Martin Gaston. Again, the building went on lockdown for Gatson nominating the game A Link Between Worlds for the Nintendo 3DS Game of the Year, which, for batshit fanatics, was too much for a Zelda game given that it broke the formula of a top-view Zelda game which hadn't been used in a while. Gatson was one of the only employees that interviewers could get a hold of, considering all communication within the staff was limited:

I was advised not to even write a review for the game in the first place. They apparently did not want a repeat of the 8.8 event but nothing seemed to go wrong after the review went up. So when I placed my vote for A Link Between Worlds to be game of the year, I thought times had changed. I was wrong. I was dead fucking wrong. Video game fanatics are by definition, fanatics. Nintendo fans, Sony fans, Microsoft fans. They're all insane for devoting themselves to something so trivial.
—Martin Gatson, while the building on lockdown had limited communication.

At least one death threat came every five minutes for these people.[6]

Of course, this isn't limited to just games, as the actual hardware used to play the games can be a subject of literally almost endless debate among video games players. In the transition between the third and fourth generations of video games this was the case in the Console Wars with the famous consoles Sega Genesis and Nintendo NES (later it was the SNES, triggering what was called the Bit Wars so called for who got from 16 to 32 to 64 bits of technology, ad infinitum, ad nauseaum), but in the latest years due to Sega having low profits and Nintendo having a truly narrow demographic it has switched to that of the Sony PS4 and the Microsoft Xbox One. Vicious attacks on both sides have ensued, but near its release the Xbox One had the greatest controversy due to its supposed invasion of privacy, which requires an online connection every 24 hours, and as a result of the controversy Microsoft dropped its plans for DRM shortly before launch. Along for the ride are PC fanboys who detest consoles in general, and many refer to themselves as the "PC master race".

Impact on attitudes[edit]

If Pacman had affected us as kids we'd be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music.
—Marcus Brigstocke

Video games have mixed impacts on players' attitudes towards violence, sexism, and racism.


During the first surge of video game popularity in the late 1970s and early 1980s, there was a somewhat widespread belief that the use of multiple lives in a video game could lead players to not value their own lives (very much in the same spirit as the idea that video game players were allegedly detached enough that they wouldn't understand violence was wrong).

There's no getting around one point — many video games are violent. Some violent games such as Mortal Kombat and God of War are very successful. The latter was particularly notorious in the early 2000s for offending various parenting sensibilities (it had, among other things, blood and gore, intense violence, strong language, monster-hacking, and general nudey themes) and the former effectively set off the entire panic itself. Games such as Grand Theft Auto (GTA) and Max Payne transpose graphic violence into gangster and police procedural settings, and first-person shooters (a genre dating to the 1980 arcade game Battlezone) gained a reputation from their 1990s flagbearer Doom for immense amounts of gratuitous and often supernatural violence.[7]

Needless to say, like any other new media panic, the old media loves to feast on these things — one of the Columbine shooters, for example, was a modestly talented Doom level designer, so many people blamed their gaming rather than their social isolation or fascist political leanings for the slaughter. Pop psychologist "Dr." Phil McGraw has been known to do shows on the alleged danger of video games, as have police procedurals such as Criminal Minds and the Law and Order franchise. In the United States, the Entertainment Software Rating Board was organized to provide MPAA-like content ratings for video games, with this system also being used in Canada while Japan, Europe, and Australia have their own rating systems; however, the perception (by and large a post hoc ergo propter hoc confusing of causality and correlation) continues that excessive video game violence can cause bad behavior in youth, presumably on the assumption that video gamers have a somewhat tenuous grasp of reality. The fact that this has been said about role playing games, comics, and (in a recent case) horror novels without being borne out by studies on the subject really doesn't faze anyone involved in the moral outrage industry.

However, there is psychological research that validates concerns regarding violent video games and an increase in aggressive behavior in children. The American Psychological Association has found that children playing video games in a general category do not show an increase in violent or aggressive behavior. They did find that children who played violent titles saw an increase in aggressive behavior.[8] The APA has called on the industry to design video games that include increased parental control over the amount of violence the games contain.[9]


See the main article on this topic: Sexism
Primary character by gender, race.[10]

Sexism has been a problem, both in games and in the gaming community itself (which in turn influences the content in the games due to consumer demand).

Despite a substantial and growing number of female gamers,[11] there is still an overwhelming tendency for games to star male characters and neglect females, as well as an imbalance in the treatment of male and female archetypes.[10][12]

Female gamers themselves are seen as special and denoted as such with terms like "girl gamer" or the arguably worse "gamer girl". Various excesses of immature behaviour (i.e., nativism, racism, sexism, and heterosexism) are normal in most gaming communities.[13] Many of the more vocal gamers are not happy to be faced with women's rights issues within the scope of their "light-hearted" medium and display behaviour ranging from rude to overtly violent, such as the "Beat Up Anita Sarkeesian" game.[14]

It's been a huge source of outside ridicule[15] and an excuse to not take gamers seriously. This wound is one that even developers admit is self-inflicted.[16][17] Inaction in the face of blatant sexual harassment in official gaming events is especially notable.[18] Further incidents like "Gamergate" don't make it any better, as they both scare off female players and developers, and make games appear more the playground of immature misogynists than a true artform.

There are several scientific studies on whether video games make people sexist:

  • Deskins 2015 ("The Effects of Video Games on Sexism Attitudes in Males"), sampling "117 undergraduate participants (41 men, 76 women)", found evidence that playing violent video games correlated with finding "screen shots of a series of sexist chat messages sent to female gamers" to be amusing (though this doesn't prove causation):[19]
The relationship between amusement and offensiveness ratings were also examined for how much participants reported playing violent video games. [....] As can be seen in Table 1, a correlation of amusement with violent video game play was also (r(117)= .184 and p= .047). That correlation showed that as people who reported playing more VVGs they also reported finding the images more amusing. [....] In order to examine the suspected differences of Hostile sexism, gender and whether or not participants played Violent Video Games (VVGs) or not, a 2(Hostile sexism split: above, below median) X 2(gender: women, men) x 2(Violent Video Games played: yes, no) analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for the mean amusement scores. That ANOVA indicated a marginal main effect for VVGs, F(1, 109) = 3.436,p = .067. That effect occurred because individuals who play VVGs reported more amusement across the images (M = .988) than did individuals who do not play VVGs (M = .635).
  • Breuer et al. 2015 ("Sexist Games = Sexist Gamers? A Longitudinal Study on the Relationship Between Video Game Use and Sexist Attitudes"), sampling 4500 self-identified "active gamers" (in the first wave of the 3-wave longitudinal study), found no evidence that video games increase or decrease sexist attitudes:[20]
The current study addressed this issue by examining the influence of video game exposure on sexist beliefs and attitudes over a 3 year period. However, no evidence for a cultivation effect on sexist attitudes was found. [....] Although the findings from the present study are certainly not conclusive, the absence of any longitudinal links between video game use and sexist attitudes at least suggests two things. First, similar to what has been suggested for aggression,38 it is likely that there are factors, such as personal experience and family and peer influences, that affect the development, proliferation, prevention, or reduction of sexist attitudes more strongly than (fictional) media content. Second, general and broad cultivation effects of video games are somewhat unlikely, as players differ in the games they play, and the interactivity of the medium also causes the experience of the same game to differ between players.
  • The abstract of Fox et al. 2015 ("Lifetime Video Game Consumption, Interpersonal Aggression, Hostile Sexism, and Rape Myth Acceptance: A Cultivation Perspective") reads:[21]
In this study, we conducted a survey (N = 351) of male and female adults and used structural equation modeling to analyze relationships among video game consumption, trait interpersonal aggression, ambivalent sexism, and first-order (percentage of false rape accusations) and second-order cultivation effects (RMA). We found support for the hypothesized cultivation model, indicating a relationship between video game consumption and RMA via interpersonal aggression and hostile sexism. Although these findings cannot be interpreted causally, we discuss the implications of these associations and future directions for research.

And several studies support the idea that "objectifying" (perceiving a person as an object, such as when a woman is not more than background decoration) people, and women specifically, dehumanizes them and makes it easier to cause harm to them:

  • Loughnan et al. 2010 ("Objectification leads to depersonalization: The denial of mind and moral concern to objectified others"), sampling two groups (A:) eighty-six people (54 female, 32 male) and (B:) eighty people participating as part of a course requirement (40 female, 40 male), found that objectification did indeed lead to dehumanization:[22]
In two studies we have demonstrated that objectification influences depersonalization, specifically the attribution of mind and moral status. As objectification increased, mind attribution decreased and moral status was withdrawn. Although this emerged as a main effect in almost all analyses, Study 2 revealed the important qualifying role of target gender. [....] A particularly worrying original finding of this research is that objectification diminishes a second aspect of personhood, perceived moral status. Whether this reduction precipitates less moral treatment of objectified others is an important question for future research. Study 2 demonstrated that the objectified are assigned more pain tablets, a finding which may indicate that they are seen as less sensitive to pain or that we care less about their suffering. Feminist theorists have argued that objectification plays an important role in facilitating violence against women (Dworkin, 2000).
  • The abstract of Heflick et al. 2011 ("From women to objects: Appearance focus, target gender, and perceptions of warmth, morality and competence") reads:[23]
Research on perceptions of humanness and the stereotype content model suggests that humanness is linked to perceptions of warmth, morality and competence. Merging these insights with objectification theory, we hypothesized that focusing on a woman's, but not a man's, appearance should induce objectification, and thus reduce perceptions of these characteristics. In three studies, females, but not males, were perceived as less competent (Studies 2 and 3) and less warm and moral (Studies 1, 2 and 3) when participants were instructed to focus on their appearance. These findings support our position and help rule out stereotype activation as an alternative explanation to dehumanization. Further, they generalized to targets of different races, familiarity, physical attractiveness and occupational status.

Interestingly, another study found that male gamers who were better at Halo tended to be significantly nicer to female gamers, and bad gamers were meaner. In other words, online misogynists are literally losers.[24]


See the main article on this topic: Racism
Characters by race.[10]
Characters by age.[10]

Racism is common in video game culture. Be it on Xbox Live where the N-word is thrown around as much as a frag grenade in an FPS or in the highly stereotyped characters of fighting games, video gaming culture has its own issues of racism on both the developer and consumer sides.

Western video games frequently face criticism for more or less portraying the same type of hero (heterosexual white males). Here's a fun chart that actually illustrates this point quite well.[25] This is so obvious that even large corporations like Ubisoft are developing videogames that openly try and break this trend as much as possible such as Far Cry 4.[26] Despite this, Far Cry 4 has been accused of racism against Asians.[27] This form of racism is based on exclusion, where minorities and people of color are either erased, stereotyped or objectified. For example, a study by the European Journal of Cultural Studies showed that Arabs and Muslims were frequently linked to terrorism in video games, promoting vicious stereotypes about both groups.[28] Despite claims to the contrary, black and Latino American gamers are statistically proven to buy more video games and play them more frequently than white American gamers, showing that this erasure isn't an issue of sales.[29]

Unlike television and movie media of the past, the racism in video games is generally formed from ignorance and erasure rather than outright malice. However, gaming culture itself makes it very hard to bring up the issues of racism. For example, when gamers playing the obviously racist video game "Ching-Chong Beautiful" complete with racial slurs against Asians and highly offensive portrayals of Asians said "Hey, this is pretty racist", other gamers told them to calm down because it was fun to play.[30]

Non-white gamers who comment on racism on video games are either brutally attacked through social media or are ignored. When black gamers asked Bioware why there weren't any black characters in Dragon Age, Bioware's response was incredibly an condescending and borderline bigoted strawman of what the gamers asked complete with the good ol' fashioned "Why aren't you asking if there aren't any vegetarians in Bioware" line of bad logic.[31] Many gamers make the claim that they themselves aren't racist for playing a game that is racist. This is also a nasty form of strawman as it tries to individualize an issue that is intrinsic to entire culture. (In other words, your individualism isn't relevant.)

While the subject matter of video games may be racist or exclusionary, video games as an activity isn't. Studies show that when people of different ethnicities and races play video games in teams, racism and prejudicial attitudes actually decrease.[32] Racism in Western video games is really a larger reflection of Western culture, as long as racism is in Western culture, there will be racism in our media.

Health issues[edit]

Another common concern about video games is health — most children consuming games are usually sitting in front of the computer, TV, and/or handheld game console and not being active.

Other known health issues include:

  • Dizziness and motion sickness (the most common)[33]
  • Back injuries and chair posture[34]
  • Blistering, bruising, or cuts[35]
  • Epileptic seizures[36]
  • Heart attacks[37]

Some see it as a case of correlation does not equal causation—suggesting that video games are the cause of developmental, attention and social issues in individuals does not address the actual problems that an individual might have, such as more sedentary lifestyles.


Nintendo's current systems (as well as newer games on the now-discontinued GameCube and Game Boy Advance) display notifications related to health and safety when starting up for the reasons listed above. Notably, its 3DS has a parental control option to turn off the 3D effect (which works differently from 3D TV and movies; for example, it doesn't require special glasses) on settings for young children due to safety concerns. As noted on the boxes of 3DS games, the 3D effect is only enabled if the parental control settings are set for players seven years of age or older (likewise, turning parental controls off entirely leaves use of the 3D effect unrestricted). Up until the 3DS (including the original DS and the Wii), the notifications could not be turned off, but they only required a press of a button to get past and only appeared when the system was turned on, so it ends up less annoying than it sounds. The 3DS only displays the warning when the system is first set up (i.e. when it's fresh out of the box), but includes health and safety application on the system's main menu.

Sony's PlayStation Portable also has health and safety notifications along the lines of what Nintendo has. While general health warnings for Playstation 3 software is generally relegated to game manuals, the PS3 itself displays a warning about photosensitive epilepsy on startup while little white dots of light flash on screen. Microsoft didn't seem to have added any to its Xbox 360 system, however.

Brain development[edit]

"Game brain" is the theory that playing video games for a long period of time affects a player's frontal lobe, inhibiting creative and emotional development (among other things). A relatively new theory, it is generally disregarded by science.

One study by Prof. Ryuta Kawashima suggested that video games impacts the development of the brain by not stimulating the frontal lobe, which the researcher concludes will result in an increasingly violent society.[38] Details of the research are vague and do not show much promise in terms of methodology, as the study compared 30 minutes of adding numbers non-stop with playing a Nintendo game.[39] Beyond the obvious ambiguity, this leads to issues of not considering the unstructured nature of most video games, and the wide range of video game types, both within and beyond Nintendo. The researcher appears to be using beta wave activity as a proxy for frontal lobe activation. A more robust way of collecting this data would be to use an actual fMRI scan. Lack of frontal lobe activation also does not automatically mean that less attention and conscious activity are inherently associated with video games. Individuals who have practiced at a specific task for enough time generally show less activation as the task is "farmed out" to unconscious mental processes.[40][41]

There is recent research that games are (gasp) good for your brain![42] Scientists in Berlin have told adults to play Super Mario 64 (the DS version) 30 minutes a day for 2 months; after this, MRI scans show increased brain matter in areas involving spatial navigation, memory formation, strategic planning, and fine motor skills of the hands compared to the people who didn't play the game. Also, lead researchers of the study concluded that video games may be used even as therapeutic treatment.[43]


There are also concerns over video game addiction, based on the assumption that video games cause people to become socially introverted, rather than being a release for people who already are. There is considerable unease in many nations over disproportionate time (and sometimes money[44][45]) some players spend gaming. In one extreme case a Korean baby died of malnutrition and neglect while her parents spent roughly 12 hours a day raising a "fantasy child" online.[46] Approximately 3% to 8% of gamers are "pathological players" associated with anxiety, depression, problems with social and family interaction, poor school and career achievement. Establishing which is cause and which is effect is difficult.[47]

MMORPGs and other subscription-based games sometimes take advantage of Skinnerian operant conditioning[48][49] to ensure a steady cashflow — but by and large the question of gaming addiction comes down to whether a game is interfering with normal life functions, and the related question of whether it's being used as a substitute for other interaction. The second is not an inherently bad thing; social gaming such as Second Life or MMORPGs often serves as a highly effective social outlet for people who find real world interaction is difficult or uncomfortable. The first, however, is potentially very destructive; unfortunately, people do confuse the two issues regularly.

To combat the negative aspect of video game addition, China enacted laws to force a time-limitation on Massive Multiplayer Online games, where players that have been playing for three continuous hours begin to receive reduced in-game abilities.[50] This is only effective in preventing monomania within a monomania, since players are free to switch to another game that does not assign active penalties.

Societal issues[edit]


Apart from actual gambling games (slot machines, casino games, etc.) there are some disturbing trends in the gaming industry with the practice of loot boxes. Defined, a loot box is a prize pack that can be acquired in game that gives random rewards. The examples we will focus on are available for purchase with real world cash, which can compulse people to gamble on these boxes. In 2007 a Chinese Free-to-play massively multiplayer game invented the modern loot box where you would earn the boxes but have to pay for keys to open them. The most notable first hit in the west to include this are free-to-play mobile games, but over the next decade or so the concept would evolve to include pay-to-play games, such as the traditionally single player series came with Mass Effect 3. In this game there is a multiplayer element that is player-vs-enemy (PvE). Multiplayer characters must be obtained or enhanced with loot boxes which when completing multiplayer elements enhanced the single player experience. Most games would introduce these items as just cosmetics however.

This came to a head with the success of 2016's Overwatch from Blizzard Entertainment (One half of the Activision Blizzard conglomerate), a pay-to-play game with cosmetic lootboxes occasionally handed out for free or available for purchase. This caught on like wildfire for the industry with many major titles for 2017 now adopting both cosmetic and power based loot boxes. Previous games in some series that relied almost exclusively on acquiring items through leveling up were now being fed through loot boxes while consumers were upset about game balance. In 2017 with the release of Star Wars Battlefront 2 (which caries the same title as a much better game from 2005), Electronic Arts was set to tie multiplayer powers and progression that would devastate game balance to these crates (including some power-ups that allowed for abilities to be used twice as often) until the rights holders (Disney) stepped in and told them to put a stop to it. Unfortunately this system still exists, but you just can't buy the crates for real world money and instead have to grind upwards of 40 hours to unlock one hero (Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader, etc.). Post launch, this has become a catalyst for political figures to get involved in games once again, as the system is psychologically exploitative and could prey on unsuspecting children who just want to play Star Wars (the game is rated for teenagers, meaning its easy to buy anywhere with no age restrictions).

Selected other titles with these elements:

  • Halo 5: GuardiansWikipedia's W.svg - (Microsoft Studios, 343 Industries) Certain modes (all labeled as Warzone) in the game have one-use or permanent cards to gain a tangible advantage that can be earned or bought with real currency. Stated in other terms, a fresh player starts with an unscoped assault rifle and a handgun, whereas tangible upgrades to these exist including scopes, bigger magazines with other guns (marksman rifles, SMGs, soforth) and all game vehicles (from the ATV to the tank) being locked behind these crates. On the other side, Arena matches put all players on equal footing regardless of unlocks and give rewards much like Warzone. So you could play Arena to unlock goodies for Warzone then switch when comfortable.
  • Middle-earth: Shadow of WarWikipedia's W.svg (Warner Brothers Interactive Entertainment, Monolith Productions) - Some critics have noticed that the true ending to the game is locked off from players unless they repetitively grind for a very long time or bunker down and buy the crates.
  • Payday 2Wikipedia's W.svg (Independent, Overkill Software) - A pay-to-play title on Steam added locked loot crates safes (with $2.49 keys drills) that contained random cosmetics. Related, a previous pack that had been on sale for $20 that provided unique masks as part of an investment pack that would provide items down the road was just revealed to be a unique safe. The backlash was so heated that community moderators threatened to quit their jobs, the review rating tanked, and bad press all around with the player base seeming to tumble out of control overnight. The only way the developer would fix this was to buy the game (as in the intellectual property of the game) from their publisher 505 Games to go independent for $30 million and a cut of the eventual sequel, Payday 3. The safes were not removed, but the drills from all future safes came at no cost.
  • Call of Duty: WWIIWikipedia's W.svg (Activision-Blizzard, Infinity Ward) - You can earn progress by watching other people open loot boxes. Compulsory behavior training? It's simply common knowledge that our troops during the D-Day invasion in World War II had randomly spawning crates fall from the sky open up, reveal cards, and they gather around that crate to see what they got.
  • Forza Motorsport 7Wikipedia's W.svg (Microsoft Studios, Turn 10 Studios) - All of your unlockable cars, car mods, suits, etc. that were once part of the game in previous entries can now be obtained only through lootboxes-er I mean, "Prize Crates"!

Compared to a similar item, Trading Card Games (TCGs, like Magic: The Gathering) generally have well known odds of what you would be getting into. The typical Magic booster contains 15 cards consisting of one land, ten common rarities, three uncommon rarities and one rare card. Cross-packs a mythic rare comes in about one-in-eight packs while a foil card comes in one in 70 cards (or one in five boosters). These statistics are easily available from Wizards of the Coast (and printed on packs), so no matter what you bought you knew a bit about what you were getting into. In addition, since these are physical items, a secondary market for them exists. If you, for example, bought a booster with a card you have no use in playing or collecting you can then resell it quite easily or make other use of it, notably, a bookmark. When compared to video games and loot boxes, the rarity odds are often not published anywhere unless required by law or developer agreement. Using Halo 5 as an example, you can buy packs in three flavors saying what rarities are included (Common, Uncommon, Rare, Ultra-Rare, Legendary and Mythic are the rarities), but nothing guaranteed in any one individual box and nothing can be resold/traded to other players.

A common rebuttal from the industry and gamers alike is that "it is just cosmetics" and therefore, they do not directly impact gameplay, which under a bit of scrutiny falls flat. Due to how people play their video games in personal settings, options that cater to how a player wants to enjoy the game causes them to enjoy the game more, and arguably, these enhancements, no matter how minor they may seem, increase a player's enjoyment of the game and is therefore considered a viable part of the experience. Worse tends to be the low value or limited of some of these cosmetics. Overwatch has limited use sprays (allowing players to decal walls with a picture) while Destiny 2 has textures (coloring) that can be used only once and only on a single piece of armor, limiting the ability to skin a whole character. Additionally, if these cosmetic items weren't important, greedy publishers wouldn't gate these items behind these chance pay-walls to begin with (and these items aren't easily ignored) and wouldn't have developed a lucrative system behind scamming people who have gambling impulses to purchase loot boxes in hopes that it may contain a skin they would wish to use. Furthermore, many of these items used to be actually part of the game (see above example: Forza Motorsport 7) and used to be actual in-game rewards, and many games still today use aesthetically pleasing costume pieces as rewards for playing the game rather than asking players to play upfront, recent examples being Super Mario Odyssey and Sonic Forces.

Another common rebuttal is that loot boxes are simply up to the discretion of the player to buy them, and all of the negative consequences are up to the individual player weighing the risks and rewards and coming to their own conclusion to make that decision. The problem with this argument is that the game psychologically manipulates the players in many ways to get them to part with their money, such as badgering them with notifications on a main menu to purchase these items, as well as forcing players to either go through endless amounts of tedium and grinding to possibly earn a crate that houses that said item if they choose not to pay extra. In many of these cases, most players have already paid 60 dollars for the game they are playing, the last thing they need is a game persuading them to part with even more cash. This is about as much choice the player has as with people who have psychological problems with gambling, and this is the main reason gambling is restricted for adults only.

Beyond that is the derogatory language used to describe the playerbase, derived from casino terminology. The most common word is "Whale" referring to someone who would spend large amounts of money on any particular game (casinos also call them "High Rollers", who would bet large amounts) with similar terms being "Dolphins" for those who spend a fair amount on a game and "Krill" for those who spend nearly nothing. Whales tend to share similarities to people with gambling addictions, making it very obvious the ingrained problems with these models.

Console Wars[edit]

Not to be confused with the other geek wars.

Xbox and PlayStation have been in a pissing contest over which one has the slightly better graphics for over a decade, and Nintendo is just doing its own thing. As the gaming market across different PCs is near-identical, and the same is true for mobile devices and the PS/Xbox feud, it's strange that fans argue so much over this (seriously, the CPU and graphics processor of the original Xbox One and PS4 were identical). PlayStation and Xbox have effectively entered a style of "gaming-PC-solely-for-gaming", though called mere "inferior PCs" by detractors, where console exclusives are really the only thing that sets those two better than PC gaming. Nintendo, depending on who you ask, either makes innovative machines (which sets them apart from being just a weaker PC), novelty crap (which makes them overly gimmicky), or both, due to effectively being an entire generation behind on computing power (they only got HD in 2012), and while they have very strong first-party exclusives, their third-party support are usually much to be desired. The thing keeping Nintendo going is their monopoly over handhelds, though the continued rise of smartphones may cause a problem, though not in the foreseeable future: the mobile game market is a complete wasteland (Super Mario Run being a contender for 2017 Game of the Year for mobile gaming should be telling), Nintendo is developing financially successful games for the smartphone (thus addressing the rise of the mobile gaming market), and Nintendo Switch and Nintendo 3DS have been so far still very successful.

Through the mid-to-late 80s and early-to-mid 90s, Nintendo and Sega were battling it out, with Nintendo winning both times. But then, Nintendo pissed Sony off, leading to Sony creating the PlayStation, which was a massive hit, because unlike Sega it had GOOD third-party titles, and unlike Nintendo it used CD-ROMs instead of cartridges (this caused its own mini-war). In the early 00s, PlayStation continued its dominance, scoring over two-thirds of home console sales with the PS2. Nintendo finally joined the disc era with the GameCube, which still only used miniDVDs, which were too small for many games, to the point that some titles had to be split onto two discs. This generation finally killed Sega, making them a third-party developer. Xbox joined the market, beginning the "gaming-PC-solely-for-gaming" era of PS and Xbox. Into the seventh generation, Xbox started the generation with the Xbox 360, a console which competed with the BluRay-using PS3, and Nintendo's surprise hit, the Wii, which STILL DIDN'T HAVE HD YET. However, it did bring motion control into the home market, so you win some, you lose some. The next gen, nothing was different on PS and Xbox other than Xbox using BluRays now. Nintendo's Wii U, which threw out everything that made the Wii popular (and as a result was a huge misnomer, having few hardware similarities to its predecessor), was a massive flop, being Nintendo's worst home console ever in terms of sales, and its terrible install base pretty much scared away game developers, as anything developed for the Wii U is doomed to have lower sales. Then, the Nintendo Switch came out, which is a home/handheld hybrid, a further development of one of the Wii U's strong feature of allowing off-TV play, and is sort of in generation limbo, with pointless debate over whether it is in the eighth or ninth generation. It's doing pretty well, nearly outselling the Wii U lifetime sales, saving Nintendo from potentially having to leave the home console market (they almost did before thanks to the N64 and GameCube). And that is all the crap this is about.

While Nintendo may not have the top home console in the foreseeable future, it dominates the handheld market. Sega tried for a while, but failed. Xbox never tried, and while the PSP and PS Vita did adequate enough to compete, they still lost.

The Potential Fall of Consoles[edit]

Another issue is that while if extremely desparate, Nintendo can resort to third-party developing, PlayStation and Xbox rely solely on second and third-party titles, meaning that they have nowhere to go if they collapse due to the mobile and PC markets (though it likely won't affect Sony and Microsoft that much). For example, while the PS4 won the eighth generation of consoles, they experienced the worst sales in their history. All three have never done this poorly before. PCs are back on the rise, and smartphones are becoming powerful enough that some of these games and starting to be ported to iOS and Android. When this happens, it's kind of game over, as the mobile gaming market is, for now, an unstoppable force. And due to pure reliance on second/third-party developers, players can play the same games regardless of format, causing many to leave the console market. At this rate, the console market may not survive.

See also[edit]

Games with articles[edit]

External links[edit]


  1. The "ur-game" remains disputed to this day; "Cathode Ray Tube Amusement DeviceWikipedia's W.svg" just isn't as catchy.
  2. See the Wikipedia article on Law 3037/2002.
  3. Which, technically, was game content that had been removed from the game's plotline but which had been left in the shipping game's data files; the controversy was over the fact that modders had been able to relink the scene into the storyline.
  4. Author Faults a Game, and Gamers Flame Back (January 26, 2008) The New York Times.
  5. Zelda:Twilight Princess, 8.8 from Gamespot (Nov 17, 2006) IGN.
  6. GameSpot Receives Death Threats and Locks Down Entire Office After Naming Zelda Game of the Year by Jack (December 19, 2013) Play4Real (archived copy from January 1, 2014).
  7. BFG-9000: When you absolutely have to frag incinerate every mofo in the room, accept no substitutes.
  8. American Psychological Association, APA Review Confirms Link Between Playing Violent Video Games and Aggression"
  9. APA/CNN, "Do video games lead to violence?"
  10. 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3
  11. Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry: 2012, Entertainment Software Association
  12. Video game industry haunted by lack of female characters: Technical issues, lack of female gamers blamed (Jun 19, 2014 11:08 AM ET Last Updated: Jun 19, 2014 11:13 AM ET) CBC.
  13. Intersecting Oppressions And Online Communities: Examining the experiences of women of color in Xbox Live by Kishonna L. Gray (2012) Information, Communication & Society 15(3):411-428.
  14. Flash Game Makes Players Beat Up 'Tropes vs Women' Creator by John Funk (6 July 2012 11:35 am) The Escapist.
  15. XBox Girls Get Revenge by CollegeHumor (Sep 8, 2010) YouTube.
  16. Survey: poor work conditions and sexism give games industry a bad rap by Tracey Lien (Jun 24, 2014, 12:00pm EDT) Polygon.
  17. Women in Games by Gabe Newell (July 10, 2014) Imagur (archived from June 10, 2015).
  18. Is pervasive sexism holding the professional fighting game community back? Sexually charged language toward a female competitor at the Capcom-sponsored, … by Kyle Orland (2/29/2012, 10:26 AM) Ars Technica.
  24. Men who harass women online are quite literally losers, new study finds by Caitlin Dewey (July 20, 2015) The Washington Post.
  26. How Far Cry 3's "Dude Bro" Led to Changes in Far Cry 4: Creating the "anecdote factory" by Laura Parker (July 18, 2014 at 2:05PM) Game Spot.
  28. Digital Arabs: Representation in Video Games by Vit Sisler (2008) European Journal of Cultural Studies 11(2):203-220.
  29. Hispanics and Blacks Missing in Gaming Industry by Damon Packwood (Sep 13, 2011) New America Media.
  30. Video games’ race problem goes all the way to the top: What we really need to fix is an insular industry, and a gaming culture that punishes people for bringing up race by Sidney Fussell (Wednesday, Dec 11, 2013 5:57 PM UTC) Salon.
  31. BioWare on Racial Diversity in Dragon Age 2 by Cuppycake (Jan 5, 2011) The Border House.
  32. Can Video Games Curb Racism? by Jeremy Hsu (October 24, 2014 11:16 am) Discover Magazine.
  33. Video Games And Motion Sickness
  34. Office Chair, Posture, and Driving Ergonomics
  35. Interactive video games can cause a broad range of injuries, Science Daily
  36. Warning stated in practically any modern game manual. Related is the infamous Pokémon episode.
  37. Multiple anecdotal cases; this is generally a given risk for anyone who doesn't take some time out of their day to exercise.
  38. Researchers: Video games hurt brain development, CNET
  39. Computer games 'cause brain damage', CNN
  40. Video Game Brain Damage Claim Criticised, New Scientist
  41. Kawashima, by the way, did endorse a series of Nintendo DS games – Brain Age – that claim to train your brain with several activities, such as the aforementioned speed-adding of numbers. Regardless of any actual scientific effect, they can be considered "not bad" as games go, and were popular enough to inspire several clones, including the very transparent The Professor's Brain Trainer.
  42. Video Games Boost Brain Power, Multitasking Skills, NPR
  43. How video gaming can be beneficial for the brain, Max Planck Institute
  44. How Every Awful Video Game Thing Was Born
  45. Inside the Epic Online Space Battle That Cost Gamers $300,000, Wired (Though this was probably worth it.)
  46. Jail for couple whose baby died while they raised online child, CNN
  47. What makes video games addictive?, The Economist
  48. My favourite waste of time: why Candy Crush and Angry Birds are so compulsive, The Guardian
  49. This is the same thing that can cause both rats and people to become compulsive gamblers.
  50. Multiplayer Online Video Gaming (MMORPG) Playing In Excess: A Process Addiction?, East Carolina University