04-16-2009, 12:32 AM
Games have certainly evolved to the point that we are now operating in "live" communities of other players, who are represented by avatars. The means in which the game is played doesn't seem to be the concern for me. I feel like the "intention" of my actions within the game is what truly makes the difference.
For instance, I could be of the mindset that I truly want the avatar I am fighting to suffer, because I know that a person is behind the avatar, and I would feel good if I defeated that person. Conversely, I could be of the mindset that should I destroy the avatar, I literally see the destruction as a group of animated pixels turning into a graphical pile of defeat, and my intention to get satisfaction by eliminating the graphic instead of causing pain to someone behind the graphic is truly where the difference lies.
After reading all of these posts and also what Q'uo had to say about video games, I definitely feel a lot more at ease about visiting my friend and blowing away a couple hundred animated soldiers on his XBox. Since I my intention is to experience enjoyment and to "veg" from a hard day of mental work, my actions seem to become nothing more than a time waster.
Regarding the 13 year old who found a community of real people, I feel the game in his case has served a different purpose than what I originally meant when I started to ask the question about games. For him, his intention was to give and take in an environment where he accepted socialism combined with animated game play. For him, the gameplay turned out to be a catalyst for growth. To me, that seems healthy as it proved to become yet another social channel to develop oneself. Had the little anecdote described the 13 year old as not getting enough attention at home and developing a passion to defeat others with an emotional attachment, then I would say that his experiences were more detrimental to growth, and would be a perfect example of how certain types of gameplay can have a negative impact on a person.
Great thoughts by everyone!
For instance, I could be of the mindset that I truly want the avatar I am fighting to suffer, because I know that a person is behind the avatar, and I would feel good if I defeated that person. Conversely, I could be of the mindset that should I destroy the avatar, I literally see the destruction as a group of animated pixels turning into a graphical pile of defeat, and my intention to get satisfaction by eliminating the graphic instead of causing pain to someone behind the graphic is truly where the difference lies.
After reading all of these posts and also what Q'uo had to say about video games, I definitely feel a lot more at ease about visiting my friend and blowing away a couple hundred animated soldiers on his XBox. Since I my intention is to experience enjoyment and to "veg" from a hard day of mental work, my actions seem to become nothing more than a time waster.
Regarding the 13 year old who found a community of real people, I feel the game in his case has served a different purpose than what I originally meant when I started to ask the question about games. For him, his intention was to give and take in an environment where he accepted socialism combined with animated game play. For him, the gameplay turned out to be a catalyst for growth. To me, that seems healthy as it proved to become yet another social channel to develop oneself. Had the little anecdote described the 13 year old as not getting enough attention at home and developing a passion to defeat others with an emotional attachment, then I would say that his experiences were more detrimental to growth, and would be a perfect example of how certain types of gameplay can have a negative impact on a person.
Great thoughts by everyone!