Found this article on Wired today about a report suggesting the AMA (American Medical Association) recognize game addiction as a specific disorder.



Personally I don't think game addiction is a "specific" disorder. I know I get addicted to games very easily, but I get addicted to ANYTHING very easily. Game addiction is one symptom of a larger cause.

No qualifications to make this statement other than years of observation. What do you folks think?

There seems to be people who are addicted to all kinds of weird things. There's people addicted to programming just like some are addicted to gaming. I wonder who's the biggest addict. The ones making the game or the ones playing it?

In general I think there are levels of addiction that could be seen as a disorder. That isn't limited to gaming though.

Keep in mind that the same report said that MMO "addiction" was more like pathological gambling than actual addiction as well, and that there was no overwhelming proof that game addiction existed.

--matt

I vote the ones making it are more addicted (using a loose non-medical definition of "addiction"), at least speaking for myself and from my own experiences.

I know I have spent hours upon hours designing and coding a system to be how I envision, skipping meals and putting off non-essential social interaction. I have also worked for others before that seemed to not only be addicted to their "concept" of a game, but repeatedly returned to attempting to make it after failures.

How many of us have not talked about our games outside of the internet? Those blank stares from non-gamers should speak volumes.

There is a line in using any form of escapism. The old "use and abuse" mantra. If a game helps relieve stress and is entertaining then you are likely using it. It it interferes with responibilities and interaction outside of the game then you may have an addiction (in my opinion).

Does coding, administration or playing of games change brain chemistry? I have no clue. Can games be addictive? Hell yes! The good ones often are.

Here is another link discussing "Detox for Video Game Addiction" at a .

For any personality prone to addiction, ANYTHING can be addictive to the point of personal harm. Stamp collecting. Investing in Star Wars action figures. Gathering every Superman comic. Catching butterflies. Playing fantasy football. Attending Mets games.

I'd like to collect grant money for writing about every little thing that can indicate people get too invested in their hobbies.

Mmm. Mets games.

I have to agree with everyone here. Addiction is addiction "period". Problem is, sometimes its not "seen" as an addiction. I am sure that a scientist that gives up nearly everything to achieve some goal, and struggles to do so for years, is as "addicted" to it as someone coding software can be. The only difference is, we see MMOs as useless, while we see a new kind of light bulb "useful", so we call the later eccentric, while the former is "addicted". In truth, they may both be addicted. Mind you, I do think that a distinction should be made and any treatment needs to be to limit the damage in those cases, not prevent people from doing brilliant things.

I do however have a serious problem with them insisting on labeling them each with some special name. The nature of how and why addiction works is the same *regardless* of the addiction. Its mechanisms are not completely known, but well enough known to tell when its a real one, or just some moron making up a term, so they can then turn around and say, "Well, its not really that some people get addicted easier, its because of the **existence** of the thing they became addicted too. That is the problem, even if it is genetic." Umm. No... Because, as Brody says, addictive people get addicted *regardless* of eliminating the things you think they shouldn't be addicted to.

Was going to say something about the kinds of people that are most vocal about anything some crank psychologist or media news outlet invents, and how they are *usually* made up of people that have replaced addiction to X with the addiction to belonging to a group that attacks X, but decided that it would be hard not to get too specific and offend someone that belongs to one of those groups.

I've always wondered why playing online games is considered any more addictive than watching television, reading novels or listening to music for hours a day.

Experts now oppose this.

That is awesome news!

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

It's the human interaction that comes along with online games that makes them be deemed more "addictive" because people can get so enveloped in a game that they are better friends with the players on a game than they are with people in real life. If you think I'm kidding, you're obviously not as addicted to mudding as I am. The old use and abuse... I definitely fall in the abuse category. I used to skip classes in High School to go to the library and play a MUD or code on one.

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

I skip other stuff to work on my MUD. Then I skip working on my MUD to play someone else's MUD. Then I skip playing on someone else's MUD to work on a MUD forum. Somewhere among all this enough actual real work gets done to pay the bills so I guess it's ok.

First thought when the iPhone came out? Does it have a telnet and SSH client yet :)

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

A follow-up article was posted in Wired on this today, it's almost amusing to think of "health warnings" on our login pages :)

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

Forum addiction :D. It would be nice if designers recognized addiction and designed the games to be less addictive. When you work on some task you like for a while you seem to enter a certain flow. Ever read about the flow theory()?

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

Hah, are you serious? It's any game designer's dream for their game to be addictive. :)

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

Yes, but in this day and age, how many would openly say so? ;)

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

I'll openly say so, the whole point is to make people want to play the game, the same way as chocolate makers make it taste good.

People have to accept some personal responsibility for how much and how often they play. We give people an option to "freeze" themselves for a period of time for those "willpower challenged", but otherwise you make your own choices.

I know in the past I've spent way to many hours playing games like Oblivion and playing MUDs, but that is my problem not Bethesda's or the owner of whichever MUD I've spent too much time on.

Re: Game addiction as a recognized "disorder"?
 

Well, most game developers only go so far as to say they want their games to have "high replayability" and "stickiness." I've noticed them steering well away from the word "addictive." It's got a bad connotation with the knee-jerk crowd.

Of course, I agree that if I'm "addicted" to a game, it's my problem to solve. But if a developer openly says they want to addict people to their game in this increasingly litigious age, it's a little dangerous.