Is There More to Video Games Than People Realize?

Many people who spend a lot of time playing video games insist that they have helped them in areas such as confidence-building, presentation skills, and debating. However, this positive perspective on video games is rarely found in mainstream media, which continues to portray games as a strange mix of the slightly menacing and alien. This lack of awareness is increasingly outdated, given how video games and the culture surrounding them have become a significant industry.

Recently, the British government released the Byron report, which examined the effects of electronic media on children. The report’s conclusions offered a rational foundation for exploring video game regulation. However, the ensuing debate devolved into the familiar argument between those preaching mental and moral decline and innovative game designers. Meanwhile, gamers continue playing, while the debate rages on over their heads.

Susan Greenfield, a renowned neuroscientist, shares her concerns in a new book. She argues that each individual’s mind is shaped by the totality of their experiences, and as more of our experiences from early childhood happen "on screen" rather than in the real world, children’s minds may undergo a profound shift. Greenfield suggests that the fast-paced, second-hand experiences provided by video games and the Internet could foster a worldview that is less empathetic, more risk-taking, and less contemplative than what we generally consider healthy.

Unfortunately, Greenfield’s writing is filled with mixed metaphors and contradictions, which hinder her ability to persuade. This is regrettable because, despite technophiles' scoffing, her concerns reflect widely held fears rooted in fact. Unlike earlier media, today’s electronic devices blur the boundaries between domestic and work-related spaces, and video games are at the forefront of this shift. A generational divide has emerged, one that is more profound than the shifts associated with radio or television, more alienating for those unfamiliar with new technologies, and more absorbing for those who are. So how can lawmakers regulate something as fluid and complex as video games?

Adam Martin, a lead programmer for an online game developer, says, "Computer games teach, and people don’t even notice they’re being taught." But isn’t the learning that happens in games rather limited? Martin explains that while much of the addictiveness of games stems from mastering a series of challenges, games also excel at encouraging exploration and experimentation, asking the player, “What if?” This, he argues, is a fundamental way humanity understands the world.

Steven Johnson’s thesis is not that video games are a great popular art, but rather that mass culture has been increasingly demanding more intellectual engagement from consumers. He points out that games generate satisfaction through the complexity of their virtual worlds, not through robotic predictability. The process of testing the laws and limits of these imaginary worlds has more in common with scientific methods than with mere addiction. The problems children encounter in games often surpass those they might find in school.

Greenfield, however, argues that there are ways of thinking that video games cannot teach, and she has a point. For instance, books engage and expand the human imagination in unique ways, offering us tools to express and understand our situations in the world. Interestingly, the video game industry is evolving in ways that resemble traditional, communal pastimes rather than the solitary, obsessive world often associated with gaming. Games that bring friends and family together around a console to compete in activities are becoming more popular. The concerns of mainstream consumers—what is appropriate for children, what’s fun to play at parties, and what appeals across generations—are increasingly shaping the agenda.

These trends reveal an important truth: video games are human creations and are within our control. This doesn’t mean we fully understand or control them yet, but it reminds us that they are not inevitable or incomprehensible. Instinctive fear of technology, no matter how deeply felt, is not the right response.

So far, the dire predictions that some traditionalists made about the "death" of old-fashioned narratives and imaginative thought due to video games have not come true. While television and cinema may be struggling economically against interactive media, literacy standards have not declined. Young people still enjoy sports, socializing, and music. Most research—including a recent $1.5 million study funded by the US government—suggests that even pre-teens do not confuse game worlds with real life.

Despite this, the pace and scale of change leave little room for complacency. Richard Battle, a British writer and game researcher, advises, "Times change: accept it; embrace it." Just as no one alive today remembers a time before radio, we will soon live in a world where no one will have grown up without computers. Therefore, it’s crucial that we carefully examine what we stand to lose and gain before it’s too late.