Firaxis is sooo screwed -- Judge: Video game addiction suit can go on
- Thread starter Julian Delphiki
- Start date
Mercade
the Counsellor
And you're willing to settle out of court for a free Deluxe Edition including all future DLC? 
Psyringe
Scout
Even in the US and with top-notch lawyer support, it's very unlikely that such a case could be won.
It's difficult enough to hold the producers of physical drugs (cigarettes, alcohol) responsible for the damage caused by addiction, although some surprising steps in this direction have been taken in the past. Key of these lawsuits is the question "If it damages you, then why do you keep consuming it?". Which, in case of a physical addiction, can be satisfactorily answered by the biochemical effects of the drug (and a stop of consuming it) on the body.
In case of video games, some similarity to drugs is certainly there, the existence of an addiction to gaming has been well established by now. However, this can "only" be a psychological addiction. That's not at all comforting to the person suffering from it, but it's way harder to bring that across convincingly in a court, the things that go on in one's mind are much harder to reliably determine than the biochemical mechanism in our body cells.
I do expect that we'll see some game-addiction disclaimers in the games' documentations in the future though, much similar to the epilepsy warnings we already have. It's the logical consequence of (a) the recent lawsuits and jurisdiction on physical drugs, (b ) the acknowledgement of games as a possible object of a psychological addiction, and (c) the understandable goal of publishers to cover their behinds. It just needs a couple of years to run through the system, then such a notice will appear.
P.S.: Yes, I see that the OP was probably intended as a "fun post" rather than one that starts a serious discussion, but I think despite sounding a bit absurd and funny right now, which it definitely does, the matter also touches some more serious issues which are worth talking about.
It's difficult enough to hold the producers of physical drugs (cigarettes, alcohol) responsible for the damage caused by addiction, although some surprising steps in this direction have been taken in the past. Key of these lawsuits is the question "If it damages you, then why do you keep consuming it?". Which, in case of a physical addiction, can be satisfactorily answered by the biochemical effects of the drug (and a stop of consuming it) on the body.
In case of video games, some similarity to drugs is certainly there, the existence of an addiction to gaming has been well established by now. However, this can "only" be a psychological addiction. That's not at all comforting to the person suffering from it, but it's way harder to bring that across convincingly in a court, the things that go on in one's mind are much harder to reliably determine than the biochemical mechanism in our body cells.
I do expect that we'll see some game-addiction disclaimers in the games' documentations in the future though, much similar to the epilepsy warnings we already have. It's the logical consequence of (a) the recent lawsuits and jurisdiction on physical drugs, (b ) the acknowledgement of games as a possible object of a psychological addiction, and (c) the understandable goal of publishers to cover their behinds. It just needs a couple of years to run through the system, then such a notice will appear.
P.S.: Yes, I see that the OP was probably intended as a "fun post" rather than one that starts a serious discussion, but I think despite sounding a bit absurd and funny right now, which it definitely does, the matter also touches some more serious issues which are worth talking about.
Disgustipated
Deity
If he can't wake up in the day, how can he play the game? Wouldn't that mean he's permanently asleep?
Terxpahseyton
Nobody
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 10,759
Not only that, but as far as I know, freaking everything can cause a psychological addiction. This is a bottomless pit (to join the ranks of boring seriousness
)It is a well known phenomena of intensive computer gaming that the nights grow longer and the days shorter. Never experienced it yourself?
Darth Caesar
Might be a Wizard
I'll add this to the lawsuits started by idiots file.
Psyringe
Scout
Not only that, but as far as I know, freaking everything can cause a psychological addiction. This is a bottomless pit (to join the ranks of boring seriousness
I guess an argument could be construed along the lines of "game developers consciously and deliberately use psychologically well-established reinforcement schemes to induce the urge to continue playing (always the next reward just around the corner in the beginning, high-end rewards that encourage long-term involvement, etc.), so they can be held responsible if these schemes are so resoundingly successful that the players forget their lives over them". It wouldn't be totally grasped out of thin air. But as I already said, it's too vague to hold up in court imho.
Best answer yet.
GeoModder
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,512
Actually, the other way around. The nights are becoming too short to play a proper game, and the days (at work) too long before its gametime again.
While I don't believe that this suit has merit, I have always been surprised by the way video game developers will brag about how "addictive" their gameplay is, either directly or through video game reviewers. Reviewers sometimes use "addictiveness" as a factor in how high of a score they give the game.
I always felt that anyone who uses "addictive" as a positive description for a game has not spent enough time articulating what quality it is that they like so much. There probably is some quality about the game that is good and that they like, but they just can't explain it very well (because I doubt "addictive" is really the quality that they are referring to).
In any case, I think this kid's lawyer is going to have a field day in the deposition asking the game developers about these quotes. I feel sorry for whoever is going to have to explain under the penalty of perjury that they didn't really mean that the game was "addictive" after being directly confronted by their own quote.
EDIT - if this suit had merit, then slot machine developers probably would have lost a lot of suits in the past. Nevertheless, at least slot machine developers are smart enough not to brag about how "addictive" their slot machines are!
I always felt that anyone who uses "addictive" as a positive description for a game has not spent enough time articulating what quality it is that they like so much. There probably is some quality about the game that is good and that they like, but they just can't explain it very well (because I doubt "addictive" is really the quality that they are referring to).
In any case, I think this kid's lawyer is going to have a field day in the deposition asking the game developers about these quotes. I feel sorry for whoever is going to have to explain under the penalty of perjury that they didn't really mean that the game was "addictive" after being directly confronted by their own quote.
EDIT - if this suit had merit, then slot machine developers probably would have lost a lot of suits in the past. Nevertheless, at least slot machine developers are smart enough not to brag about how "addictive" their slot machines are!
Psyringe
Scout
Btw, Civ4 would have been relatively safe - while they did make "one more turn" into one of their main marketing slogans for the game, it's one of the very few games that let you display the real-world time, and even set an alarm. I wonder if Civ5 retains this feature. 
I can see where an online game maker, who benefits from the amount of hours spent on their game, would be incentivized to try and hook gamers to play as many hours as possible. Games that have only a flat up-front cost have significantly less incentive to truly addict someone.
Put differently drug makers and the like truly benefit from said addiction whereas companies that make permanent goods benefit less.
Put differently drug makers and the like truly benefit from said addiction whereas companies that make permanent goods benefit less.
5 Creepy Ways Video Games Are Trying to Get You Addicted
Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_1846...trying-to-get-you-addicted.html#ixzz0xvIWaBBq
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html
Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_1846...trying-to-get-you-addicted.html#ixzz0xvIWaBBq
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=busg7ktmwDw
I can't possibly imagine an ad like this being published these days.A more precise term for "physical addiction" is "chemical addiction". Games cause the body to produce euphoria enducing chemicals that people are programed to respond positively to. Whether the chemical is created externally or internally the addiction is just as real.
Heck, these forums are a prime example of how strong those chemicals can be. The joy from just anticipating Civ 5, let alone actually playing the game, is consuming countless hours of our collective lives.
Addiction == Enjoyment in the sense that desire to repeat an experience is directly proportional to how enjoyable that experience was previously.
I don't necessarily think we should directly punish (through legal liability) the entertainment industry for creating content that is enjoyable knowing full well that the more enjoyable the content is the more apt people are going to forgo their responsibilities in order to partake in the more enjoyable entertainment. I suppose indirect "social" influences, such as a tax used to fund treatment centers, would be something I could probably support - similar to how casinos/gambling is handled.
Heck, these forums are a prime example of how strong those chemicals can be. The joy from just anticipating Civ 5, let alone actually playing the game, is consuming countless hours of our collective lives.
Addiction == Enjoyment in the sense that desire to repeat an experience is directly proportional to how enjoyable that experience was previously.
I don't necessarily think we should directly punish (through legal liability) the entertainment industry for creating content that is enjoyable knowing full well that the more enjoyable the content is the more apt people are going to forgo their responsibilities in order to partake in the more enjoyable entertainment. I suppose indirect "social" influences, such as a tax used to fund treatment centers, would be something I could probably support - similar to how casinos/gambling is handled.
Darth Caesar
Might be a Wizard
Here are my thoughts on the subject.
The Guy Sueing--->
Me -------------->
The Guy Sueing--->
Me -------------->
Weird. Lineage II is a South Korean game and you'd think that'd they would have warnings about game addiction. I remember hearing about a guy that died in an internet cafe (called a PC Bang in Korean) after playing for basically 72 hours straight or how a couple abandoned their infant at home to get in more playing time at their local internet cafe. Pretty bizarre stuff goes on in South Korea.
This guy should know better though. Sometimes you just need to take responsibility for your own actions.
The Civ series almost caused me to be late for work on a few occasions though, I must admit.
This guy should know better though. Sometimes you just need to take responsibility for your own actions.
The Civ series almost caused me to be late for work on a few occasions though, I must admit.
