When I was born they had Pong. By the time I was a kid they had Atari. In my teen years it was Nintendo. By college we had Sega. By late college we had the PlayStation.
I'm living right in the wheelhouse of the video game generation. I was a master of both Pac-man and Tekken Tournement. I wasted time with both Galaga and Grand Theft Auto. As I have grown, video gaming has been a constant influence in my life. Now, as a dad, I have to weigh that influence again from a different perspective.
The cons of video games get a lot of popular press. It's not too hard to find a story linking video games to obesity, anti-social behavior or violence. Honestly, I am typically critical of these stories for the fact that most make rather loose leaps between the correlation and the causality of social ills. For example, if I had research that said that "By their 15th birthdays, close to 100 percent of males have masturbated to orgasm." and I have data that says "95 per cent of the teens surveyed said they had access to either a video game machine or home computer and a similar proportion (90 per cent) said they owned at least some video games." Does that mean that video games makes boys by age 15 masturbate? No, it's a correlation. However, the media rarely takes the time to explain the methodology of their comparative data or it's collection in the inferences that it makes when blaming social ills on video games.
I can honestly admit that as a result of my childhood, I'm jaded about the validity of these results because I belonged to several "at risk" groups of my adolescent time. I was a single parented child. I also listened to heavy metal rock. I played D&D. I had dyslexia. We were, for most of my life, below the poverty line. My parents didn't have a college education. Somehow, through all of that statistically proclaimed "adversity" I managed not to become a drug fueled, Satanist who was kept down by socio-economic underpinnings of a corrupted upbringing. Who knew?
The truth of it is, a lot of that so-called study done at the time was conducted to blame a social phenomenon that people didn't understand or like or correlated with an event that they would accept either happened for a different reason or no reason at all. Like the kid that killed himself while listening to Ozzy. His parents wigged out and blamed Ozzy, and heavy metal, for their sons death. In the process, they actually sued Ozzy for causing their sons death. The court killed the case but the standard of people blaming external events for an issue that would have more than likely been tied to the home was set.
Additionally, I never forget that the media is generated not by experts in relevant fields but by people with journalism degrees. They can write about science but are rarely scientist themselves.
On the other hand, the positive effects of video games are rarely ever discussed. In passing we are told that these games are horrible things that teach our children horrible things. Really? If they teach horrible things, then is it possible that they can teach good things too?
For example, some video games teach children problem solving abilities dictated by logic and memory. Not only are children given objectives, but they are given limitations in multiple areas that govern the problem, that must all be managed, simultaneously, in order to solve the problem. All of this is done in an environment that rewards success, promotes learning, increases hand eye coordination, has consequences for failure and works within a construct of fair play.
For example, the "Lego Starwars" video games are ones that my kids love. In them you have to solve puzzles, both short and long term. Achievement is rewarded. Mistakes have an immediate cost but the option to retry and learn from mistakes is available. It forces players to make logical problem solving steps while under character constraints, physical constraint and chronological constraints. Most importantly, it's fun.
This is a game that my four year old can play at a totally different level than what my six year old does or for what I do. The complexity increases the reward of play while not governing the game play itself.
The Shrek and Spiderman3 video games are similar but for older players, due to plot complexity. Most sports games fit under this mold, as well.
In this, parents who are willing to take the time to research and pay attention to game play can find that some video games are great learning tools that create their own reward while giving the parent the open forum to show the real life benefit of the lessons learns in the virtual world.
Even this morning, as my son sat, stuck in a part of the Ratatouille video game, he was frustrated with his ability to pass the level. I pointed out that sometimes multiple attempts have to be made to correctly time any event in order to pass the level. If that fails, back tracking and reevaluating the steps you made to get there and looking for a missed part of the level sometimes helps to show another path to progress. However, I stressed, there is always a way to get over any objective because the game is governed by it's design so that once you truly have all the options the answer will present itself. Sure enough, before I left he had passed it and in that exchange he was reminded of the same qualities that make real people succeed in the real world.
Of course not all games are suitable for all kids and some games are just crap but the same can be said of books, TV or ,in some cases, parents. The point I am making is that video games, out of hand, are no worse than any other tool that a parent has for teaching, yet offer a somewhat unique way to allow for an interaction that mimics the real world in the tasking that one must acquire in order to solve real world issues.Labels: BADASS, hobbies, media, nerdery, parenting, psa, rats, science, scoreboard, sports |