Viewing Thread:
"Dangers of Gaming!"

Everyone knows that in any sport you can injure yourself. In Skiing you break your neck, in football you break your ankle, in snooker you get a cue up the *** but what happens to gamers?

The truth is that gaming isn't as safe a hobby as people would think. Although rare and usually at the expense of the game designer accidents do happen.

I'm writing this article after a friend, who owns a PS2 tripped up on his dance mat while playing Dancing Stage Euromix and landed on his ankle, badly spraining it. This is obiously a rare case, but the history of videogames has not always been painless.

The most common injury is epilepsy and has caused many epileptic fits or seizures. This condition is becoming common and now every video game is obliged to carry warnings about epilepsy. Another common injury is strain of the hands, wrists and arms, however this is easily avoided through taking regular breaks from gaming.

I think the first danger to the gaming world was the Virtual Boy, whose 3D headset cause many people headaches and in extreme cases even seizures. This was the main reason (along with the lack of sales due to this reason) that the Virtual Boy was taken off the market in 1996. The Virtual Boy also caused optical injuries to under 7s who used it.

Another injury or condition i've heard about comes from rumble features. A 15 year old English boy was a games fanatic and played aprox 7 hours of gameplay a night for 5 years and from this extensive gameplay picked up a twitch in his hands called HAVS (hand arm vibration Sydrome) which had developed from the rumble feature of the games which he had been playing.

A more recent case where a lot of people were injured was Mario Party 1 on the N64. A few of the mini games saw the player rotate the control stick as fast as possible. This often caused very painful friction burns (I myself was burnt of 5 different occasions). Eventually, I started wearing my socks on my hands and rotating the stick with them.

Of course, injury while playing video games is pretty rare but it still happens.

thanks for reading
xlroguelx

You don't need to be playing a gam for 7 hours a day to develop HAVS. You only need around 2 hours a day of reletivly heavy rumbling to develop it in a couple of years.

Insane Bartender is right. Gaming does need to be regulated, but i must say i think automatic cut offs are too much and would put people off playing the game. I also think that just telling people they've been playing too long is too little. Maybe making the game slower if you play it too long would frustrate people enough to make them stop but if people still insist on playing they still could

Silent85 wrote:
> No it dont people enjoying themselves lets be happy

People who take cocaine enjoy doing that, and smokers enjoy smoking. People who drink, do so because they enjoy it, and even pedophiles enjoy what they do. Does not mean it's healthy, does not mean it's right and does not mean that use should not be regulated and controlled.

Recently I went to a 2nd hand games store and traded in my copies of NHL 2002 and Ridge Racer V. In return I decided to get GTA3. (at last!) However, i had exchanged £38 worth of games in and GTA3 was only £33. With the £3 left over I picked up an old copy of International Track & Field on the PS1 and said to my mate, "why not?... it'll be a good laught to play i suppose".

I got home and decided to give the athletics sim a try. Every single event required the frantic pressing of the circle and square buttons alternately. half an hour later and I have what feels like crippling arthritis and a very second-hand, beaten-to-death control pad!

No it dont people enjoying themselves lets be happy

Small Frog wrote:
> Most games have that little 'play for 45 minutes then have a 15 minute
> break' thing in the manual. Nobody listens unless they are genuinely
> epileptic or at risk from the extended exposure to whatever it is they
> shouldn't be exposed to.

Perhaps games should have in-built cut-offs then? After, say, 2 hours of play in a 24 hour period, the game locks itself for a pre-determined period of time. Or something like that.

The amount of time some people spend on video games NEEDs to be regulated.

Insane Bartender wrote:
> Bullfrog, makers of Dungeon Keeper, put their own little health
> warning in that game. Keeping an eye on the clock, the "Dungeon
> Keeper" would inform you when you've been playing too long
> quoting things like "GO TO BED" etc.

Let's be honest though. When did anyone actually go to bed as a result of this?

Most games have that little 'play for 45 minutes then have a 15 minute break' thing in the manual. Nobody listens unless they are genuinely epileptic or at risk from the extended exposure to whatever it is they shouldn't be exposed to.

If you think epileptic fits and HAVS are the worst effects from excessive gaming, consider this:

If someone plays games for 7 hours a day, for 5 years, and suddenly notices they have developed HAVS, then the noticable "outward" effect of this excess is the least of his worries. In order to put those hours in, this person has likely neglected:

- Social life
- Extra Curricular education
- education in general
- work experience

Even his relationship with his parents is likely to have faltered.

This person, not only having a physical side-effect, will doubtless suffer the consequences for years to come of being societally under-developed. With what is likely a failed education, and very small circle of friends, this person will need to be completely re-integrated into society, and even then as unskilled labour. And no, playing games religiously for 5 years does NOT qualify you as a games tester.

The problem with this sort of side-effect is that you can't just wake up one day and think "oh my god, i had better get on with my life, and get these shakes sorted out while I'm at it". It's not that easy. Sure, the HAVS can more than likely be fixed with a course of drugs, or at least controlled that way. But no drug exists that can give you back the education you missed. No drug has been created that can help you interact with society the way you should have been for the last few years.

Epilepsy isn't a major problem with gamers these days, I believe all games are clearly health labelled. But where is the health label saying "WARNING: Excessive gaming can cause disintegration of societal patterns" or "CAUTION: Video Games can seriously damage your education"?

Medical Technology gives us the comfort that no matter what gets broken in our bodies, it can almost always be fixed, but mental damage is different, far more subtle, yet far more damaging in its own way.

Such a health warning would be detrimental to the gaming market, and I doubt very much we're likely to see it appear. But as video games are being made more involving, more addictive and more pretty, I think we will see an increase in the number of people becoming disassociated with society, in order to fulfil their desire to play video games.

Bullfrog, makers of Dungeon Keeper, put their own little health warning in that game. Keeping an eye on the clock, the "Dungeon Keeper" would inform you when you've been playing too long quoting things like "GO TO BED" etc. Would it hurt for other games to follow this trend? Since nothing will ever be added to the packing of such products, should pressure be applied to the game prducers to help moderate the amount of time played on their products?

Something needs to be done, the youth of today is slowly flushing it's future down the toilet. Not all of them, but it is happening, and it is changing lives, and it is tragic.

IB

i once jammed a snes in my eye. it wasn't an accident though.

I once choked on a copy of Starfox 64