I have recently been questioning the reasoning for why I play video game, and no matter how many answers I run through my head, the singular truth has evaded me for quite some time. I find myself thinking about the innate escapism that gaming provides while also fulfilling the need for instant gratification, but these answers feel empty. Is there some deeper meaning or is it simply providing another stimulus to break up the monotony of life?

Science would side with the latter, arguing that the reason for playing is purely based on the brain functions that are take place through the experience. Often when science and video games collide it usually entails a limited study about the effects of violent video games on “young impressionable youths,” while ignoring much else. However, in a 2005 study done by the Helsinki School of Economics¹ on the physiological and emotional responses induced throughout the experience of a game, it was found that “emotional game events may vary as a function of the active participation of the character.” To put it simply a positive emotion and physiological response was noted whenever a player was contributing to an experience no matter the positive or negative outcome in-game; while the negative emotions were only registered during a replay of a failed attempt of the game.

While it is clear that playing video games causes emotional and physiological responses, it doesn’t answer our reasoning for playing them in contrast to a number of other activities, which elicit the same responses. Many child experts look at the video game industry’s success as a result of the increased percentage of families where both parents work, as well as the decreased amount of time that kids spent actively playing which, according to a 2005 article written by the American Medical Association², dropped by 25% over the period from 1981 to 1997. With this statistic in mind it doesn’t take much to reason that the drop in outdoor time could be attributed to the rise of video games and, as the article suggests, structured activities.

While it may seem like a stretch to say that decreased time outdoors is the main contributing force behind the reason why millions of people sit in front of the couch for a purely manufactured experience, the factor of nostalgia adds further proof towards this hypothesis. According to Fred Bryant³, a researcher at Loyola University, “Most people spontaneously reminisce when they’re alone or feeling down—or both—which suggests that we reach for pleasant memories as an antidote to feeling blue,” leading to evidence that nostalgia could be a driving factor for the reason we play video games. As the children that grew up playing video games are now having children of their own, it is only natural for them to share the activities they grew up with to their offspring in hopes of creating the same great memories that they find nostalgia in.

Where using scientific reasoning can explain the instinctual reasoning for playing, it doesn’t provide any answers as to its place with respect to the human condition. In this reference point electric impulses and instinctual emotions are meaningless; the focus needs to be put on the possibility for a video games to make us question our existence. Although this may seem like a tall order, it is more a question if video games can ever be perceived as art.⁴ This is a question that has been debated many times over the years, most notably having movie critic Roger Ebert say that games can’t and will never be art. In a response to an Interview with Clive Barker with gamesindustry.biz⁵, which he posted on his web page, Ebert continues stating that “Art seeks to lead you to an inevitable conclusion, not a smorgasbord of choices.” Whether or not you agree with Ebert is a moot point, it is up to personal experience which should make this decision for you, not some faith in another person’s opinion. I could state which side I associate with, but it would only prove to further devalue my point.

Shadow of the Colossus is often one of the games cited in the argument for Games as Art.

Another point that Ebert makes in his response is that “[Standard game conventions don’t] have much to do with art; they have more in common with sports.” Although it is debatable if a game is art under the traditional sense, games are often goal oriented, much like sports. Competition is a huge part of our cultural, and video games provide a bevy of ways to bolster an individual’s competitive nature, much like sports. Be it your gamerscore, level of your Character in WoW, or the speed that you can complete the original Mega Man, a part of your motivation for doing these things involve the spirit of competition.

So ultimately there is no singular answer to why we play video games. While Science does provide an interesting answer, there isn’t much meaning behind it, much like knowing how a refrigerator works. It could be simply a way to break the monotony from a dull life, find gratification from simple things, explore new environments or even for the shear fun of it, but it is up to an individual, to ultimately decide why they enjoy and play video games.

-Eric Wall

References:

1. Ravaja, N., Saari, T., Laaeni, J., Kallinen, K., Salminen, M. (2005).
The Psychophysiology of Video Gaming: Phasic Emotional Responses to Game Events
Available: here

2. Burdette, H. (2005).
Resurrecting Free Play in Young Children
Arch Pediatric Adolesc. MED/Vol 159
Available: here

3. Krakovsky, M. (2006).
Nostalgia: Sweet Remembrance
Psychology Today Magazine, May/Jun 2006
Available: here

4. Jenkins, H
Games, The New Lively Art
Available: here

5.Ebert, R. (2007)
Games vs. Art: Ebert vs. Barker
Available: here

Tags: featured, Game Industry

Subscribe to the Check Your HUD RSS Feed