Playing games is not an accomplishment: How video games make you retarded.

[RK47]

 

[Johannes]

I already mentioned the difference between challenging and non-challenging games, be the challenging ones video- or other kinds of games.
Really, your attempts at discrediting videogames are laughable. It's only good if you make money, or improve your fitness? Sorry but those are very lame goals to have in life, money and physique are only really good in letting you achieve other, more noble goals.
Also I would bet that playing a good game, reading a good book or fucking a nice girl is a much more worthwhile pursuit than whatever drudgery your career consists of. Even if those things are "only" good for fun and entertainment. If I already happen to get enough money from elsewhere, it's really meaningless if my choice of hobby can bring me some extra coins or not, what matters is if it's intellectually stimulating.

Basically it boils down to whether you can look back at something with pride or not. Be it watching a profound film, beating a tough roguelike, playing in a AoE2 tournament, running a marathon, playing some matches of hockey in the Nth division, assembling a big Star Wars miniature collection, working as a door-to-door salesman, whatever. That everything you do is actually something you want to do, or helps you effectively accomplish those things you find fun and engaging.
If you could, would you go back and switch all the games you've played, all the movies you've watched, all the books you've read, for something else more worthy of the time spent? Or might you lose something actually important in doing so?

Guy in OP is not sad because he played some games, he's sad because he's neglected everything else he wanted to do.

like starcraft right?

can someone please take RK47 for a stroll in the park? he is shitting into other peoples threads again.

RPG Codex
>doesn't scale to your level

 

[Jick Magger]

You're still here, so video games must be doing something right.

 

[Brayko]

I don't understand the underlying theme here. I play games all the time and I don't "suffer" from anything. I chase pussy, usually fail sometimes get lucky, I don't mind my job, I got a loose commander structure at my place of employment. I live with my girlfriend who helps pay the bills. When I'm home I like to jam on the PC.

I don't see what people are whining about. Shitty attitudes and the expectation of instant gratification is the new "In" I suppose.

 

[861129]

Basically it boils down to whether you can look back at something with pride or not. ...

If you could, would you go back and switch all the games you've played, all the movies you've watched, all the books you've read, for something else more worthy of the time spent? Or might you lose something actually important in doing so?

Guy in OP is not sad because he played some games, he's sad because he's neglected everything else he wanted to do.

This is well said, even accounting for all the other existential perspectives that can be argued/question-begged for.

 

[Kane]

It's only good if you make money, or improve your fitness?

That's not what Matthew or I said. But good work at failing to even grasp the issue, putting words into other peoples mouth sure is a lot easier than actually reading the article. I don't think you even know what the term "success" means. I even bolded the critically parts of Matthews text and you still blubber on about "challenges" or "looking back at things I liked". None of this has to do with success.

Guy in OP is not sad because he played some games, he's sad because he's neglected everything else he wanted to do.

Yes, that is what the article was about, it's great that you are starting to catch on. What is important here is that the author asks the question why he neglected everything else and gives an answer.

 

[Angthoron]

Johannes. Is this on purpose?

The target matters in differentiating what target is worthy of being competent at.

Is what on purpose?

And you have not given any way of discerning between pursuits that can give *real (???)* accomplishments and those that cannot, that wouldn't be totally arbitrary. And if something, playing games for example, is a worthless pursuit, why do you keep doing it at all?

As I said I am NOT competent enough to explain how to differentiate analytically. Someone must be. Go ask them.

There was this blind guy last year, playing in one of the top-tier raid groups in WoW, who went on to beat what was then the top tier of raiding. Yeah, without dying and being a hazard to the crew. Sure, he had someone helping him, but try playing with your eyes closed while someone tells you what to do and you'll find it's surprisingly difficult.

I'd say that counts as an achievement.

However, that guy's not only chained to his computer:
http://wow.mmosite.com/updates/wow_...help_a_blind_player_take_down_deathwing.shtml

 

[Kane]

Johannes. Is this on purpose?

The target matters in differentiating what target is worthy of being competent at.

Is what on purpose?

And you have not given any way of discerning between pursuits that can give *real (???)* accomplishments and those that cannot, that wouldn't be totally arbitrary. And if something, playing games for example, is a worthless pursuit, why do you keep doing it at all?

As I said I am NOT competent enough to explain how to differentiate analytically. Someone must be. Go ask them.

There was this blind guy last year, playing in one of the top-tier raid groups in WoW, who went on to beat what was then the top tier of raiding. Yeah, without dying and being a hazard to the crew. Sure, he had someone helping him, but try playing with your eyes closed while someone tells you what to do and you'll find it's surprisingly difficult.

I'd say that counts as an achievement.

However, that guy's not only chained to his computer:
http://wow.mmosite.com/updates/wow_...help_a_blind_player_take_down_deathwing.shtml

The question here is what has all of this to do with success?

 

[Angthoron]

Johannes. Is this on purpose?

The target matters in differentiating what target is worthy of being competent at.

Is what on purpose?

And you have not given any way of discerning between pursuits that can give *real (???)* accomplishments and those that cannot, that wouldn't be totally arbitrary. And if something, playing games for example, is a worthless pursuit, why do you keep doing it at all?

As I said I am NOT competent enough to explain how to differentiate analytically. Someone must be. Go ask them.

There was this blind guy last year, playing in one of the top-tier raid groups in WoW, who went on to beat what was then the top tier of raiding. Yeah, without dying and being a hazard to the crew. Sure, he had someone helping him, but try playing with your eyes closed while someone tells you what to do and you'll find it's surprisingly difficult.

I'd say that counts as an achievement.

However, that guy's not only chained to his computer:
http://wow.mmosite.com/updates/wow_...help_a_blind_player_take_down_deathwing.shtml

The question here is what has all of this to do with success?

Depends on what your definition of success is. Conversely, he's not complaining about how a landmine ended his effective life, killed his hobbies and stomped everything into dirt.

 

[Kane]

Depends on what your definition of success is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_status
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stratification

 

[Angthoron]

Depends on what your definition of success is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_status

Ah.

 

[Cool name]

Look Felix Felicia Felinia, I would agree with you if you tell me what a winner is first and I agree with THAT.

I did use the definition of winner that was implicit on the discussion. From this quote: "(...) an ever increasing connection between your chances in life and the amount of money you have and last but not least the so-called ~pillars of society~ living the role-model of hedonism and shallow fun (...)" Therefore the quotes I did add to the word winners. It is not one I do personally agree with.

In my experience the rich, the powerful, the successful, and the beautiful (the 'pillars of society') do not live lives of hedonism and shallow fun. This is mostly a mediatic construct and thus I did question the 'defiance' inherent in being the consumer of this product and in using it as an excuse to become inert and not care about anything.

 

[Captain Shrek]

Look Felix Felicia Felinia, I would agree with you if you tell me what a winner is first and I agree with THAT.

I did use the definition of winner that was implicit on the discussion. From this quote: "(...) an ever increasing connection between your chances in life and the amount of money you have and last but not least the so-called ~pillars of society~ living the role-model of hedonism and shallow fun (...)" Therefore the quotes I did add to the word winners. It is not one I do personally agree with.

In my experience the rich, the powerful, the successful, and the beautiful (the 'pillars of society') do not live lives of hedonism and shallow fun. This is mostly a mediatic construct and thus I did question the 'defiance' inherent in being the consumer of this product and in using it as an excuse to become inert and not care about anything.

 

[Captain Shrek]

I'd say that counts as an achievement.

However, that guy's not only chained to his computer:
http://wow.mmosite.com/updates/wow_...help_a_blind_player_take_down_deathwing.shtml

Angthoron. I suspect that you know exactly what I mean. My inability to put into words not withstanding.

 

[Kane]

In my experience the rich, the powerful, the successful, and the beautiful (the 'pillars of society') do not live lives of hedonism and shallow fun.

Well, then you're simply uneducated. But even if your weird perception was somehow true, by simply turning on the TV (or any other media for that matter) you'd see role-models a-plenty, whether these are actually real or ficticious is completely irrelevant. What's important is the message.

And just to reiterate on the "winners" again; you can obviously play a good game, have a good time and declare success for yourself - but it is exactly that kind of personal success that is fictious; it only exists within your bubble. Real success is granted by - and can only exist among - your social peers. It's not up to you to determine whether you are successful or not if said success is anything more than what you personally deem successful.
And that is exactly the trap that Matthew Duder fell into. Telling yourself that you are successful is not enough.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_status
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stratification

Looks like a relative system dependent on external observers.

 

[Anselmus]

In my experience the rich, the powerful, the successful, and the beautiful (the 'pillars of society') do not live lives of hedonism and shallow fun. This is mostly a mediatic construct and thus I did question the 'defiance' inherent in being the consumer of this product and in using it as an excuse to become inert and not care about anything.

Not true in my experience. Well, I don't doubt the very exceptional who literally dedicate their lives to their work have no time for such things. But having spent time as a server in the catering industry you get to see how the unexceptional rich (Hollywood types, neurosurgeons, famous academics, business execs, etc.) spend their money and free time, and it's shallower than a highschool girl's life. Somebody like Warren Buffett is surely an outlier.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

I prefer to think that games are protecting society from me rather than the other way around.

"Next, on FOX News: Will gamers go after your children if they aren't sated with more rape and murder simulators?"

 

[Captain Shrek]

In my experience the rich, the powerful, the successful, and the beautiful (the 'pillars of society') do not live lives of hedonism and shallow fun. This is mostly a mediatic construct and thus I did question the 'defiance' inherent in being the consumer of this product and in using it as an excuse to become inert and not care about anything.

Not true in my experience. Well, I don't doubt the very exceptional who literally dedicate their lives to their work have no time for such things. But having spent time as a server in the catering industry you get to see how the unexceptional rich (Hollywood types, neurosurgeons, famous academics, business execs, etc.) spend their money and free time, and it's shallower than a highschool girl's life. Somebody like Warren Buffett is surely an outlier.

Before Agassi answers that let me tell you: Her criteria for Rich, Beautiful and smart are completely different. And that is in fact the right criterion.

 

[Angthoron]

In my experience the rich, the powerful, the successful, and the beautiful (the 'pillars of society') do not live lives of hedonism and shallow fun. This is mostly a mediatic construct and thus I did question the 'defiance' inherent in being the consumer of this product and in using it as an excuse to become inert and not care about anything.

Not true in my experience. Well, I don't doubt the very exceptional who literally dedicate their lives to their work have no time for such things. But having spent time as a server in the catering industry you get to see how the unexceptional rich (Hollywood types, neurosurgeons, famous academics, business execs, etc.) spend their money and free time, and it's shallower than a highschool girl's life. Somebody like Warren Buffett is surely an outlier.

Well, everyone does something with their free time. People with more money will clearly be able to burn more money away at a time for their entertainment, but basically, for most of the rich folks that actually work for their financial success, this relaxation stuff is just that, relaxation. It's not made a cult out of, it's not a "lifestyle" or shit like that. Just people wanting to have fun. This is generally true for 1st gen rich folks that worked for a living, but at 2nd and 3rd gens, things tend to change as it becomes more of "Easy money" for them, and they usually grow up in a situation that then feeds their hedonism. Or, yeah, if 1st gen dude gets his money the easy way (most often entertainment sorts), then yeah, they'll fuck around and show off their motherfucking MONEY, dawg.

Thing is though, shit that MTV and the likes sell as SUCCESS SUCCESS SUCCESS stories and SUPERSUCCESS LIFESTYLE is just a fucking construct. Sure, you can pursue that image, and be forever unhappy with how fucking shit your life is and how you aren't rich and famous Mr. Bono, or you could set your own goals and succeed at them and be relatively happy and successful on your own terms. Maybe even get rich as you succeed to follow your goals and dreams (assuming you are competent enough for it). So yeah.

 

[Kane]

I prefer to think that games are protecting society from me rather than the other way around.

"Next, on FOX News: Will gamers go after your children if they aren't sated with more rape and murder simulators?"

 

[Anselmus]

Well, everyone does something with their free time.

Yes. The rich/successful are no more hedonistic than any other social stratum, except perhaps in practical terms (they have more freedom/ability to indulge their hedonism than someone who has less leisure time or money) but Agassi (is she really a girl, Shrek? Black Cat would say something contrarian like this) seemed to imply the rich/successful are LESS likely to be hedonistic than anyone else.

 

[DraQ]

There was this blind guy last year, playing in one of the top-tier raid groups in WoW, who went on to beat what was then the top tier of raiding. Yeah, without dying and being a hazard to the crew. Sure, he had someone helping him, but try playing with your eyes closed while someone tells you what to do and you'll find it's surprisingly difficult.

I'd say that counts as an achievement.

However, that guy's not only chained to his computer:
http://wow.mmosite.com/updates/wow_...help_a_blind_player_take_down_deathwing.shtml

I'd have gone with text-based games if I were him - MUDs and the like.

 

[Captain Shrek]

s she really a girl, Shrek?

Many answers to this one mon ami.

1) This is a Role Playing game forum
2) I don't care as long as she gives a great impression of being one
3) I do care because I happen to be a guy who wants to score with girls. But I understand the futility of that on internet forums.

 

[Angthoron]

To find out if the poster is a girl:

1) Wait for them to start posting angrily.
2) Ask them if it's their periods talking.
3) Success.


Disclaimer: Your chances of continuing any meaningful social interactions with the poster-revealed-female after such a test will be minimal.