The Gamer’s Syndrome

Chris LaVigne August 4, 2009 When the obsession for videogames causes a total withdrawal from the real world, it’s time for a reality-check.

I have a terrible confession to make. Out of two recent international events—the Iranian election with its subsequent protests and government crackdowns, and the Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) in California where video-game makers showed off their new wares—guess which one I spent hours researching, watching videos and posting to online forums about?

Here’s a hint: it was the one where they announced an Italian plumber was going to ride a dinosaur in space.

During the three days of E3 I watched entire press conferences filled with corporate shills lauding their upcoming products with the subtlety of a ShamWow infomercial. I memorized release dates for new games. I argued with online strangers and real-life friends over which company had the strongest showing. I crashed my computer twice for downloading too many game trailers and screenshots simultaneously.

By contrast, my knowledge of the Iranian political situation, which could feasibly change the nature of the Middle East and global security, consists of a few headlines from CBC’s website and episodes of The Daily Show.

It’s embarrassing, and I’m sure I’m not alone. Videogamer culture is plagued with extreme tunnel vision. Gamers praise fun and entertainment above all else, enshrining escapism as their core value and sparing little time and attention for the problems of the real world.

Every videogame website with a messageboard or forum is guaranteed to host long threads where posters argue over which game system is best. Many gamers, particularly younger ones, take these debates very seriously, sticking up for their choices with the intensity one might expect from a discussion of politics or religion. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo fans react to criticism of their beloved Xboxes, PlayStations and Wiis with the type of indignation usually reserved for slurs against one’s mother (and often respond, ironically enough, with slurs against the original poster’s mother). The endless fanboy debates sparked by every major game announcement hint at the frightening idea that the gamer generation is more concerned with the success and failure of three international mega-corporations than anything else in the world.

Another quiz: guess which one of these two announcements sparked controversy and calls for a boycott among gamers?

1)  In April, Greenpeace released its 12th tri-monthly Guide to Greener Electronics, which ranked 17 top electronics manufacturers on their environmental policies, and has included videogame console makers since December 2007. For the seventh straight time, Nintendo ranked last on the list with a score of one out of ten (up from zero in its first appearance). Microsoft has always scored less than three while Sony has dropped from a seven to a 4.5.

2)  At June’s E3, game developer Valve announced it was releasing a sequel this winter to its popular 2008 multiplayer zombie game Left 4 Dead.

While news of the Greenpeace report was met with indifference or hostile messageboard comments equating the organization with terrorists or (possibly worse?) Al Gore, Left 4 Dead 2 was quickly the subject of a large boycott movement. Its crime? Not being free.

Valve had built a good reputation with gamers by releasing many additions to its games as free downloads. Many felt the content of Left 4 Dead 2 should have been similarly added to the existing game at no cost. A “Left 4 Dead 2 Boycott” group on Valve’s player-community service Steam rapidly grew to more than 38,000 members. It spawned a huge debate with an opposition group who vowed to boycott the boycott and numerous other groups whose names have now descended into Monty Python-esque madness (the L4D2 Boycott Boycott Boycott Boycott Boycott,” for example, whose motto is “Yeah, those boycotting boycotters boycotting the boycotter’s boycotters are going to go down!”). Despite the apparent silliness, many gamers took serious offense to Valve’s decision and the company has had to scramble to try and appease its customers.

Nintendo, on the other hand, hasn’t even responded to Greenpeace’s report and no united group of gamers has emerged to force console manufacturers to be more responsible and informative about their environmental impact.

Is it too much to expect gamers to care? Sure, most videogames help us de-stress, take a break from reality and tune out. And that’s perfectly fine,. Everybody needs a getaway from the world. Any activist I’ve met who’s busy being active 24-7 has been miserable, on the verge of a coronary, or both. It seems like gamer culture is headed to the opposite extreme, though. More than 1990s-style slackerdom, 21st-century gamers have embraced an almost Matrix-like detachment from the real world. We’ve created a virtual bubble to hide in, and it feels to good to leave.

It’s more fun to shoot pixelated aliens than worry about the environment. It’s easier to build computer-generated rollercoasters than get involved with politics. It’s far less depressing to contemplate the future of motion-control technology than the fate of democracy-defending protesters in some far off land.

I understand. After years of being very politically involved, I slowly retreated. As the world’s sadness overwhelmed me, I started spending more time with the hobby that’s fascinated me since the childhood bliss of playing my family’s Intellivision. A session of Half-Life replaced time once spent reading the newspaper. As I became aware of my flight, though, I tried to urge myself back to the fight. I work with an environmental group now, but haven’t strengthened my stomach enough to follow national or international politics too closely.

I worry that gamers who are way more hardcore about gaming than I am will have no connection to the world to fall back on. I wonder what it would take to get them to notice and care about a world event not announced via a game company’s press release. I’m incredibly frightened that gamers worship their corporate benefactors so strongly that they’re willing to ignore or defend their poor environmental practices. What else are we willing to excuse?

I hope that gamers will eventually start to re-associate themselves with the world, to exist in it, help solve its problems and fight against its injustices. Gamers have shown they can be charitable with their contributions to the Child’s Play charity that provides games and toys to hospitals for sick children. Maybe their generosity can extend to causes that aren’t so photogenic, too.

Maybe games themselves can become a more vital part of our culture. Designers who are part of a growing Games For Change movement are using games to engage with society and politics, the way we’re used to authors, filmmakers and musicians involving themselves in the world. It’s mostly been academics and activists who’ve shown interest, but a slow trickle of their ideas have been mixing into the mainstream game industry.

Perhaps some kind of balance will be restored, so gamers can indulge themselves in E3’s three-day orgy of self-promotion while still remembering that the world will not, in fact, end if Microsoft doesn’t pump out another Halo sequel. Perhaps they’ll start getting more involved in causes dedicated to stopping those things that may actually cause the world to end. Maybe gamers like me will feel embarrassed enough by their culture of escapism that they’ll take another look at what they’re missing out there in the real world.

4 Comments


Maybe if we could accept games as more of an art form than a childish distraction people could see engaging the works as a valid pass-time. No one should feel guilty about going to the art gallery in interesting times.

Posted by Kevin Brash on August 5, 2009

But perhaps they should feel guilty for spending all of their time there, to the point of ignoring what's going on outside. I say this as a “hardcore” gamer myself.

Posted by Andrew Holliday on August 9, 2009

The big problem with the greenpeace video was they where too emotional for my taste. They say that consoles contain “toxic” chimical but never said why they are toxic and also they dont give any alternative. Also as said in the video sony is switching they production lines for more “green” way to make produce, its just going to take time because they cant just stop in one shot or else they lose millions.

Finally Fire retardant on electricity is a most because electrical fire is deadly. Also why arent they pushing more about recycling, that would be more efficient then anything else. Being environmental friendly is only about what you put into thing, but making sure they last long enough and don't caught in fire.

Posted by Philippe Bruneau on August 9, 2009

It appears that today, more than ever, gamers are willing to sacrifice their health, careers and personal relationships for the pleasure kick they get from manipulating pixels on a screen (see http://wowdetox.com/ for prime examples).

If gamers are willing to bring such direct and significant consequences on themselves from gaming then what is the likelihood they are going to concern themselves with global issues such as climate change?

Posted by Gavin Peterson on August 13, 2009

Tenth Anniversary: Spring

ISSUE 43 Tenth Anniversary: Spring 2012

online content:

also in this issue:

  • Face the Music

    by Tim Falconer How can someone who passionately loves music also be a terrible singer? Tim Falconer takes up voice lessons—and discovers the surprising science of tone deafness.
  • The Big Job

    by Deni Y. Béchard As a teenager, Deni Y. Béchard went to Vancouver to live with his father, an ex-con with a penchant for telling tall tales. He met a man desperate to forget the past.
  • The Homesickness of Astronauts

    by Johanna Skibsrud "She felt a great sadness. She would remember next to nothing of this, even soon."
  • [see full issue contents]