"Questionable scientific 'evidence' of game addiction is giving the industry?s critics ammunition for a new onslaught against the medium. And this time, it?s not just violent games that are under fire."
The article touches on the history of crusades against video games and the sensationalist popular science being used to target video games. This is more threatening than the violent video games debates, addiction brings on a whole new argument and studies to use against video games. Quote:
"Onslaught 1.0 focused almost exclusively on ?games with violent content.? Among other things, it allowed most of the industry to take a giant step backward (or as far away as possible) from studios like Rockstar and Running With Scissors.
Onslaught 2.0, however, will target the medium in general. There?ll be no slouching back to Tiburon this time round. And thanks to the kind of uncritical, sensationalist popular science that has found its way into places like NewScientist, the crusaders have acquired precisely the ammunition they need to stoke the stigma against videogames and renew their campaign to make gaming a sin that demands government temperance."
I believe this is the gaming industries wake up call, a call to arms if you will. If things continue as they have, gaming will soon find itself regulated like tobacco, drugs, and gambling. Gamers should sit up and take notice, mail your representatives to let them know you are not an addict, you are a gamer. You are not addicted to games, games are a way to enjoy a story interactively. Respond to NewScientist, tell them they are wrong to publish sensational claims on limited research that proves nothing and is based on a flawed model. Take the time to read the article, it points out many of the flaws inherent in this type of research. Check out the four page article here: Next Generation - ANALYSIS: Science and Videogame Addiction