
Wired for gaming: Brain differences in compulsive video game players - HugoDaniel
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151221194124.htm
======
raymondgh
$6 to read the study. All I want to do is skim it and explore their
graphs/charts out of curiosity. I can't justify $6-$38 (from rent to download)
for a couple minutes of intrigue. Am I alone in this, or is this a real
problem?

~~~
adenadel
Most readers get access through a library or their place of work (usually
those involved with scientific industries). I don't know if I've ever heard
from anyone paying those prices for a single article. If you went to a 4 year
college at some point you might want to check if your login to the library
still works. You can search for the article there to read it.

~~~
proksoup
If I could understand how the money contributed to the science, I would be
much happier to pay even to skim.

~~~
adenadel
The thing is... fees to publishers don't contribute to funding science.

------
mhuangw
I've always thought that competitive gaming at the highest levels (League,
DOTA, CS:GO, etc.) required a great deal of mental aptitude. Whether that
translates to increased skill in other activities, I'm unsure.

~~~
Mikeb85
I've personally done competitive gaming (in several FPS games I was on teams
that were top-5 worldwide, although these were older games, before
'competitive gaming' was considered a 'real' thing), competitive chess, and
played various sports competitively.

The one thing they all require: lots of practice. It's not enough to be a
"good" chess player - you need to know the openings, know the responses, and
you train repetitively for many scenarios. Simply analysing the possibilities
and being smart isn't enough at higher levels, even if it's enough to blow
away most good casual players...

Same goes for games - for FPS games you memorize maps, coordinate with your
team-mates, and practice, practice, practice. For RTS games, it's much like
chess - you practice openings, plan for various scenarios, memorize sequences
of moves, and so on. If you're on a team, you can practice combining different
strategies (often I'd play an early rush, while my team-mate would develop to
a later-game state as quickly as possible). Winning tournaments is nothing
like winning non-competitive games - it's more of a grind where every detail
matters.

I'm sure it all requires a good amount of mental aptitude, however training is
still key, and the amount of time spent practising somewhat precludes the
possibility of being equally skilled in other tasks (while you can be above
average in many things, good luck being at the 'top' of more than 1 of these
activities).

Edit - I didn't really comment on the main article. Personally I don't think
being good at a video game is in any way related to compulsive gaming. A
similar comparison is between problem gamblers and professional poker players
- they do the same activity, but their motivations are much different.

------
teddyh
From the title one can draw the obvious question: What are the differences
between normal video game players and “compulsive” ones? Or is that difference
glossed over in the study?

~~~
cLeEOGPw
The difference is that compulsive gamers have little control over their play
time. If you play games for long periods of time, it does not mean you are
compulsive, if you do it by choice, because let's say, you have nothing better
to do. You are compulsive if you just can not simply stop playing game. It
boils down to the difference in brain connectivity, because it is impossible
to differentiate the two only looking at behavior over some period of time.

------
dreamgames
[https://en.dusoyun.com/2playergames/3player](https://en.dusoyun.com/2playergames/3player)

