should games like this be banned?

tacomancer said:

This is what Candy Crush Saga does to your brain | Dana Smith | Science | theguardian.com

Candy Crush is basically designed to exploit human neurochemical weaknesses.



This is the sort of mechanism which fuels gambling addiction. As science and psychology becomes more sophisticated, more problems with how the human brain processes information will be revealed, opening the door for more ways to exploit that weakness.

I personally view this as extremely unethical at best as it purposefully undermines free will. What is your take?

Click to expand...

We need a strong government that protects us from every possible danger, we need a Government that's able to stop this sort of expectation. Games are a DANGER to you! BAN GAMES!

What if...? said:

....From my research on the subject it appears that about 25% of people are completely defenseless to common techniques.....

Click to expand...

(assuming the figures are correct) Should 75% of the population be banned from doing something enjoyable because 25% of the population can't handle it? I say no.

tacomancer said:

My view is that the addictive drugs should have heavier regulations while the nonaddictive ones should not, except to minors.

Click to expand...

Not that I approve of regulations, but what would these regulations look like?

Hard Truth said:

(assuming the figures are correct) Should 75% of the population be banned from doing something enjoyable because 25% of the population can't handle it? I say no.

Click to expand...

If you look at my posts in this thread you'll see that I don't advocate banning anything. Disclosure and other forms of regulation are appropriate. Just put a warning up that says the game is designed to be addictive. Not so good you want to keep playing, designed to BE addictive.

Education too. Do you think they aren't pounding this crap into kids heads? Who don't have ANY particular cognitive defenses? Whose personalities are mostly shaped by five years old?

Henrin said:

Not that I approve of regulations, but what would these regulations look like?

Click to expand...

If people were prone to suffer physical withdrawal symptoms then the drugs should be illegal. If people were prone to suffer mental withdrawal symptoms greater than what would be seen with a non drug addiction, they would be illegal as well. This effect would have to applicable to 98% of the normative population to rule out the fact that the human body can just be weird sometimes. (For example s common antibiotic levaquin makes me go into a paranoid state, but that's not normal thus wouldn't be considered valid for analysis because its too uncommon a reaction)

This can be empirically tested, thus is able to be proven to be true and therefore be applied without bias or politics or people getting in the way.

tacomancer said:

That would be a good idea too. A list of requirements on disclosure might pass the needs of the free market crowd.

Click to expand...

What if...? said:

If you look at my posts in this thread you'll see that I don't advocate banning anything. Disclosure and other forms of regulation are appropriate. Just put a warning up that says the game is designed to be addictive. Not so good you want to keep playing, designed to BE addictive.

Education too. Do you think they aren't pounding this crap into kids heads? Who don't have ANY particular cognitive defenses? Whose personalities are mostly shaped by five years old?

Click to expand...

I have no problem with mandatory disclosure of a risk as long as it is scientifically accurate-which would require more than one study to establish.

Hard Truth said:

I have no problem with mandatory disclosure of a risk as long as it is scientifically accurate-which would require more than one study to establish.

Click to expand...

I just wishI had thought of it.