• loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s a good first step when game publishers have “innovated” stuff like skill-based mechanics and opaque ranked ladders and there exists an entire economy of esports and deadbeat streamers all for tricking gullible children into believing that playing an online “competitive” game for upwards of six hours a day is something other than a black hole for their valuable time while parenthood and governance has not been able to catch up to said “innovations”.

      Onviously the best approach would be a humanistic and holistic one where companies are forced to not litter their games with addictive dark patterns along with investments in actually positive time sinks for children like sports and youth centers. But in the absence of those that is a good first step.

      • Flamingoaks@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        no its not a good first step this is simply not something that can be addressed at a country level a good first step would be to force corporations to provide parents with tools to see how much their children play and to limit it. this is just a senseless bruteforce approach to a problem that require the most granular approach possible, because the problem isnt that all the children are playing to many of those damn video games its that a few children are addicted.

    • HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I suspect it’s a hamfisted approach to limited data. If some kids can play 6 hours a night and still keep up with schooling, it’s probably okay, but to track that requires impractically constant levels of feedback between parents, teachers, children, and game operators.