that is way to individual! Taliban accumulates a lot of money through trafficking or tolling drugstransports, meanwhile certain cities in afghanistan had a 10 to 20% increase in addicts.... you don't take those cases per individual base ( of course how it is going there they might be better of in short term bliss and low health )

It depends what you're banning, its externalities, and weighing the pros and cons to maximize utility for all stakeholders - if you want to be a fair and just leader. If you ban video games, you're wiping out ~$40 billion USD of annual revenue from China alone and that sweet 25% corporate tax and 13% VAT revenue.

If the problem is localized to kids and teens (in contrast to adult and senior gamers who are presumably living normal, productive lives), then a fair law would exclude those who aren't problematic to the rest of society. Seems like a good option on paper when you've got overworked parents too drained to police their own kids' phones. I doubt some parents in the West actually police what is on their kids' phones regarding apps and their usage time. As I've said, I feel bad for budding gamers Huijie and Xiuying, but there's more to life to see than just video games.

Drugs are a whole different issue I'm ill-equipped to comment on. Besides being off-topic of course. No idea how everyone got into their own non-sequiturs about China's Opium War history or how its chemical plants are shipping out fentanyl when the posted issue is specifically about a specific demographic's video game regulation.

This is true. The Yakuza are generally interested in most entertainment industries from Pachinko to professional wrestling. Usually, those businesses are not only proftable but good for money laundering as well.

do states want uncontrolled communication?

Well said, truth to be told, i have no clue how far that so called strife for perfection/balance is governing china's ways i'm sure as long as it is politically favored then there is room for such exercises in pure mind and people. Holistically speaking the money gains mentioned might fall away against the bonusses from a more solid core of working people

Games can be addictive indeed, but putting them on the same shelf as drugs is absurd. Games aren't even half as harmful as opium. And while there are probably more gaming addicts than opium addicts, the health and life costs are incomparably smaller when it comes to gaming. I don't know how people behave after taking opium, but I can bet that they behave better after playing games.

By this reasoning (people not getting off games and dying) we could say almost everything is opium. The comparison makes no sense.
Videogames are materially not addictive, much unlike drugs, so if somebody cannot quit the problem is psychological and personal, not physical.


EDIT: of course, a totally different matter is the exploitation of gambling mechanics (surprise!), but then again it is not really the vg part, but rather the introduction of gambling in it.

Good point. :) The addiction from games is based on psychological mechanisms, while addiction from drugs is both physical and psychological. So drugs are much more harmful.

dont think so , what matters is the result , even religion can lead to addiction and change brain chemistry

Are you suggesting that games and drugs are comparably harmful? I don't think that's consistent with our medical knowledge. I'm not talking here that games aren't addictive at all. I only suggest that the costs of using games vs costs of using drugs are not the same and that's why we shouldn't compare these two things.

While the immediate detrimental effects to a person are certainly worse through drug abuse, the long-term effects of essentially retreating into a virtual world become both personal and societal... and expand outward exponentially with the growth of the past time.

IMO if this widespread "retreat" keeps growing (as it will... we love video games), there will need to be some "concrete" real-world accomplishment associated with gameplay. My guess is this will come from something akin to crypto-currency mining being built into games and / or "farming" and sales of in-game resources (which already occurs on many MMO's).

Again, I love video games...

... but they are an "escapist" medium...

... and when such a large number of society seeks consistent, lengthy escape (for many reasons both valid and invalid)...

... we may be headed for trouble.

But...

... even with that said...

... I feel lucky to have experienced the Old West... the Age of Sail... the French Revolution... Ancient Egypt and Greece (as well as many other times and places)... in ways that my parents and grandparents could never have hoped. And I see great value in that.

And...

... when I see things like Skyrim Grandma... that really makes me happy. As time takes a toll on our bodies and abilities, we can still wander the hills of far off places and experience new and fantastic things.

Introverts have always existed and always will. There have always been hermits and such. It's better if they do something instead of nothing and it's better if they communicate with someone online rather than just keeping to themselves.

When hermits started to escape the society en masse and monasteries first started to appear, no-one said:"Hey, haven't you notice the addicting properties of being alone in the desert?". While at the same time authorities did express their concerns about the trend.

It has absolutely nothing to do with drugs. It's peronality first and THEN it's the effects of prolonged "exposure" to something. Wether it's reading books, watching telly or playing games, etc..

Fighting "addicting games" by banning them has the same effect like fighing loitering by installing speakers with ultra sound. Yes, it does scare the youth to somewhere else but it doesn't solve the underlying problem why they were there loitering in the first place. I'm sure if the youth (or even the elderly :D) would have something better to do, they woul do it.

P.S. I'm talking about games and not gambling, btw.

Well, seeing that video games sprung from visual and visceral simulation, I think it would be foolish to discount the potential risks. Where people could "get lost" in a movie for a few hours or spend time "in their imagination" via books, video game simulation and stimulation is quite different.

I'm not saying video games are "the devil," but that they deserve to be studied for both the good and the bad they are bringing.

They do deserve to be studied but shouldn't attention be proportionate to seriousness? Considering a list of all the potential things that could harm kids, how / why does media come to the conclusion that games need high concern?