Devs and Publishers Comment on Accusations of Addiction to “Overly Addictive” Video Games
Game devs object to accusing their games of being addictive simply because they give players „too much” fun.
Some publishers have been accused of intentionally incorporating "addictive" mechanics into games in order to compel players to make payments for aggressive microtransactions. Lawsuits have recently been filed against Microsoft, Activision Blizzard, Epic Games, Rockstar Games, and numerous other developers and publishers, alleging the inclusion of "addictive psychological features" in their games (via PC Gamer).
Games as a destructive addiction
For reminder: one of these lawsuits (filed in the last 12 months) ended up in court in the American state of Arkansas and was brought by Elizabeth Jones, a mother claiming that her son had become addicted to games. Over the course of 9 years, this was supposed to result in him dropping out of school, being diagnosed with serious depressive disorders and "withdrawal symptoms such as rage, anger, and physical outbursts." And spending 350 dollars a month on video games.
As stated in the application, developers are responsible for designing their games in a way that "take advantage of the chemical reward system of a user's brain (especially minors) to create addictive engagement."
Similar allegations were included in the remaining five lawsuits. In total, the law firm Bullock War Mason submitted five of all the applications. The law firm clearly focuses on matters concerning video game addiction and, as reported by PC Gamer, aims to "shining a light on this industry, holding these videogame companies accountable for the harm they are causing, and ensuring changes are made to protect children going forward."
Addictive games = bad games?
These aren't the first accusations about the potentially addictive nature of video games, even if we overlook situations from the late 20th century. Already in 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) recognized "gaming disorder" as a disease.
Some game devs and publishers have already responded to the allegations from the lawsuits. They considered it an "attack on the rights of video game developers under the First Amendment" (this is an amendment adopted by the USA in 2011; via Google Scholar / ESA).
The main criticism from developers is that the accusers appear to be highlighting the "overly engaging" nature of video games as an example of "addictive" mechanics. For example, the "problem" with the Call of Duty series is that it offers "fast-paced play, satisfying graphics, sounds, and other [sources of] dopamine lifts." In turn, the accusation against GTA was formulated as follows: "it includes endless arrays of activities and challenges to continually engage users and ensure they are never bored."
We can actually question whether these described "flaws" of video games can be seen as negative traits at all. That's why developers emphasize that the lawsuits didn't specify particular elements of each game that would have a "damaging" effect on the players.
Instead, the devs argue that the accusers employed "sinister" terms to defame the normal, creative aspects of video games that make them appealing and challenging, as described by PC Gamer.
That Plaintiffs find the expression in games 'too persuasive' and 'catchy'--ie, too entertaining--'does not permit [them] to quiet the speech [through games] or to burden its messengers [developers].
