The Times: Tech column - EverQuest 'dangers'/Klez worm/Word secrets
By David Rowan
CAN playing a computer game kill you? Elizabeth Woolley believes that an addiction to a popular online game called EverQuest caused her 21-year-old son to take his life last November. So obsessed was Shawn Woolley with the role-playing game that he shot himself in his Wisconsin home after apparently playing for 12 hours a day. "It's like any other addiction," says Mrs Woolley, who wants EverQuest to carry a health warning. "Either you die, go insane or you quit. My son died."
Now, in a move that is stirring the online gaming world, Woolley plans legal action against the game's publisher, Sony Online Entertainment. Naturally enough, Sony denies that it is at fault: Shawn Woolley, after all, had a history of epilepsy and depression, and doctors had diagnosed mental illness. As one member of the "Green Knights" order of EverQuest players said this week: "It's a little like me walking along the street, while drinking a can of Coke, and tripping, and then suing Coca-Cola for not issuing a warning."
Yet the case has revived the debate about the social evils of computer games in particular, this hugely successful Dungeons & Dragons-style game reputedly so addictive that some players call it "EverCrack". There was a similar case in Florida last year when a baby died of neglect. His father, Tony Lamont Bragg, was allegedly so engrossed in his EverQuest sessions that he ignored the baby's screams (Bragg was sentenced to 15 years for aggravated manslaughter). Certainly the game is compulsive: of 2,300 players surveyed, two-thirds claimed that they were addicted. But can a game really be blamed for the problems of some of those who choose to play it?
As tempting as it is to demonise computer games for society's ills, the evidence does not suggest such a simple link. Yes, video games are overwhelmingly violent - so much so that that the Army uses them to train soldiers to kill without hesitation. But that does not necessarily imply that a balanced civilian will want to kill, even after a day at the keyboard. A recent Home Office study examined a decade of academic research into computer games and the young. For every study that showed children becoming aggressive after playing, another concluded that the practice had a calming effect. For each survey that raised worries about addictive behaviour, another concluded that obsessive players go on to prosper educationally and achieve better jobs.
With sympathy to Mrs Woolley, the truth is that some people go through life with particular problems - whether or not they choose to escape into a virtual fantasy world.
++++
IF YOU are among the thousands to have received the latest computer virus, have a heart: its creator was just trying to be a decent son. Variations of the "Klez" worm have been spreading from China by e-mail this week, with such subject lines as "Let's be friends" and "Some questions". But the writer is only trying to help - honest. "I'm sorry to do this," an embedded message states in sketchy English. "I want a good job. I must support my parents. Now you have seen my technical capabilities. How much my year-salary now? No more than $5,500. Can you help me?"
Nice try, fella, but next time take out a small ad.
++++
Here's a reminder for anyone who uses Microsoft Word - civil servants at the Inland Revenue, for instance - that Bill Gates's software can betray your true thoughts. Word, among its quirks, allows you to switch back to recently deleted versions of a document. That's all very useful, but probably not if that document is a carefully reworked press release designed to portray Gordon Brown's Budget in the best possible light. The mischievous Need to Know newsletter has discovered that the Word press release about the new North Sea oil tax, on the Revenue's website, underwent a last-minute revision. Brown originally sought to "ensure that the nation receives a fair share of the profits from the exploitation of the North Sea", but that, apparently, sounded a bit too socialist. So this was replaced with a far more expedient sentence about "the North Sea fiscal regime (not striking) the right balance between promoting investment and taking an adequate share of revenue". Remarkable.
(The Times, April 24 2002)
CAN playing a computer game kill you? Elizabeth Woolley believes that an addiction to a popular online game called EverQuest caused her 21-year-old son to take his life last November. So obsessed was Shawn Woolley with the role-playing game that he shot himself in his Wisconsin home after apparently playing for 12 hours a day. "It's like any other addiction," says Mrs Woolley, who wants EverQuest to carry a health warning. "Either you die, go insane or you quit. My son died."
Now, in a move that is stirring the online gaming world, Woolley plans legal action against the game's publisher, Sony Online Entertainment. Naturally enough, Sony denies that it is at fault: Shawn Woolley, after all, had a history of epilepsy and depression, and doctors had diagnosed mental illness. As one member of the "Green Knights" order of EverQuest players said this week: "It's a little like me walking along the street, while drinking a can of Coke, and tripping, and then suing Coca-Cola for not issuing a warning."
Yet the case has revived the debate about the social evils of computer games in particular, this hugely successful Dungeons & Dragons-style game reputedly so addictive that some players call it "EverCrack". There was a similar case in Florida last year when a baby died of neglect. His father, Tony Lamont Bragg, was allegedly so engrossed in his EverQuest sessions that he ignored the baby's screams (Bragg was sentenced to 15 years for aggravated manslaughter). Certainly the game is compulsive: of 2,300 players surveyed, two-thirds claimed that they were addicted. But can a game really be blamed for the problems of some of those who choose to play it?
As tempting as it is to demonise computer games for society's ills, the evidence does not suggest such a simple link. Yes, video games are overwhelmingly violent - so much so that that the Army uses them to train soldiers to kill without hesitation. But that does not necessarily imply that a balanced civilian will want to kill, even after a day at the keyboard. A recent Home Office study examined a decade of academic research into computer games and the young. For every study that showed children becoming aggressive after playing, another concluded that the practice had a calming effect. For each survey that raised worries about addictive behaviour, another concluded that obsessive players go on to prosper educationally and achieve better jobs.
With sympathy to Mrs Woolley, the truth is that some people go through life with particular problems - whether or not they choose to escape into a virtual fantasy world.
++++
IF YOU are among the thousands to have received the latest computer virus, have a heart: its creator was just trying to be a decent son. Variations of the "Klez" worm have been spreading from China by e-mail this week, with such subject lines as "Let's be friends" and "Some questions". But the writer is only trying to help - honest. "I'm sorry to do this," an embedded message states in sketchy English. "I want a good job. I must support my parents. Now you have seen my technical capabilities. How much my year-salary now? No more than $5,500. Can you help me?"
Nice try, fella, but next time take out a small ad.
++++
Here's a reminder for anyone who uses Microsoft Word - civil servants at the Inland Revenue, for instance - that Bill Gates's software can betray your true thoughts. Word, among its quirks, allows you to switch back to recently deleted versions of a document. That's all very useful, but probably not if that document is a carefully reworked press release designed to portray Gordon Brown's Budget in the best possible light. The mischievous Need to Know newsletter has discovered that the Word press release about the new North Sea oil tax, on the Revenue's website, underwent a last-minute revision. Brown originally sought to "ensure that the nation receives a fair share of the profits from the exploitation of the North Sea", but that, apparently, sounded a bit too socialist. So this was replaced with a far more expedient sentence about "the North Sea fiscal regime (not striking) the right balance between promoting investment and taking an adequate share of revenue". Remarkable.
(The Times, April 24 2002)
posted by David Rowan at Wednesday, April 24, 2002
<< Home