Want to save the world? Play videogames more. That's what director of game R&D at the Institute for the Future Jane McGonigal is saying you need to do.
In a speech given at TED 2010, a conference where smart people spread smart ideas, she argues that if humanity played 21 billion hours of games every week we would pick up the skills required to solve all the world's problems. She even calls gamers "super-empowered hopeful individuals" because when gaming we have an actual drive to overcome challenges and a belief that we can accomplish anything. It is when we switch to reality that we lose these beliefs.
The solution? Achievements for reality. If you apply the reward system of games to reality people start changing the world in order to get to what she awesomely calls an "epic win." The complete strategy to unlocking world peace is revealed in the video below.
Matthew Razak is Destructoid's Associate editor and co-founder of film site Flixist. He began as community member "cowzilla" and was since sequestered to write brainy features material. He lives in Los Angeles with his beautiful wife.
Likes
Games! Movies! Hats!
Meet the rest of the team
Yesterday I ate a sandwich and I swear I felt my XP increase.
Unfortunately, if I base my leveling solely off sandwiches, it will take approximately 2,100,534 sandwiches before I hit the cap. So currently I'm still level 1.
as much as i like playing games, i don't think playing more will help us, i think we need to think of real life more as a video game. at least when it comes to problem solving. i am so much more willing to take on impossible tasks, or any tasks for that matter, in a video game than i am in real life. i'll give up if a math problem is too hard, but i'll charge headfirst into a room full of giant demons, or a giant boss. i'll die a few times, and maybe stop playing for a little, but i always come back and try again until i beat it.
To be fair a lot of nerds are gamers. In most countries the nerds are a lot smarter than the average populace. In America this was especially the case as the average American is stupid as fuck but the nerds are very sharp.
Too bad I don't like games that involve shooting people. So unless you can find a way to blast cancer cells with rocket launchers, I think we're screwed
Byronic Man said: My girlfriend seemed impressed with the skills I developed from copious amounts of gaming. I am referring to finger dexterity.
You should start using your tongue for the face buttons. Start of on easy mode on Bayonetta and work your way up. When you complete it on hard I'm pretty sure she'll hit the fucking moon.
the problem with this is that in video games you get a do over button for screwing up. when you screw up in real life, millions of people might die and change occurs over a much longer period of time. also individuals are forcibly prevented from carrying out certain overarching actions that might be doable in video games but not in real life.
She's so optimiistic it's hard not to like her but her analysis extends somewhat (extremely) naively when she discusses 'the solution.' If it were me, I'd develope games that have direct relevence to the real world with similarly correlative consequences - for example, a game that teaches you skills, knowledge or capacities that you can use in the real world). But integrating the games into reality is simply more escapism.
This woman spouts absolutely nothing for 25 minutes, using hype words and SWEEPING generalizations to sell her idea (nobody gets angry playing games? really?), tries to pull a Malcolm Gladwell and then references 3 absolutely boring game ideas that 95% of gamers would never play.
Come on, really? I mean, she pulls up some interesting facts. Like how 5 million people working for a whole year would equal 5 million years of work. But overall she says almost nothing. Seems to me like shes fishing for a grant.
@Tron - Instantly thought that, but managed to suppress the song. Thanks for the nail in that coffin (FUUUUUU gotta go play it now).
Re: Article - Isn't it kinda counter intuitive to suggest playing more games will achieve things, when it would mean less time to achieve actual things in real life?
I know you guys were talking about this terrifying you the other day on the podcast. I honestly don't see the harm in it, it seems like a pretty cool idea.
thats the stupidest thing i've heard this week. did she forget 75% of all games have you murdering someone or something?
will she hand out these games with real solutions to those who want to kill us? will these real solution games gather all people together to hold hand and sing kumbi-ah? for someone who is speaking at conference for smart people, that is not how we fix our problems.
#1 fix to america's problems= legalize and tax drugs and end this failed war on drugs that has done absolutely nothing but make good citizens criminals and fill prisons with people who should not be there in the first place.
just the legalization of marijuana will eliminate the need to cut down vast forests and replace them with a renewable fast growing annual resource that has so many benefits to mankind, but oh, no, video games are the goddam cure for what ails ya, what a load of naive bullshit.
Vedicardi2: You'd think so at first but not if you think about it a little more. For starters, money has value for exchange where as gamerscore is just about ego. Plus, money doesn't have nearly the same power to make people do things they never otherwise would. Think about it, how many people would play Hana Montana for $0.00, the cash equivalent of 1000 gamerscore?
I saw this video yesterday, what a fucking waste of time it was. Video games aren't any more conducive to solving real-world issues than any other medium of entertainment. I love and respect video games as an art form and an entertainment venue. I also try to be a responsible human being and do what I can to leave this world in a better state than I entered it. Both video games and social welfare are important aspects of my life. But this theory she puts forth that we need to trick people into the latter by using the former is an insult to both.
The mentality that violent videogames directly provokes violent behaviour is often used by sensationalist evangelicals/politicians, and you know what we say about that.
This lady (whatever her name is) is obviously talking about developing problem-solving attitudes and mentalities. You could take your little 'solution to america's problems' to the bank, but until someone with capacity is motivated to employ all the hundreds of ideas posted on internet blogs, they'll just sit there wasting away. That's why the gamer problem-solving mentality ought to be brought out to real world issues or reality brought to the realm of the gamer.
The latter is the motivation of those three games she referenced. Yes they're lame but they're prototypes demonstrating her hypothesis. Criticizing them for not being God of War enough is missing the point of the project.
Yeah to bad life doesnt work like that....if you want a game that you can look at to help people out you would have to look at a SANDBOX....being the biggest EVE ONLINE.
And if everyone knows eve its full of WAR, Deception, corruption, ect ect
I dunno how many of you skipped over that video just to make a joke about it, but seriously. Watch the damn thing, be an intellectual for half an hour. It'll be well worth your time.
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
7:00 PM on 03.21.2010
| 
Unfortunately, if I base my leveling solely off sandwiches, it will take approximately 2,100,534 sandwiches before I hit the cap. So currently I'm still level 1.
10 GamerScore
Honestly, it is a future that I don't want to be part of.
This seriously may have just changed my life.
Always
I wanna be with you
And make believe with you
And live in harmony harmony oh love
Money, whores, pancakes, whichever.
My girlfriend seemed impressed with the skills I developed from copious amounts of gaming. I am referring to finger dexterity.
You should start using your tongue for the face buttons. Start of on easy mode on Bayonetta and work your way up. When you complete it on hard I'm pretty sure she'll hit the fucking moon.
I'm listening...
The solution? Achievements for reality
...awww. No thanks lady.
Bodybuilding = grinding
I'm gonna be a Berserker!
She's so optimiistic it's hard not to like her but her analysis extends somewhat (extremely) naively when she discusses 'the solution.' If it were me, I'd develope games that have direct relevence to the real world with similarly correlative consequences - for example, a game that teaches you skills, knowledge or capacities that you can use in the real world). But integrating the games into reality is simply more escapism.
Come on, really? I mean, she pulls up some interesting facts. Like how 5 million people working for a whole year would equal 5 million years of work. But overall she says almost nothing. Seems to me like shes fishing for a grant.
I call BS on this one.
Re: Article - Isn't it kinda counter intuitive to suggest playing more games will achieve things, when it would mean less time to achieve actual things in real life?
twice....
..three times, maybe.
will she hand out these games with real solutions to those who want to kill us? will these real solution games gather all people together to hold hand and sing kumbi-ah? for someone who is speaking at conference for smart people, that is not how we fix our problems.
#1 fix to america's problems= legalize and tax drugs and end this failed war on drugs that has done absolutely nothing but make good citizens criminals and fill prisons with people who should not be there in the first place.
just the legalization of marijuana will eliminate the need to cut down vast forests and replace them with a renewable fast growing annual resource that has so many benefits to mankind, but oh, no, video games are the goddam cure for what ails ya, what a load of naive bullshit.
here's the solution, more people farming and less people having kids when they are not ready for the responsibility of having a kid.
here is her answer: play a video game where you solve world hunger and it'll take care of itself, kay.
mind over matter never seemed so lush.
The mentality that violent videogames directly provokes violent behaviour is often used by sensationalist evangelicals/politicians, and you know what we say about that.
This lady (whatever her name is) is obviously talking about developing problem-solving attitudes and mentalities. You could take your little 'solution to america's problems' to the bank, but until someone with capacity is motivated to employ all the hundreds of ideas posted on internet blogs, they'll just sit there wasting away. That's why the gamer problem-solving mentality ought to be brought out to real world issues or reality brought to the realm of the gamer.
The latter is the motivation of those three games she referenced. Yes they're lame but they're prototypes demonstrating her hypothesis. Criticizing them for not being God of War enough is missing the point of the project.
And if everyone knows eve its full of WAR, Deception, corruption, ect ect
I'm sorry, but I have strongly disagree. This kind of crap is pseudo-intellectualism at its best.