Recent video game addiction lawsuit lists five major video game publishers as liable for...

[Cal Jeffrey]

Editor's take: In 2019, the World Health Organization finally acknowledged that video game addiction is real. Although they intentionally avoid calling it that, opting for the more politically correct terminology "gaming disorder." The WHO's recognition blew the litigation doors wide open for parents unwilling to take responsibility for their children's out-of-control gaming behavior.

A complaint filed on October 30 against five of the biggest publishers in gaming - Activision Blizzard, EA, Epic Games, Microsoft, and Ubisoft - accuses them and some of their studios of purposefully enabling video game addiction. The lawsuit, posted by Insider Gaming, was entered into the Eastern District of Arkansas and lists 14 charges ranging from negligence to misrepresentation and violations of the Deceptive Trade Practice Act.

In addition to the publishers, the action lists several specific studios, such as Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer Games (collectively under Activision), EA DICE, and Ubisoft Montreal. Plaintiffs only listed a few games that G.D. "played or plays," including Fortnite, Rainbow Six, Battlefield, and Call of Duty. The suit also lists the Microsoft Store, Google Play, and Xbox Game Pass as culprits.

Plaintiffs Casey Dunn and her husband Thomas, filing on behalf of their minor son G.D., contend that the gaming companies are responsible for their son's 12-14 hour per day video game addiction. The Dunns claim G.D. has spent over $3,000 on microtransactions and DLC. This figure does not include the $350 per month spent on services like Xbox Game Pass, Battlepasses, and other game-related subscriptions.

Dunn v. Activision Blizzard et al. via Insider Gaming

"Defendants manufactured, published, marketed, and sold video games, including those played by G.D., that Defendants had specifically developed and designed to cause the addiction experienced by G.D. and other users," the suit reads. "Defendants use traditional game tactics such as feedback loops and reward systems, along with patented designs containing addictive features and technology to ensure its users keep playing longer and spending more on 'microtransactions' within the game."

The plaintiffs are seeking an amount to be determined by the court to cover injuries to G.D. sustained from his addiction, such as physical pain in his hands, elbows, and shoulders. They also want monetary compensation for the parents' "economic loss," statutory and punitive damages, and legal fees.

Plaintiff lawyers spend a great deal of the 129-page filing describing video game addiction and how game companies create monetization practices that leverage addictive behavior, hooking players to spend more money. Specific examples of addictive game mechanics include the usual trigger words like "loot boxes" and "pay-to-win transactions."

The lawsuit even points to various marketing patents it claims studios use to reel in addicted players. For instance, Activision allegedly patented a matchmaking method that pits non-premium players against players who have purchased items to entice the gamer to buy premium gear or cosmetics from the store.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/100783-recent-video-game-addiction-lawsuit-lists-five-major.html

 

[i like foxes]

No Steam , lol !

 

[waclark]

Yeah, I don't see this going anywhere. One could argue the same point with alcoholic beverage manufacturers. Booze is manufactured, advertised, given away, and more to entice people to drink more. So, is Jack Daniels responsible for people who are alcoholics?

 

[Cal Jeffrey]

I get the whole video game addiction thing, but not when it comes to kids. Ultimately, it is your responsibility as a parent to take control of such situations. How did the kid run up his parents' credit card to $3,000? Why is $350 per month still coming out of his parents' bank account? Why are the parents allowing their son to play video games 14 hours per day?

These are ALL things the parents can control. In fact, I would say that it's child abuse on their part for letting it get out of hand. I mean if they really want to play the addiction card, swap the video games for heroin. Would they have bought him a bag of smack? would they just let him use their card or cash to go buy drugs? No. So how can they blame the game companies for addiction when they could have prevented it?

Don't get me wrong. Game companies do sometimes use sleazy tactics to get players to consume more of their content and premium items-- and I'm not talking about Blizzard and Diablo IV. /s But let's not get into this whole 'my son is addicted to video games because companies' thing when the real problem is 'my son is addicted to video games because I chose to use Xbox as a babysitter.'

 

[m4a4]

Sounds like, if anything else, the lawyers are "winning" for convincing these parent that no, they're not at all responsible...

 

[amghwk]

It's confirmed. Suing is the national pastime.

I wonder when WHO will come up with "Lawsuit Addiction" or "Lawsuit Disorder"...

 

[kiwigraeme]

Oh you make your game too much fun
oh you make your pies too tasty
Oh Farcebook allows doom scrolling I believe ( never used it )


Don't mind specific points -loot boxes to kids etc
but blaming a game for being a game is weird

 

[brucek]

If I were the juror I'd be more interested in a case suing these companies for watering down the enjoyability of their games and/or intentionally adding lots of time-wasting filler "daily quests" or similar. (Just kidding, while that's annoying, the remedy is for the gamer to stop playing/buying.)

I'm trying to think of what evidence I'd need to hear to make me feel the publisher had done something criminally wrong to increase addictive properties beyond the inherent "addiction" to any enjoyable activity, and I'm not sure what that might be.

Potentially they'd maybe get me if they had something along the lines of massive misrepresentation of the game mechanics - I.e., the publisher states something like "loot is randomly awarded" but the reality is "a sophisticated algorithm considers multiple factors about this individual player to decide when the optimal time to give good loot to keep them engaged for the most number of hours." Even then the cause of action would be the fraud/deception vs. addiction per se.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

While it's natural for a bunch of older cynical gamers to go full "McDonalds Coffee" lawsuit on this case, there are some fundamental merits.

-Many popular games use dark patterns and skinner box techniques to induce a strong dopamine response to get players psychology hooked.
-Games are marketed toward children. We wouldn't think it's ok to market cigarettes, booze, gambling, etc toward kids but games very much are.
-Parents might initially think a game is safe for their kids to play based on marketing and general popularity and let their kid play (maybe so they aren't the odd one out in their friend group) only to later discover the child has developed an addiction, which by definition isn't just something you can always parent your way out of.
-These parents could have very well grown up on non-skinner boxes games and think these new games are the same thing as the Mario and Sonic they played growing up.

Now I'm not saying the Publishers are obviously guilty or the parents are totally off the hook for not doing their job better, but there is *shock* room.for nuance here

 

[Theinsanegamer]

I get the whole video game addiction thing, but not when it comes to kids. Ultimately, it is your responsibility as a parent to take control of such situations. How did the kid run up his parents' credit card to $3,000? Why is $350 per month still coming out of his parents' bank account? Why are the parents allowing their son to play video games 14 hours per day?

These are ALL things the parents can control. In fact, I would say that it's child abuse on their part for letting it get out of hand. I mean if they really want to play the addiction card, swap the video games for heroin. Would they have bought him a bag of smack? would they just let him use their card or cash to go buy drugs? No. So how can they blame the game companies for addiction when they could have prevented it?

Don't get me wrong. Game companies do sometimes use sleazy tactics to get players to consume more of their content and premium items-- and I'm not talking about Blizzard and Diablo IV. /s But let's not get into this whole 'my son is addicted to video games because companies' thing when the real problem is 'my son is addicted to video games because I chose to use Xbox as a babysitter.'

We, as a country, have long given up on holding parents accountable. That’s “shaming culture”. Instead we give them the tools to be “empowered” to be professional victims where absolutely nothing is their fault, it’s always a third party, one that is nebulously “evil” because someone in academia said so, and is usually a party that can be sued or otherwise punished for the misdeeds of the child.

 

[Hollow]

Should we sue any company trying to make a good game because a good game is addictive? Why don't they sue coca cola instead? They are selling one of the most addictive beverage ever with a very long term addiction that will cause your teeths to rot, ulcers in your stomach and diabetes. Like always, people should learn how to control their temptations and do informed choices instead of complaining about the products. Are we so dumb we can't make reasonable decisions?

 

[Neatfeatguy]

No Steam , lol !

Steam doesn't produce video games. Steam is just a platform to purchase and store digital media, nothing more.

I think you meant to say, "No Valve , lol !"

Then one would simply say that Valve barely makes games anymore so no one really thinks about what they have to offer. If you're not big into Counter Strike, what else really is there from Valve? Half-Life? Hahahaha! That's a joke and it's been the butt of jokes for the past decade+ since they can't seem to even finish the story line with Episode 3 that never came out and never will.

Anyway, the lawsuit is just BS. If someone has a drinking problem do lawsuits get opened up against Budwiser? Smirnoff? Captain Morgan?

If someone has a gambling problem do lawsuits get opened up against the Bellagio? MGM Stuido?

This is just a money grab attempt because people can't take responsibility of their own problems. Always someone else's fault. No one is making them play games. No one makes drunks drink and no one makes gamblers gamble.

 

[RudyBob]

Well they have tried and mostly succeeded in destigmatizing negative consequence behavior. This is no different. Next they will be giving out games and the console to play them on because "they" care and "they" are going to do it anyway

 

[masaaya4]

While it's natural for a bunch of older cynical gamers to go full "McDonalds Coffee" lawsuit on this case, there are some fundamental merits.

-Many popular games use dark patterns and skinner box techniques to induce a strong dopamine response to get players psychology hooked.
-Games are marketed toward children. We wouldn't think it's ok to market cigarettes, booze, gambling, etc toward kids but games very much are.
-Parents might initially think a game is safe for their kids to play based on marketing and general popularity and let their kid play (maybe so they aren't the odd one out in their friend group) only to later discover the child has developed an addiction, which by definition isn't just something you can always parent your way out of.
-These parents could have very well grown up on non-skinner boxes games and think these new games are the same thing as the Mario and Sonic they played growing up.

Now I'm not saying the Publishers are obviously guilty or the parents are totally off the hook for not doing their job better, but there is *shock* room.for nuance here

I remember years ago around when DOTA2 was released, that steam(valve) announced something about hiring psychologists to work on their games.

when the modern idea of game development is using psychologists to decipher how to get gamers hooked, something is not right.

especially the games that offers micro transactions, then the methods used and the design around the gamers experience are way out of hand.

we are beyond blaming our selves or patents for what is happening with modern games.

I mean, when a game does not feature season pass and micro transactions and yearly releases, and the game actually lives up to promisses and gets patched, customers (on steam) talk about buying the game full price without discount to "support the devs". or buying 'supporter DLC'

the fact that this is even a thing shows how fed up people are getting.

 

[i like foxes]

Neatfeatguy , a question arises as to why they dont blame other game studios as Bethesda ? Because they blame the wrong person . Its them the parents to blame .

 

[BuckarooBonzaii]

I guess times are hard. Blame the companies but don't teach your child self control and choices.

 

[amghwk]

If only governments go after cigarette producers instead of trying to "educate", increasing taxes on ciggies and treat addiction .... Like what they are doing here against game producers...

 

[fadingfool]

If it gets micro-transactions band I fully support the plaintiff - other than that it certainly looks like an admittence of bad parenting. My nephew was pretty addicted to computer games, in the end you can use them as a reward mechanism to get the behaviour you want but you need to be strong enough to work through the tantrums. You also need to spend time with your kids and even share their interests if you can - that way you can get them to expand their interests from the single obsession.

 

[Vanderlinde]

In next update; you get a dialog stating how long you played and if you wanted to continue.

 

[The Talking Tech]

They are not suing Sony as well?

Obviously the lawsuit has been brought up by PlayStation fanboys.

 

[TheHustler]

I don't agree with them playing for more than 10 Hrs per day, but Who knows? Maybe they would have become gaming streamers and earn money for a living and pay them back the money they owed to their parents.

 

[kira setsu]

These are just terrible parents with alot of cash to burn.

 

[RandomWAN]

People suing:
Can't be bothered to control theirs or their kids' behavior.
"Am I out of touch?"
"No, it is the game developers who are wrong."

 

[bondflavor]

We never learned how to parent, so let's sue some companies over it for money instead of taking responsibility for it!

Also, the World Health Organization, lol. ROFL, even.

 

[Koguma]

If I were the juror I'd be more interested in a case suing these companies for watering down the enjoyability of their games and/or intentionally adding lots of time-wasting filler "daily quests" or similar. (Just kidding, while that's annoying, the remedy is for the gamer to stop playing/buying.)

I'm trying to think of what evidence I'd need to hear to make me feel the publisher had done something criminally wrong to increase addictive properties beyond the inherent "addiction" to any enjoyable activity, and I'm not sure what that might be.

Potentially they'd maybe get me if they had something along the lines of massive misrepresentation of the game mechanics - I.e., the publisher states something like "loot is randomly awarded" but the reality is "a sophisticated algorithm considers multiple factors about this individual player to decide when the optimal time to give good loot to keep them engaged for the most number of hours." Even then the cause of action would be the fraud/deception vs. addiction per se.

You've inadvertently described the exact algorithm they use. This case could actually hold water. EA especially I believe hired psychologists and designed algorithms to specifically target addiction, and created game mechanics around that. It's like cigarette companies adding more nicotine to make sure you're even more hooked.