Gaming vs Gambling DiGRA 2018 Patrick Prax
0 likes150 views
The talk compares the results and practices of the treatment of problem gaming and gambling with each other relevant information for both the theoretical discussion of these concepts and the policy for their treatment. The results show that the central difference between the treatment of gambling and gaming was the aim of the treatment: for gamblers this aim was first and foremost to stop gambling. For problem gamers the aim was not to stop gaming. On the contrary, the gaming was often not even the focus of the interaction with the practitioner. The aim was instead to help the gamers to add more life to their lives instead of taking the gaming away.
![Practitioner: I dont think we should mix gaming
and gambling but the organizations in
Gothenburg and in Sweden do it. The risk is that
the treatment becomes a copy of that for
gambling. You know, people know how one of
them works but if we get a 16-year-old and tell
him you have to completely stop playing! we
will lose him. Its a big part of culture. A youth
culture that is. I think that [asking them to stop
gaming completely] makes many scared.
19](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/gamingvsgamblingdigra2018-patrickprax-180727153316/85/Gaming-vs-Gambling-DiGRA-2018-Patrick-Prax-19-320.jpg)
Gaming vs Gambling DiGRA 2018 Patrick Prax
- 1. Problem Gaming vs. Gambling: Can they be treated together? Patrick Prax Assistant Professor, Department of Game Design, Uppsala University patrick.prax@speldesign.uu.se 1
- 2. 2
- 3. Gaming and Gambling at DiGRA Lootboxes from the perspectives of legislative frameworks a typology that focusses on the interaction of money (buying boxes and selling content) Questions of defining gaming and gambling (in regulatory institutions and theory) I am exploring this question from the perspective of the consequences for the problematic users. 3
- 4. 4
- 5. Aim Comparing the results and practices of the treatment of problem gaming and gambling with each other relevant information for both the theoretical discussion of these concepts and the policy for their treatment. 5
- 6. 6
- 7. 7
- 8. 8
- 10. 10
- 11. 11
- 12. 12
- 13. 13
- 14. 14
- 15. Reality of Treatment in Sweden Mixed in treatment in Sweden because of lack of funding and infra-structure for gaming so far In Uppsala gamers are thrown in to the groups of the gamblers without even seeing it as an issue In Goteborg gamers did join the gambler groups over periods 15
- 16. 16
- 17. 17
- 18. Differences - Similarities Chasing losses and making it all good again Dispelling Gambler卒s fallacy Consequences after stopping vastly different (life phases) 18 Both can be seen as consequences, escapism, symptoms of other, underlying problems (self esteem and expectations on self)
- 19. Practitioner: I dont think we should mix gaming and gambling but the organizations in Gothenburg and in Sweden do it. The risk is that the treatment becomes a copy of that for gambling. You know, people know how one of them works but if we get a 16-year-old and tell him you have to completely stop playing! we will lose him. Its a big part of culture. A youth culture that is. I think that [asking them to stop gaming completely] makes many scared. 19
- 20. Gamblers have to stop gambling - Gamers need to start living 20
- 21. Aim Comparing the results and practices of the treatment of problem gaming and gambling with each other relevant information for both the theoretical discussion of these concepts and the policy for their treatment. 21
- 22. 22
- 24. Problem Gaming vs. Gambling: Can they be treated together? Patrick Prax Assistant Professor, Department of Game Design, Uppsala University patrick.prax@speldesign.uu.se 24