Written by Michael Thervil
Chinese President Xi Jinping
For many nations around the world, cracking down on video games is either at the bottom of their list or non-existent on their list of things to do when it comes to public welfare. However, in the case of China, President Xi Jinping is making it a priority. And when you really look at it, it should be one. Video game addiction is real. In fact, there is absolutely no difference between someone who is addicted to drugs and alcohol when compared to someone who is addicted to video games. See, addictions of any kind, whether it be shopping, eating, drug use or in this case videogames thrive on the increased levels of dopamine within the human brain. In short, when you look at dopamine in terms of how it aids in human addiction, it’s directly associated with the human body’s reward system. This is what Chinese President Xi Jinping is attempting to shield Chinese citizens from.
The often-exploitative measures taken by gaming companies can be easily seen when it comes to in-add purchases and their ability to entice players to “level up” in conjunction with the presenting of “daily rewards” which further entices players to continue to play their games. What Chinese President Ping is attempting to counteract here is the manipulation of Chinese citizens by gaming companies by adding laws on the books for people under the age of 18. In the Collective West, we may see President Jinping’s moves as “extreme”. But what’s extreme is the amount of money that video game production companies are making in China. Since President Ping has addressed the issue of gaming addiction in China; video game production companies have lost an estimated $80 billion in revenue.
With this $80 billion loss, it has caused both investors and videogame production companies alike to take a second look at their business practices. Another thing that can be said regarding President Ping’s actions is that his actions could force the Chinese youth to be more productive in and outside of their classrooms. When you look at the children in America, you can easily observe the correlation between children’s heavy gaming activities and poor academic performance. Could it be that President Xi Jinping is attempting to dismantle an explosive technological barrier that interferes and/or prevents Chinese students from excelling within the walls of Chinese academia? It seems that way.
Currently, Chinese video game production companies NetEase market shares are down 28% with the market shares of Tencent also decreasing 16%. They’re followed by Bilibili who also lost 14% of their market share.
Two years ago, President Xi Jinping imposed time limits on how long children can play video games. The logic for the time restrictions were so that they could reduce the risk of Chinese children being exposed to the exploitative nature of video game production companies. Going a step further President Xi Jinping added even more restrictions such as the ability for children to play these video games only on Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and holidays between the hours of 8am to 9pm. Pressing this social issue even harder, President Xi Jinping has also imposed laws that restricted the amount of time Chinese children could play these games which are limited to a maximum of 90 minutes.
Photo by ALEX PLAVEVSKI/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
It was also reported that those who are addicted to video games may be sent to a boot camp as a last-ditch effort to act as an intervention to cease their addiction to video games. The boot camp will be considered a “reform school” by many standards but are officially called “gaming addiction centers”. However, these gaming addiction centers serve as military schools. Children who are sent here are subjected to military like discipline and structure, physical training regiments. Children also have their brain activities measured to ensure that they are getting the proper treatment that they deserve. Again, for many people around the world – this may seem like extreme measures taken by President Xi Jinping ; but the question of the day is: “is it really?”
Comments