Perhaps I’m the only one who’s run into this sentiment, but I’ve heard three different people now marvel at youngsters’ prowess playing Guitar Hero, noting (with variations) that, if only we could “harness that ability,” we could do great things. ?The working assumption seems to be that the mental/physical human processes that go into that game could be redirected to some other task (presumably one not invented yet) with the result that businesses or other institutions could get more work or different kinds of work done.
I should note right up front that I’ve not played the game myself, but I have seen other people play it. ?But as far as I can tell, the game consists in the player’s or the players’ responding to successive stimuli, each response (or lack of response) being right or wrong, period. ?Enough responses that correspond to the stimuli and one advances; enough responses that do not match or enough passive failures to match the stimulus, and one does not advance.
This is where I need some education–is there any decision-making more complex than that in Guitar Hero? ?If so, I’m obviously missing something. ?If not, this is nothing more than a sorting algorithm, something I was writing on Pascal back in the early nineties as a high school junior. ?In other words, unless there’s something to Guitar Hero that I’m missing, computers have been able to do precisely what Guitar Hero calls for (respond to green with 00, to red with 01, to yellow with 10, to blue with 11, etc.), much faster than a human being could, for some time.
I’m not saying that there’s no merit to people who play stimulus-response games; after all, I’ve wasted my share of hours and then some on video games. ?But I do question the rather breathless cult of youth that holds anything kids are doing as inherently worthwhile and potentially revolutionary.
That said, my initial question stands: does Guitar Hero require human-style decision-making at any point, or is it MTV with a feed bar? ?I know some of you out there play some Guitar Hero. ?Do educate me.
It does prepare them for a life in the mailroom.
I suppose you could also say that playing the drums in Guitar Hero is pretty similar to playing the drums in real life–though whether THAT is a worthwhile pursuit is another question altogether.
There is definitely an art that goes into Guitar Hero or Rock Band, but the art is in making the game, not in playing it. Except for a few places for fills and free-style playing, it has everything to do with response to stimuli and nothing to do with decision-making (unlike games like Civilization). Of course, I’ve never heard the comment that someone who is good at GH could harness that energy to do great things. I have heard lots of people say that it’s silly to play a guitar game instead of playing a real guitar. Much like when I played Pirates! on my Apple IIGS as a kid–my parents were always yelling at me to turn that computer off and try some real pirating on the high seas. So what do GH and RB do? They teach you rhythm, basic drumming skills, voice control, and some knowledge of how rock music is put together. But really, what it comes down to is that they’re fun. And now with Beatles Rock Band and the soon-to-be Lego Rock Band, I can play with my 6- and 8-year-old nephews without having to worry about which song is coming up next. No, kids, you can’t sing Man in the Box.
As I noted before, I have nothing against some mindless fun–I’m not going to cast the first stone on that one. I was mainly concerned with the claims of great cognitive powers that go into playing, and both of you seem to be telling me that such optimism is unwarranted. That was the head-scratcher on this end.
I would never argue for the intrinsic cognitive merits of it but Guitar Hero, especially in the later versions that include drums and microphone, is a really fun social activity, similar to perhaps sport-watching, but possibly even more interactive. I would argue that playing Guitar Hero, while not employing human-style decision-making, is far more brain-stimulating (and thus beneficial) than watching MTV. That might be where the optimism comes from?
I guess I’ve sort of been doing this for years each time I find a song I want to learn?playing the recording over and over again, responding to the aural stimuli figuring out how to play the song on my guitar. Except I can be “wrong” and still be “right” if I like what I play better than the recording. I get to score myself. Sweet! Although, with the new Beatles release, I am very tempted to buy the game.
Maybe what people really like, but can’t frame well, is the intense attention, focus, and perseverance (and maybe discipline) the game can engender in the youth playing. More qualities than skills.
It is a form of sight reading, I think. That is a skill.
Joe
Peter, thanks for reading.
I agree that there are fun things that aren’t revolutionary–one needn’t get too far into my past to see how many “interactive” viewings of Monty Python and the Holy Grail, I’ve been a part of. I can see why people would play Guitar Hero–the fantasy element, the low-risk karaoke experience–but I don’t think my Monty Python or their Guitar Hero is going to “change the world,” unless I’m missing something.
Joe, I can see the sight-reading angle, and that’s probably my favorite take on this so far. I suppose, now that I think of it, that my first run through a jazz number on a saxophone is in some ways a set of responses on a “controller” of sorts as the notes approach, though on an x axis rather than a y axis.
I think I like your answer because it confirms that I’m looking not at some revolutionary “digital age” kind of super-cognition but a previously “aristocratic” skill democratized. I think I could live with that account of things.
“…as far as I can tell, the game consists in the player?s or the players? responding to successive stimuli, each response (or lack of response) being right or wrong, period. Enough responses that correspond to the stimuli and one advances; enough responses that do not match or enough passive failures to match the stimulus, and one does not advance.”
Sounds like perfect training for the corporate world to me.
LOL
I’m glad I can count on one curmudgeon chiming in.
Who me, a curmudgeon? Just filling in the last line of your argument, my man.
I’ve only witnessed about 30 seconds of play on this game so my opinion can’t count for much. But, like you, I’m pretty skeptical of grandiose claims by youth-worshipers about the benefits of these pop-culture distraction systems. Similar claims were made about video games in general in the past but about the only “benefit” I’ve seen come out of them is a generation of boys trained to unthinkingly push buttons on all the new kill-at-a-distance military systems.
Congrats on finally finding a topic to generate some discussion.
I am a fan of these types of games. I do think they are in ways different than other video games because of the way they affect the senses. They really are mtv meets video games. That said I think they offer little educational value and are more a source of entertainment. What is scary is that I’ve heard teachers are using Rock Band/Guitar Hero games in schools, for instance in music classes.
Anyone who is even the most amateur musician and has played these games, knows that they are nothing more than a cheap simulation. A different skill set is at work, even on the drums, even on the singing. Do you think anyone makes it to the major leagues playing wiffle ball?
In everything like this there is a cost/benefit equation. In this area, I think the numerous hours it takes for most people to get really good at these games, are better spent doing something else. I put a lot more value in being able to play “Smoke on the Water” (a very easy riff) on guitar than getting through “through the fire and the flames” on expert (which I can’t cause it’s too freakin hard.)
Hey, now… I did get some comments on my Heidegger series, so don’t be that way, Robert!
Phil, I agree that there are more productive things to do, but not everything is productivity. My initial suspicion was just that there’s no “cognitive revolution” going on (perhaps a Dance Dance Revolution, but that was a few years ago). And so far, folks have more or less confirmed it.
I think you have to go back to the larger question of whether computers have “rewired” our brains.?
I think it’s interesting that for all your deep, philosophical posts, a guitar hero post draws more comments than anything else. What does that say about the intellectual direction of our society?
Perhaps there is a college philosophy class in this somewhere: Guitar Hero as the answer to Existentialism?
This is hilarious. For some reason, this reminds me of those glorious hours we devoted to Goldeneye and Perfect Dark… ahhh good times. Part of the context of our playing those games in college was that we had just read a thousand pages of primary documents ranging from medieval commentaries to modern philosophy. At least for me, I wanted to play the game precisely because it was an activity that did not demand cognitive or creative thought. I wonder with you why people feel the compulsion to hyperventilate over certain aspects of youth culture.
At any rate, I have two words for you Nate:
Proxy Mines!
Unless Jake Robinson was playing. That sucker would trap the spawn points every time and then deny he did it.
As you no doubt saw in the comments, that’s pretty much what folks could say in defense of Guitar Hero. I do like Joe’s suggestion that it’s a democratized (with all the good and the bad that comes with democratization) practice of sight reading. That account actually makes a fair bit of sense to me.