"Saying 'Goodbye' to Video Games"

[Z A C K]

But that's just repeating the definition of a hobby -- "an activity done regularly in one's leisure time."



By equating it with masturbation?

I don't see why calling something a "hobby" grants it some kind of honor or legitimacy. People have all kinds of weird, ridiculous hobbies. Calling something a "hobby" isn't like calling it "art" or something like that. It doesn't lend it some kind of credence.

Here's a list of 10 weird hobbies:

1. Playing dead

2. Appearing in the background on TV

3. Collecting tea bag covers

4. Collecting elongated coins

5. Collecting Cigar bands

6. Tatooing vehicles

7. Suing

"Those include lawsuits against New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick, former President George W. Bush, Somali pirates, Britney Spears and Martha Stewart. He’s also filed lawsuits against Plato, Nostradamus, James Hoffa, “Various Buddhist Monks,” the Lincoln Memorial, the Eiffel Tower and Three Mile Island."

8. Grooming dogs to look like other animals

9. Beetle fighting

10. Knitting breasts

http://amazingbeautifulworld.com/entertainment/10-of-the-strangest-hobbies/
http://www.writers-free-reference.com/11hobbies.htm

I want those panda dogs.

 

[Frozpot]

I don't know. A leisurely activity?

I mean, according to Frozpot's definition, masturbating to porn could be called a hobby. Would anyone call that a hobby?

It kind of wreaks of gamers trying to legitimize their pastime to me.

That's not MY definition, that is THE definition.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

That's not MY definition, that is THE definition.

According to who?

 

[Frozpot]

According to who?

Oh, just this obscure thing called a dictionary.

Just to ease your incredible mind, Here is one from

Dictionary.com

noun, plural hobbies.
1.
an activity or interest pursued for pleasure orrelaxation and not as a main occupation:
Her hobbies include stamp-collecting andwoodcarving.

Merriam-Webster

Definition of HOBBY
: a pursuit outside one's regular occupation engaged in especially for relaxation


Oxford

An activity done regularly in one’s leisure time for pleasure: her hobbies are reading and gardening


Vocabulary.com

A hobby is an activity that you do in your spare time for fun. Your hobbymay be putting together model train sets and driving your mom crazy from all the noise.

In the 13th century the word hobby referred to a small horse or a pony. It later came to describe a toy horse — a hobbyhorse. It’s from the hobbyhorse that the word’s modern sense of “favorite pastime” evolved. A hobby is something that you do for fun — not money — and you typically do it fairly regularly. Collecting stamps, growing roses, reading — any of these can be hobbies


If that's not enough for you, even the Urban Dictionary agrees!

hobby
a pastime, something you enjoy doing in your spare time
I take pride in my hobby - homemade bongs using my engineering degree


Gee, I wonder how people could possibly consider gaming a hobby...

Edit: Perhaps you should illuminate what you think the true definition of a hobby is, lol.

I wait with bated breath...

 

[This_Hard_Land]

So, according to all those definitions, are the following activities considered hobbies to you?

- Masturbating to online porn.
- Smoking cigarettes.
- Watching reruns of The Big Bang Theory.
- Eating junk food.

Well?

Those definitions are not sufficient.

 

[Frozpot]

So, according to all those definitions, are the following activities considered hobbies to you?

- Masturbating to online porn.
- Smoking cigarettes.
- Watching reruns of The Big Bang Theory.
- Eating junk food.

Well?

Those definitions are not sufficient.

I suppose they do if they are being done for the purpose of enjoyment, relaxation, and passing the time. There is a directed intent necessary, I believe.

I've already indicated that I don't think randomly watching TV is a hobby because it is passive, but critiquing it on a regular basis would be. Watching reruns to watch reruns could be, I suppose, perhaps even watching a specific show religiously. It seems to me you should be doing it specifically.

There is zero requirement of productivity to be considered a hobby.

Those definitions are, by definition, sufficient. Why should I care that you don't think they are? Who are you to determine this and thus change the actual definition?

You haven't answered the question, not that I am surprised. I find that people who want to appear smart often resort to belittling others rather than demonstrate it.

Gaming easily falls into the category regardless. It is an activity, it can often involve skill and critical thinking. You act toward and react to evolving situations. In online gaming you compete against others. Does playing sports not count as hobby?

 

[Oblong]

I am going to start calling THL "This Hobby Land"

 

[Andy]

THL, you are objecting to the standard definition of a word? Slow day?

Can you offer a better alternative? A single word, not a phrase, and not a rephrase of the definition of a hobby.

 

[Qbert]

It's a hobby. Deal with it.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

I suppose they do if they are being done for the purpose of enjoyment, relaxation, and passing the time.

That's the difference between you and I. I would never consider those things hobbies. To each their own I guess?

 

[This_Hard_Land]

THL, you are objecting to the standard definition of a word? Slow day?

Can you offer a better alternative? A single word, not a phrase, and not a rephrase of the definition of a hobby.

I can only speak to what's in my heart. I realize that I'm totally alone here but I've never approached that word the way it's being defined here. The definition to me, has always dealt with an activity that has a learning curve. Something that you progressively get better at the longer you do it. I would never in a million years call TV watching a hobby.

I will poll people in real life and report back with the results...

 

[Frozpot]

I can only speak to what's in my heart. I realize that I'm totally alone here but I've never approached that word the way it's being defined here. The definition to me, has always dealt with an activity that has a learning curve. Something that you progressively get better at the longer you do it. I would never in a million years call TV watching a hobby.

I will poll people in real life and report back with the results...

It doesn't matter what you think it means, lol. It is the definition. Subjectivity FTW, I guess.

You can say you don't think it's a meaningful hobby, and that would work, but you don't get to change the actual meaning of a word because it doesn't fit your personal criteria.

"No no, it's not murder because you have to use a gun! I clearly used a hammer!"

All that said, then by your definition, gaming is a hobby. Learing curve? Check. Get better the longer you do it? Check. I even said it's difficult to classify TV watching as a hobby, as it is a passive thing. You aren't doing it, it is doing you, so-to-speak. Now, once you start doing things beyond just watching, it becomes a hobby.

Oh yeah, and doing a poll means nothing. Consensus isn't fact.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

Consensus isn't fact.

This is where you lost me.

1) You just gave us the consensus definition.

2) Words derive their meaning from the intent of the people speaking them.

1. Nice: This word used to mean “silly, foolish, simple.” Far from the compliment it is today!
2. Silly: Meanwhile, silly went in the opposite direction: in its earliest uses, it referred to things worthy or blessed; from there it came to refer to the weak and vulnerable, and more recently to those who are foolish.
3. Awful: Awful things used to be “worthy of awe” for a variety of reasons, which is how we get expressions like “the awful majesty of God.”

If the majority agrees that the word hobby falls in line with the way I perceived it, then that is the true definition of the word.

 

[MisterxboxNJ]

I poled your mom. Get it? Poled.

EDIT: That was my 1,200th post....I might as well just quit and walk away

 

[Frozpot]

This is where you lost me.

1) You just gave us the consensus definition.

2) Words derive their meaning from the intent of the people speaking them.

1. Nice: This word used to mean “silly, foolish, simple.” Far from the compliment it is today!
2. Silly: Meanwhile, silly went in the opposite direction: in its earliest uses, it referred to things worthy or blessed; from there it came to refer to the weak and vulnerable, and more recently to those who are foolish.
3. Awful: Awful things used to be “worthy of awe” for a variety of reasons, which is how we get expressions like “the awful majesty of God.”

If the majority agrees that the word hobby falls in line with the way I perceived it, then that is the true definition of the word.

As it stands, now, that is the definition. I suppose it is erroneous to use a man-made construct such as "definitions" in the same sentence as "fact", certainly given how language changes over time.

However, at this point in time, the definition is officially as stated- it is documented and widely accepted as the proper definition, and takes a concerted effort to change it. Why bother having definitions or even language at all if they are as nebulous as you seem to think? What use to even look up a definition if it can be changed any time you misapply it or feel on a personal level it doesn't represent what you wish? Without a common base, there can't be effective communication. Subjective reality bulls***. This isn't some thousand year change, either.

Beyond that, the responses to your interpretation have not been supportive. When we have a disagreement, we turn to set standards as a guide. You wish to corrupt the meaning to make yourself feel superior. Hardly surprising, really.

You haven't even provided your own criteria for a definition to compare it to.

Nice google search by-the-way. It would have been more useful if you could have found a link to a discussion on the topic at hand.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

As it stands, now, that is the definition. I suppose it is erroneous to use a man-made construct such as "definitions" in the same sentence as "fact", certainly given how language changes over time.

However, at this point in time, the definition is officially as stated- it is documented and widely accepted as the proper definition, and takes a concerted effort to change it. Why bother having definitions or even language at all if they are as nebulous as you seem to think? What use to even look up a definition if it can be changed any time you misapply it or feel on a personal level it doesn't represent what you wish? Without a common base, there can't be effective communication. Subjective reality bulls***. This isn't some thousand year change, either.

Beyond that, the responses to your interpretation have not been supportive. When we have a disagreement, we turn to set standards as a guide. You wish to corrupt the meaning to make yourself feel superior. Hardly surprising, really.

You haven't even provided your own criteria for a definition to compare it to.

Nice google search by-the-way. It would have been more useful if you could have found a link to a discussion on the topic at hand.

Just because definitions aren't perfect doesn't mean we should throw them out.

I've since asked 3 people the following questions. Their responses were unanimous...

1) Is watching TV a hobby? NO
2) Is eating junk food a hobby? NO
3) Is playing video games a hobby? "Wellll...(discussion ensued)"

So three things.

1) I believe that if there was a large scale Gallup pole given this year, in America, the majority of citizens would not consider watching TV or eating potato chips a hobby.
2) I think two polls would present themselves if the same question was asked about video games.
3) I think just about everyone in the country would agree that wood working is a hobby.

So, provided I was right, are all the people in America wrong or have the definitions given be insufficient? The word clearly has a different meaning that the basic definitions provided.

 

[MisterxboxNJ]

Spoiler

 

[Andy]

I think arguing on the internet is his hobby.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

I think arguing on the internet is his hobby.

That's not a God damn hobby.

 

[Andy]

Just because definitions aren't perfect doesn't mean we should throw them out.

I've since asked 3 people the following questions. Their responses were unanimous...

1) Is watching TV a hobby? NO
2) Is eating junk food a hobby? NO
3) Is playing video games a hobby? "Wellll...(discussion ensued)"

So three things.

1) I believe that if there was a large scale Gallup pole given this year, in America, the majority of citizens would not consider watching TV or eating potato chips a hobby.
2) I think two polls would present themselves if the same question was asked about video games.
3) I think just about everyone in the country would agree that wood working is a hobby.

So, provided I was right, are all the people in America wrong or have the definitions given be insufficient? The word clearly has a different meaning that the basic definitions provided.

I know this is a stupid conversation, but I can't resist.

You've introduced bias in the way you set up the question. By having the first two answers "no," you've given the people a mental set which they use to answer the next question. It's a well-known effect that most pollsters or questionnaire designers are careful to avoid. A sequence of "no's" predispose (not determine, just predispose) people to say "no," and a sequence of "yes's" predispose them to say "yes." So, you set your poll up in a biased fashion.

Compare with this sequence:

1. Is playing with trains a hobby? (yes)
2. Is playing chess a hobby? (yes)
3. Is playing videogames a hobby? (yes)

In fact, the "Well..." you got signals that the participants saw that there was something different about videogames, that it didn't match the first two examples.

...

I notice that you've gone from complaining about a word being used (properly) to complaining that a standard definition of that word is inadequate. Look, you can always find fault with a simple definition of a word. Definitions aren't supposed to be exhaustive analyses of a concept from every possible angle, covering every contingency. They're supposed to be brief, simple descriptions. A dictionary would come in a 100-volume set, if every concept had an exhaustive description and analysis.

You've still not offered a better alternative, btw, which suggests to me (surprise) that you're not really interested in finding a solution, just debating for the sake of debating.

 

[Andy]

That's not a God damn hobby.

Seems like it is. You engage in it regularly during your leisure time, apparently for pleasure, and there's an element of active engagement.

 

[Oblong]

Seems like it is. You engage in it regularly during your leisure time, apparently for pleasure, and there's an element of active engagement.

Only he is not improving at it over time. He is simply chipping away his credibility with each new nonsensical argument.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

I know this is a stupid conversation, but I can't resist.

You've introduced bias in the way you set up the question. By having the first two answers "no," you've given the people a mental set which they use to answer the next question. It's a well-known effect that most pollsters or questionnaire designers are careful to avoid. A sequence of "no's" predispose (not determine, just predispose) people to say "no," and a sequence of "yes's" predispose them to say "yes." So, you set your poll up in a biased fashion.

Compare with this sequence:

1. Is playing with trains a hobby? (yes)
2. Is playing chess a hobby? (yes)
3. Is playing videogames a hobby? (yes)

In fact, the "Well..." you got signals that the participants saw that there was something different about videogames, that it didn't match the first two examples.

Let me ask you this.

Back in high school, you're taking a test that you feel you didn't prepare well enough for. You come to a True or False section of the test and think "Oh thank God!". Now you're chipping away at a sequence of questions that you've answered True to. Would you say that you're predisposed to answering True to the next question, or would you think "I've answered True to the last X number of questions. This one has got to be false."

I think a variety of other factors (cadence, tonality environment etc), of which I didn't explain, influenced whether my audience of three were predisposed to answering my third question as either "Yes" or "No".

I notice that you've gone from complaining about a word being used (properly) to complaining that a standard definition of that word is inadequate.

I don't think I've changed my stance at all. I cringe when people say gaming is their hobby because I don't think gaming is considered a hobby. I don't think I ever validated that the word was used properly. Help me out here if you have the energy. (My keen sense here is telling me that this conversation has reached its half life)

Look, you can always find fault with a simple definition of a word. Definitions aren't supposed to be exhaustive analyses of a concept from every possible angle, covering every contingency. They're supposed to be brief, simple descriptions. A dictionary would come in a 100-volume set, if every concept had an exhaustive description and analysis.

I don't think most definitions can be picked apart as much as the word hobby has been defined here. I find most definitions to be satisfactory for the most part. Leave gaming out of this for a moment. The definitions provided by Frozpot are blatantly insufficient.

Ask people what they think the definition of the word hobby is and they will say something along the lines of "An activity that you do in your spare time for enjoyment." Then you challenge those people on that definition by saying "So smoking cigarettes, according to your definition, is a hobby?" 10/10 times they will respond with "Well, no but...um...let's see a hobby is..." They always attempt to redefine the word. I don't think the definitions to most words can be challenged this easily.

That to me suggests that the word hasn't been defined properly.

I think what the above definitions have been missing is an inherent beneficial nature to what a hobby actually is. I can picture a concerned Mom, walking past her sons messy bedroom while he plays games for hours on end, saying "You need to go outside. Get a hobby or something." The word, to me, is always mentioned as a positive. I don't think society views this activity as adding to the greater good.

You've still not offered a better alternative, btw, which suggests to me (surprise) that you're not really interested in finding a solution, just debating for the sake of debating.

A hobby to me is an activity that one actively participates in during their spare time, that allows for growth/new understanding, and benefits the participant/community in some way.


NOTE: To everyone involved, you could stick a lie detector to me and ask me "Do you think the PS4 has a better 2016 lineup than the XBox One" and I'm answering yes without a blip on the graph. I know that for a fact. With this, I'm much more inclined to believe I could be wrong. I know it's not coming off that way but I could be persuaded here.

Anyway, Andy, great post. Posts like that, or the potential of reading posts like that, are the reason why I come here.

 

[Andy]

Let me ask you this.

Back in high school, you're taking a test that you feel you didn't prepare well enough for. You come to a True or False section of the test and think "Oh thank God!". Now you're chipping away at a sequence of questions that you've answered True to. Would you say that you're predisposed to answering True to the next question, or would you think "I've answered True to the last X number of questions. This one has got to be false."

I think a variety of other factors (cadence, tonality environment etc), of which I didn't explain, influenced whether my audience of three were predisposed to answering my third question as either "Yes" or "No".



I don't think I've changed my stance at all. I cringe when people say gaming is their hobby because I don't think gaming is considered a hobby. I don't think I ever validated that the word was used properly. Help me out here if you have the energy. (My keen sense here is telling me that this conversation has reached its half life)



I don't think most definitions can be picked apart as much as the word hobby has been defined here. I find most definitions to be satisfactory for the most part. Leave gaming out of this for a moment. The definitions provided by Frozpot are blatantly insufficient.

Ask people what they think the definition of the word hobby is and they will say something along the lines of "An activity that you do in your spare time for enjoyment." Then you challenge those people on that definition by saying "So smoking cigarettes, according to your definition, is a hobby?" 10/10 times they will respond with "Well, no but...um...let's see a hobby is..." They always attempt to redefine the word. I don't think the definitions to most words can be challenged this easily.

That to me suggests that the word hasn't been defined properly.

I think what the above definitions have been missing is an inherent beneficial nature to what a hobby actually is. I can picture a concerned Mom, walking past her sons messy bedroom while he plays games for hours on end, saying "You need to go outside. Get a hobby or something." The word, to me, is always mentioned as a positive. I don't think society views this activity as adding to the greater good.



A hobby to me is an activity that one actively participates in during their spare time, that allows for growth/new understanding, and benefits the participant/community in some way.


NOTE: To everyone involved, you could stick a lie detector to me and ask me "Do you think the PS4 has a better 2016 lineup than the XBox One" and I'm answering yes without a blip on the graph. I know that for a fact. With this, I'm much more inclined to believe I could be wrong. I know it's not coming off that way but I could be persuaded here.

Anyway, Andy, great post. Posts like that, or the potential of reading posts like that, are the reason why I come here.

Thanks, THL, but my head is starting to hurt, and I don't want to go round and round about this anymore. If you're not happy with videogames being called a "hobby," there's nothing I can or should do about that, except to wonder why you're tilting at this particular windmill. I expect that most people will continue to call it a hobby, and you will continue to cringe.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

Thanks, THL, but my head is starting to hurt, and I don't want to go round and round about this anymore. If you're not happy with videogames being called a "hobby," there's nothing I can or should do about that, except to wonder why you're tilting at this particular windmill. I expect that most people will continue to call it a hobby, and you will continue to cringe.

Understood and agreed.

 

[Frozpot]

Let me ask you this.

Back in high school, you're taking a test that you feel you didn't prepare well enough for. You come to a True or False section of the test and think "Oh thank God!". Now you're chipping away at a sequence of questions that you've answered True to. Would you say that you're predisposed to answering True to the next question, or would you think "I've answered True to the last X number of questions. This one has got to be false."

I think a variety of other factors (cadence, tonality environment etc), of which I didn't explain, influenced whether my audience of three were predisposed to answering my third question as either "Yes" or "No".



I don't think I've changed my stance at all. I cringe when people say gaming is their hobby because I don't think gaming is considered a hobby. I don't think I ever validated that the word was used properly. Help me out here if you have the energy. (My keen sense here is telling me that this conversation has reached its half life)



I don't think most definitions can be picked apart as much as the word hobby has been defined here. I find most definitions to be satisfactory for the most part. Leave gaming out of this for a moment. The definitions provided by Frozpot are blatantly insufficient.

Ask people what they think the definition of the word hobby is and they will say something along the lines of "An activity that you do in your spare time for enjoyment." Then you challenge those people on that definition by saying "So smoking cigarettes, according to your definition, is a hobby?" 10/10 times they will respond with "Well, no but...um...let's see a hobby is..." They always attempt to redefine the word. I don't think the definitions to most words can be challenged this easily.

That to me suggests that the word hasn't been defined properly.

I think what the above definitions have been missing is an inherent beneficial nature to what a hobby actually is. I can picture a concerned Mom, walking past her sons messy bedroom while he plays games for hours on end, saying "You need to go outside. Get a hobby or something." The word, to me, is always mentioned as a positive. I don't think society views this activity as adding to the greater good.



A hobby to me is an activity that one actively participates in during their spare time, that allows for growth/new understanding, and benefits the participant/community in some way.


NOTE: To everyone involved, you could stick a lie detector to me and ask me "Do you think the PS4 has a better 2016 lineup than the XBox One" and I'm answering yes without a blip on the graph. I know that for a fact. With this, I'm much more inclined to believe I could be wrong. I know it's not coming off that way but I could be persuaded here.

Anyway, Andy, great post. Posts like that, or the potential of reading posts like that, are the reason why I come here.

What a pretentious load of bs, lol. Since when did wood carving add to the greater good? Bike riding? Painting a picture? Builing model airplanes? Painting tiny figurines? Collecting rocks or coins? Writing a blog?

Contributing to the greater good has never been a requirement. That is not what hobbies exist for. Some hobbies do, in fact, contribute to the greater good but that isn't why they are considered hobbies.

Playing games is still a relatively new pastime, but getting good at them has as much potential for being successful as learning the guitar. Maybe more so given the lower barrier to entry. You could spend 8 hours a day diddling the guitar and still affect the world around you as much.

Would I put more emphasis and value on time spent learning to play? Absolutely, but that still doesn't disqualify what I consider lesser endeavors to be hobbies. It is simple, and the classification doesn't have to have some deeper purpose.

Greater good, lol. I'm done.

 

[team56th]

Funny thing other than THL's argument is, the article is not about giving up playing video games, but about collecting them. The writer had this huge collection and got obsessed by the physical game discs, and after a while he realized that collecting is sucking all funs from actually playing them.

Since I buy all games digitally I get considerably less obsessed about collecting and stuffs, but there are times when other game-related stuffs are sucking all the funs from actually playing them - notably the whole "resolutiongate" bulls---. At one point you need to stop caring about anything other than playing the types of games you love, preferably a very simple game from them. As of late, Rare Replay has been crucial in this. Playing Battletoads, Banjo-Kazooie and Conker reminds me what I love most about games. A great atmosphere, varied gameplay, adequate challenges, games are that, not some console wars or something.

 

[Entreri804]

What a pretentious load of bs, lol. Since when did wood carving add to the greater good? Bike riding? Painting a picture? Builing model airplanes? Painting tiny figurines? Collecting rocks or coins? Writing a blog?

Contributing to the greater good has never been a requirement. That is not what hobbies exist for. Some hobbies do, in fact, contribute to the greater good but that isn't why they are considered hobbies.

Playing games is still a relatively new pastime, but getting good at them has as much potential for being successful as learning the guitar. Maybe more so given the lower barrier to entry. You could spend 8 hours a day diddling the guitar and still affect the world around you as much.

Would I put more emphasis and value on time spent learning to play? Absolutely, but that still doesn't disqualify what I consider lesser endeavors to be hobbies. It is simple, and the classification doesn't have to have some deeper purpose.

Greater good, lol. I'm done.

Totally agree with this ... And gaming is not only a hobby , but can be a very compative hobby. Take a compative fist person shooter. It requires alot of precise hand and eye coordination to be successful and getting familiar and mastering the tool / input device / controller that you're using in order to achieve perfection, that requires a lot of practice. No different than anything else in life that you're competing at regardless if its sports or whatever the case may be .Then the mental part comes into play. Anticipating where your opponents going to be. Learning map managment. Out thinking your opponents... Exedra Exedra. None of what the hard line and saying makes any sense but one doesn't ever? As I told him time after time, put the pipe down...smh

 

[This_Hard_Land]

I've finally been able to explain why gaming isn't considered a hobby by most people...

The term hobby, is exclusively used in a positive/beneficial manner. In western culture, when we hear the phrase "You need a hobby" it always means "You're not spending your time well, you need a more constructive focus."

Whether we like it or not, our culture has not embraced gaming as a beneficial activity.

The definitions posted above fail to include context, and how could they?

This is up at NeoGaf right now. It looks like the Chinese government doesn't view gaming as a positive focus for its citizens either.

http://www.computerworld.com/articl...-score-system-is-a-warning-for-americans.html

 

[Entreri804]

Its up to an individual to decide what is beneficial to them as a person, not a website.