siliconwafer writes: "An article in The Economist raises some interesting points about addiction to video games, drawing from psychology and sociology to describe why certain people prefer certain types of games, and why they might become addicted to them. It is suggested that to discourage addiction, game designers could have their games recognize addictive behavior and respond to it by encouraging gamers to take breaks. Do game designers have any responsibility to recognize addictive behavior, or does this responsibility fall solely on the gamer (or the gamer's parents in the case of a minor)?"
If one considers the amount of bugs in somce games which hinder the ability to play any length of time (Battlefield constant crashes, for instance), the feature is already present.
What happens if I fall ill, get stuck at home only with a single pizza delivery number and crappy cable? Can't I play until one of them kills me?
More monitoring? Nanny government, now corporations? We have cigarettes, coffee, several addictive legal drugs, etc. Why the concern with games?
Leave my addictions alone!
Because games don't bring the same level of income/taxes as ciggies or legal drugs? Why would it be allowed to you to waste time consuming something less profitable?