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)?"
Without the right to engage in self-destructive behavior, there is no freedom. Almost anything in excess is dangerous, but the alternative to allowing excess is implementing suffocating social/political rules. As others have pointed out, the principle extends far beyond gaming. Why not police other "suboptimal" activity? Ban soft drinks, medicate hyperactive children, obey authority, drink the Kool-Aid. It's all a piece of the same awful pie.