From the time that I first got a Sega Genesis as a birthday present for my sixth birthday, I have enjoyed the challenge of a good video game.  A lot of arguments are made that discredit any value to gaming.  Video games are a practical way to experiment with creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, and a way to learn that all actions beget consequences.  Even today’s popular first-person shooters teach teamwork and strategy, and force you to outsmart your competition.  As a professional, I vouch for the positive aspects of video games in my own personal development.

The problems arise when video games take an unbalanced portion of one’s life.  Video games do develop character, but cannot produce a well-rounded individual alone; other activities must fill the other voids that exist.  Anyone that says this problem is due to the nature of video games and video games alone would be ignorant, though; every single thing in the entire world is bad when used excessively.  One attribute I noticed as a high school student was that most gamers seemed to do well or at least above average academically.  I believe that results from two characteristics that develop from being a frequent video game player.  The first of those characteristics is unequivocally positive—gamers will certainly improve their intelligence, logic, and test-taking abilities from the lessons taught by video games.  The second characteristic could be viewed in a positive or a negative light. 

Video game players understand how to work the system to succeed.  Just as some Pokémon fans would surf around Cinnabar to take advantage of a certain glitch that helped them not need to work any harder than was necessary, I remember listening to my junior English teacher in particular and figuring out exactly how to get top grades on my essays.  As long as I met the length requirement, spelled the words right, and I produced entertaining stories (some were downright ridiculous), she had no problem with a few grammatical errors.  Three times she read my stories to the class as examples of “great writing,” when it was really pretty average, but tailored precisely to what she wanted.

In Madden football, one of my favorite plays has been to load one side of the field with three receivers and send them all on streaks.  The strategy is nearly impossible to stop for long, unless your team is truly inferior to the opponents.  If the defense opts for zone coverage, the safety and cornerback cannot effectively cover all three receivers.  In man coverage, just lob the ball as deep as you can to whichever receiver is the fastest and watch the cornerback try to keep up.  It’s a noob sort of play, but it has won me a lot of games, and broken a lot of my friends’ controllers.  It works great.  Would Nick Saban run the Alabama offense with this strategy, though?  Absolutely not.  I’ve learned how to beat the defensive algorithms put into place by the Madden programmers, not how to actually run a high-power offense.  I may have gotten 107% in AP Language and Composition, but that doesn’t mean I actually learned anything!

Now the question arises: is learning how to “beat the system” a positive or negative characteristic to convert from video games to real life?  My opinion is that learning how to do so is a valuable talent.  However, one must understand when they are really doing great things and when they are “faking it,” as to not delude themselves and end up in a bad situation or rely too much on their ability to manipulate things that they cannot actually control.