Active gaming burns more calories, coordination still a concern
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Jan 12th 2007 at 5:15PM }
A recent Mayo Clinic study may indicate that kids burn significantly more calories while playing active games (e.g., Dance Dance Revolution Ultramix 2, Wii Sports) than while engaged in sit-down games. That this conclusion seems obvious is part of the problem.Parents may now be more content than ever to plop their kids in front of the TV if they perceive that a few hours of active gaming will substitute for necessary exercise. Even if kids, on average, burn twice as many calories while on the dancepad than while button-smashing a gamepad, they're still simply engaged in virtual activity. Wii Sports might be all the rage but "touching a virtual ball is not the same thing as catching a real ball," warns Active Healthy Kids Canada director of development Jennifer Cowie Bonne, "You need those types of [real life] fundamental skills to build a foundation for a lifelong involvement in other types of physical activity." You wouldn't want Junior to grow up throwing baseballs like a pansy, would you?
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mr. Khan @ Jan 12th 2007 7:19PM
Well, yes, Wii Sports and DDR may be fun simulations, but are still no substitute for the real thing (real boxing is much more fun, real golf, not so much, real tennis more fun, real baseball much more fun, as is real bowling, dancing, to me, just sucks period)
Will they take the place of the real activity? no.
But i get the impression that these health advocates like to bitch about anything that doesn't occur in the fresh air and isn't in the fruit/vegetable/and grain food group...
Rowd149 @ Jan 12th 2007 5:51PM
Eh, this seems like another one of those "It's virtual, so it CAN'T be as good as the real thing" things. Why? "Because it's virtual, so..." The point is, if you're getting the same amount of exercise(check) and getting the same amount of social interaction(check, considering the kids who play alone all the time are the ones who'd be alone even if they didn't play video games; going over to friends' houses to play games together is something I used to do all the time), then it just comes down to adults clinging to old ways. Virtual isn't any worse or better than the real thing, it's just different. You won't throw a baseball like a pansy if the game makes you throw it like a man. ;)
PS Joystiq, stop using quotes from lobbying groups, nothing good can come of it...
Huzzah!! @ Jan 12th 2007 11:57PM
Elite Beat Agents = Coordination.
So I would prescribe alternating session of DDR and EBA.
-Dr. Me
Ourobolus @ Jan 12th 2007 7:42PM
Really? You mean moving around burns more calories than sitting on your ass? I'm not sure whether to be mad at the Mayo clinic for wasting money on a frivolous study, or at Joystiq for subjecting me to such idiocy.
Ian @ Jan 12th 2007 7:26PM
Solution, play your Wii or body active games outside! Worked with us and DDR ;)
Xian! @ Jan 12th 2007 7:32PM
Have to disagree with Rowd, I see their point perfectly. Hitting a virtual ball with a tennis racket is fine for entertainment, but a little rumble from the controller isn't enough to teach you how much force you need to achieve a certain distance. That's force feedback only real life can give you.
It doesn't apply as much if you're old enough that your childhood was spent dodging real balls, shooting real hoops, and skipping real stones over a real lake, but the current generation, which is still in its developmental stages (preteens developing hand-eye coordination, motor skills, etc) won't achieve the same results from virtual activities. 10-20 years from now they'll be at the mercy of tradespeople simply because they don't know how to hammer a nail through a piece of wood without losing a finger.
It can't and shouldn't be a substitute for real activity. Equal exercise ("check") and equal social interaction ("check"), while fine for entertainment, don't equate to equal experience. That's the crux of the issue.
Heck, we're already seeing the affects of poor hand-eye coordination with flying wiimotes... ;)
Kris @ Jan 12th 2007 7:54PM
ummm since when did any of the sports games we played as children teach us anything useful about the world?
I know that my career progress here at Become, Inc. has improved greatly because I know how to toss a football.
Welcome the virtual age... catch up.
Saturn2888 @ Jan 13th 2007 1:10AM
Where in the world do you guys pick up most of the pictures for the articles? Gosh... Especially, where's this one from. I wouldn't even know how to find a picture like that. I'd assume there are those among you with Photoshop skills enough to design some of those yourselves.
Moe @ Jan 12th 2007 8:09PM
Kudos to the Mayo Clinic for pointing out something that no other gaming site mentioned: virtual activity just isn't the same. Rather than buying a Wii and Wii Sports to play a game virtually, parents should be requiring their kids to actually play the sports. There are other parts of sports that don't simply involve exercising; how about learning to work in teams, making friends, building confidence, etc. All these things cannot be gotten from pretending to play real sports in front of a TV.
"Eh, this seems like another one of those "It's virtual, so it CAN'T be as good as the real thing" things. Why? "Because it's virtual, so..."
I heard about another Nintendo game. It's called "Wii Life." You live life...in virtual reality. Use the wiimote to go to school, drive to work and interact with virtual characters. If we're going to pretend to play sports to avoid confronting reality, you might as well just avoid real life altogether. Hooray for virtual reality.
Rowd149 @ Jan 12th 2007 8:45PM
@Xian
Why can't a video game teach hand-eye coordination? Even older computers are powerful enough today to run realistic physics engines. And with input devices like the Wiimote that are capable of mimicing real-life movements, there's absolutely no reason why games aren't as good as the real thing in many cases.
And as a matter of fact, I'm not the only one who thinks that: physical therapists regularly use games to help people regain motor skills after accidents.
Of course, if someone is going out to build a house, it's probably a good idea to give him a hammer and tell him to practice. Same with someone who's going out to play sports. But if it's just hand-eye coordination or fitness in general, a well-designed virtual environment is perfectly suited to replace a real one. Case-in-point: I asked two of my friends, who are avid parkour-ists and runners, what I could do to help improve my reflexes for wrestling. What do you think they said I should do? Join them on a free run? Nope. They said to download Counterstrike. The point is, the brain-body connection can be trained a number of ways, including virtual, to bring about a maximum effect.
@Moe
"I heard about another Nintendo game. It's called "Wii Life." You live life...in virtual reality. Use the wiimote to go to school, drive to work and interact with virtual characters. If we're going to pretend to play sports to avoid confronting reality, you might as well just avoid real life altogether. Hooray for virtual reality."
Once again, this just seems like prejudice and rhetoric. Many futurists have predicted that the separation between our virtual and real lives are going to keep getting smaller and smaller until it's almost nonexistant. When I'm talking about a conversation I had with a friend on AIM, I don't say "I posted a message, and he posted back"; I say we talked. Because that's what we did. There's nothing to dispute about that.
Xian! @ Jan 12th 2007 9:18PM
@ Rowd: Good points, but I think you missed my argument. I'll try to explain myself better.
Certainly computer simulations are great at what they do. Flight simulators can teach pilots without putting themselves in danger. O.R. simulations allow doctors to practice important techniques without putting real patients at risk. Still, any doctor or pilot would say that simulations are designed for safe practice and confidence-building but will never approach real-world application. You can't go to an airline and say: Give me a 747, I've clocked over 1,000 hours in a flight simulator. Or to a hospital: Got any heart patients? I've operated on 1,000 virtual hearts! (Counter-strike can be used, I guess, to improve your reflexes and camping abilities. ;)
Children whose brains are still growing and developing physically (from birth into teen years) need real feedback from the world around them. The worry is that they will play with a virtual ball with "realistic physics" instead of picking up a real ball with real physics. At that stage in their development their brains will be hardwired with the nuances of a virtual ball which may cause them to, as James said, throw a real ball like a pansy because they never handled one before.
You mention physical therapy applications, but that is only necessary where more conventional (and vastly cheaper) applications fail; most institutions will still make you bend over and pick up the ball yourself.
fawazr @ Jan 12th 2007 9:29PM
It's unreasonable to assume that gamers will want to take part in actual sports and real life activities in lieu of virtual activities. Many people have no inclination to go out and play tennis or baseball, so the Wii Sports package would be their sole means of enjoying these activities, virtual or otherwise.
Let's also not forget that the price of the Wii is still cheaper than buying into a sport hobby that you may end up losing interest in within two months. For 250 dollars or less the arthritic, clumsy, uncoordinated, and uninitiated can all enjoy taking part in and competing at virtual activities.
And last but not least, the Wii experience would be more enjoyable for a wider audience (not just athletes and dancers) because it rewards regardless of physical ability.
Virtual activities may not be as beneficial as actual activities, but it's presumptuous to assume that one is better than the other. As far as getting a traditionally sedentary demographic to enjoy themselves while being more active, I would say that virtual activities have thus far emerged victorious.
Rowd149 @ Jan 12th 2007 10:03PM
@Xian
I think you're underestimating peoples' abilities to adapt. If you take a man who's played baseball all his life, and tell him to shoot a basketball, he may not make it, but he'll have a general idea of what to do, and I'm sure he'd be able to develop the skill over time. Not playing basketball in his youth isn't going to keep him from doing it for the rest of his life.
And, I think the argument being made is that parents need to cut out as much video gaming as possible in favor of outdoor activities. As if kids wouldn't go outside of their own accord at some point. I believe they would. It's something inherent, and a few hours of gaming a week isn't going to change that.
Mince @ Jan 12th 2007 10:13PM
Anyone who thinks that flapping about on the Wii constitutes a healthy workout will be overweightish I fear.
Wii sports. (rolls eyes) Nothing, nothing like playing real sport.
Xian! @ Jan 12th 2007 11:32PM
@Rowd: Nobody is talking about adults. We're talking about children. Brains don't come fully pre-formed with neurons in all the right places. The act of learning physically develops them. Even an adult brain learning music will physically change, creating the necessary mental pathways for the independent movement of fingers and hands.
As for adaptation, of course it's a factor. If you think about it, we had to adapt to play video games. We grew up throwing a ball, and had to adapt to pressing a button.
Now consider the fact that games are always easier than real life (hence "entertainment"). Naturally, it's easy to adapt FROM life TO games, but not so easy the other way. What happens when a child who is excellent at virtual baseball is asked to play real baseball, and they suck at it? They'll cry and flee back to video games. They may think video games are superior to real activities when in fact they're only easier. They may choose virtual experiences over real ones. Virtual sports, virtual friends, virtual love, virtual sex. Just because they're easier.
And if you think the easy life is the best one, you're probably living in a virtual world right now. ;)
I've explained my position as best I can. If you maintain yours, then we'll agree to disagree. Hey, in 20 years let's have our kids go at it in a cage match--yours trained against virtual opponenents, mine with muscles and a reset nose. They'll settle the argument for us. ;)
Take it easy, Rowd.
SuicideNinja @ Jan 13th 2007 2:54PM
Throwing baseballs is for pansies.
Throwing punches is when it gets interesting.
Zegim @ Jan 13th 2007 2:24AM
This is pretty obvious, but it's useful to have it as a sicentific study, I guess it has value in courts and stuff. Or at least more credibility than mere anecdotes.
And, how does being phisically fit help you in your everyday life? It keeps you healty, for one; and secondily, prevents you from looking like a standing cow.