Reading through Part One, I could not help but write little notes in the margins questioning not only quoted psychology, or rather McGonigal’s interpretations of it, but of her entire premise and following arguments. She’s simply arguing that if reality were structured (if that is even a possible option) more like games, everyone would be happier and more engaged with the ‘real world’, thereby making the world a better place. In one very specific paragraph, McGonigal fails to notice a major flaw in her argument (see page 40, the first full paragraph). In his chronicle on playing Breakout, Sudnow writes that while in a restaurant he was “just waiting to get back to the game”. McGonigal says that Sudnow never used the term addiction, but I feel that sentence clearly illustrates the addictive power of games, and more largely, of all the hobbies humans have willingly, actively, and happily engaged in. What perplexes me is that she considers such addictive quality negative (“Gamer addiction is a subject the industry takes seriously” McGonigal 43), yet in the context of Sudnow’s testimony, this absenting and distraction from reality is flow, a highly positive emotion. My question is, does the happiness derived from games translate into happiness with ‘reality’ despite the distractions it imposes?
So far, McGonigal has not convinced me. Furthermore, she seems to be suggesting that flow and fiero