🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 30 May 2005 00:30:19 -1000, "KC 2.0 --faster than before"
<rightguard@reincarnate.com> wrote:

>
>At the Charles Schwab company's call center headquarters in Phoenix, human
>resources Vice President Chip Luman has learned a secret about financial
>services technology and the employees who operate it: Video game players
>often display exceptional business skills.
>
>"The people who play games are into technology, can handle more
>information, can synthesize more complex data, solve operational design
>problems, lead change and bring organizations through change," said Luman,
>38.

They need to be into technology because most games have trouble working on
anything that deviated from the norm.  

As always, correlation does not mean causation.  I'm sure there's an
example where a person plays lots of games but doesn't know the more
advanced topics about computers (e.g. assembling one).  


>
>Moreover, almost all the games they cite are mainstream hits from an
>industry that often is vilified as brainless and exploitative. Some of the
>games that have the most positive potential are either famously
>controversial or rated Mature because of violent or provocative content.
>

Isn't that the only option available - brainless and exploitative? :)

Still, a small chunk of these mainstream "Mature" games actually have some
sort of plot and require some form of tactics to complete.  The only reason
mainstream games get cited is because they are the most commonly
remembered, and that they usually have some sort of modding capability (to
attract the experienced programmers.)