Replik: ‚The difference between gaming and other forms of leisure activities like sports centers around the fact that video games are also a form of human expression. They are usable by people as tools, much like stone is for a sculptor, to create something that lasts with their mind, which can even considered to be their sole heritage to the world they were born and live in, i.e. a basic human right.
Therefore people playing video games, i.e. „gamers“, are not only consuming them as products, but are also recipients of their content, i.e. the works created.
And by modifiying or even only playing them, they get creators themselves (!). They create save games for example, or are manipulating their worlds because video games are also not only a set of rules but fiction.
Yet there are performative qualities in role-playing games like LARPs too, which could suggest to strengthen their given appreciation. As a historian I also have to say that (re)enacting events is also part of commemorative culture, a culture of rememberance.
And of great importance for this cause is again, that when people come together creating or playing video games, they usually do this as consenting individuals. Hunting or fishing on the other hand may generally be a violation of animal rights.
While the whole notion of „addiction“ is something coming very strongly from the product side of things, neglecting very large portions of video games, like their respective meanings or even ruling out different attempts regarding their possible interpretations. The „Catcher in the Rye“ for example, has been often suggested being a source of inspiration for crimes, yet „inspiration“ is not something usually associated when it comes to violent acts after playing video games.
The terms used by social sciences are much more focused on „correlation“ to or even „causation“ of events or unpleasent behaviour. While the criticized portions of „culture“ or „art“ as they are often used in Germany, are something that is very much excluding, elitist – not something coming from „ordinary“ people but „Kulturschaffende“ for example -, and therefore discriminating.
The problem centers around authoritarian concepts in which „art“ has to be rooted in a positive „value“, „good“ or „beautiful“.
The aforementioned concepts are politically especially problematic when it comes to the German cultural past. Yet „art“, especially much art of the later 20th century like the Wiener Aktionismus, is often something even not considering aesthetics but anti-aesthetics (!).‘