Multiple levels of dumb.
First, in a world where the scientific research on one of the most important issues of the day is conflicted, is there any use for two guys with vested interests sharing their personal opinion? Their subjective assessment of their own case?
Second, the question is not whether video games help. They challenge hand-eye coordination, therefore they will improve it up to some level. The question is whether they are useful for improving it, whether they improve it more than, say, playing some frisbee. Frisbee would also get you some whole body motion and vitamin D. Goodness knows what they mean by "improve cognitive abilities" because by some definition there is no way to improve this past puberty or so. Once you have a definition, the question is whether games would improve it better than reading a challenging book, doing some puzzles, or planning a party. We need to know how VGs *compare* to other pastimes.
There is a cost to playing video games. They take up a lot of time, thus they displace a lot of other activities. They vigorously stimulate parts of our brain and mind, and leave other parts startlingly idle. VGs are certainly changing us as individuals and as a society, as did TV, radio, agriculture, et al. The question is how, and we only have pieces to the answer.
I am absolutely *not* anti-vidi game. They are awesome. I keep meaning to play some but never get around to it. But as with texting and the automobile I am fascinated by the fact that we adopt new technologies without really asking how they will change who we are.
reports from OrcCon 2008.
