2. 职称英语
  3. A recent talk by games academic Jane McGonigal has re-ignited discussion on

A recent talk by games academic Jane McGonigal has re-ignited discussion on

游客2023-11-12  61
问题     A recent talk by games academic Jane McGonigal has re-ignited discussion on the role they play in our society. Traditionally, the debate has centered on whether they are "damaging" or merely "harmless fun". But McGonigal is a games advocate. Her belief is that games are actually good for us.
    In order to solve the world’s most urgent problems, McGonigal says, we need to play more games because gaming creates people who are solution-focused, collaborative, optimistic and hard-working. This position is interesting, although open to the obvious critique that, unlike in-game challenges, real-world problems are not set up to be rewarding, interesting or even soluble, so framing them as a game is likely to lead nowhere. But there’s certainly potential in using game-like mechanics to encourage us to do things we otherwise might not want to: such as the S2H fitness monitor, which allows users to claim rewards for physical activity.
    The wider point—whether playing games actually improves any of our skills—is still open for debate and research. Various studies have shown that playing certain games can increase players’ visual attention, fine motor skills and spatial reasoning. Intuitively, it is not surprising that practicing skills involving fast responses and complicated physical maneuvers might make us better at them.
    But is this a reason to play games, or a useful position for gaming advocates? As a novelist, I’ve always found the idea of promoting reading because it improves cognitive skills deeply depressing. Reading is a wonderful thing not because it makes our brains better but because it is enjoyable, enriching and gives us new experiences: just like games.
    Once someone has told you that something is good for you, it immediately becomes less attractive. I’m not sure it’s necessary to say that playing games will save the world or improve us. Can’t we just have fun? [br] Why has Jane McGonagal’s position re-ignited discussion?
选项 A、Her viewpoint on playing games is very different from the traditional ones.
B、She believes games can create collaborative, optimistic and diligent people.
C、She thinks problems in real world can be solved as a game.
D、She claims that playing games stimulate our interest.
答案 A
解析 因果细节题。定位到第1段，根据第1段第2句可知，传统观念中对游戏的争议点在于玩游戏“有害身心”还是“纯粹无伤大雅的娱乐”，而McGonigal却提倡玩游戏，认为玩游戏有益。这与传统观念背道而驰，因此备受争议。故选项A正确。B项的内容文中有提及，但这是McGonigal认为人们应该玩多点游戏的原因；C项是对第2段首句的误解；D项文中没有提到。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3180859.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)