I think there's a lot more out there than Civ in the "formative/educational" market. My literal favorite game of all time is KSP, not just for the amazing gameplay but for what it's taught me. Similarly, semi popular but niche games like Farming Simulator and the other "%s Simulator 20%u" games have a lot of meaningful content. I'd argue even ArmA and similar games are educational in some capacity. Also, Portal because I just have to mention it.

That said, I don't know where I'd go with Fortnite, Overwatch, the COD lineup, and the rest of the mega titles. You could maybe make an argument for some of them maybe but I don't know what that would look like. They're fun games but mostly seem pretty devoid of anything inspiring or intellectually challenging.

Then there's the ugly... Mobile games categorically seem awful.

Edit: Also, kids should be encouraged to mod games. I think you'll probably find more than a few people who are here right now because they found out how to mess with game files to change what they see on the screen, in effect, the ultimate power and learning experience.

Dude, don't be ridiculous. There are countless games that aren't FPS monstrosities.

Into The Breach, Starbound, Galactic Civilizations, Celeste... these are all games that require you to think in some way and aren't mindless hack-and-slash or competitive shooter games.

Can they replace going to school? No, but let's not devolve this argument into "most games aren't like Civilization". A lot of the hatred for games is seriously misplaced.

That's why I said categorically. As a parent, try to consider the merits -- or lack thereof -- of each individual game.

I spent a lot of time playing Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? and The Legend of Zelda.

I have warm memories of both. But I didn’t learn anything from Zelda- it was pure entertainment and connection to popular culture. I can still hum the theme song. I did learn some stuff from Carmen Sandiego.

> I'm more annoyed that everytime video games come up, someone brings up Civilization as a strawman to argue.

> 99% of games aren't Civilization. We all know people are talking about that 99%. The article even calls out that the parents make exceptions for some educational games/screen time. And yet rather than legitimately engage and address peoples concerns about video games, it's always the same argument of: raise the benefits of Civilization, share nostalgia about playing it in the past and ignore the actual arguments being presented.

> This thread is no exception. This is a place of more intelligent discourse - address the opposition's points, or concede they are valid.

If you had carefully read the comment you’re replying to, you'd have noticed the GP is addressing the claim “video games can be educational”. Not “most video games are educational”, but “video games can be educational”, which Ms. Stecher seems to be denying. Thus it makes perfect sense for the GP to present an example.

So before hypocritically accusing others of “strawmanning”, “unintelligent discourse”, and “ignoring the actual arguments being presented”, please take the time to read what people are actually saying.

And while 99% of games aren’t Civilization, I’d need a citation for the claim that 99% of games aren’t educational, if that’s what you meant to imply.