There's an obvious pattern where every generation has had their activities scrutinized (and often feared) by the parent generation, and the scrutiny/fear is usually not justifiable.

That said, a pattern is a pattern until it isn't, and I think it's fair to ask what criteria you'd use to evaluate the cost/benefit of some activity on a cohort of individuals that lack a fully developed frontal lobe.

Some questions going through my mind as I've witnessed my children during quarantine:

1. Does the activity negatively impact the individuals ability to satisfy other obligations (academic, fiscal, personal-care, etc)?

2. Does the activity require only a shared interest, or is active participation required? if the latter, what's the time demand of the participation?

3. If the individual ceases the activity, will they maintain relationships with the individuals they participated with?

4. Can proficiency in the activity translate to other endeavors?

5. does the idea of taking a break from the activity cause anxiety or stress?

I let my kids play the games because I want them to have some autonomy, but online games in particular result in greater negative answers for these questions than other activities (including offline games).

Curious about your observations... do you find there's no difference between online vs. offline?