The violence of video games.

[marty]

so, chances are if you are in this part of VT, you have heard of the opposition to violent video games. People are advocating that these video games are training kids to become murderers and that the games desensitize kids to actual violence.

First off, this is completely incorrect, I'm sure we all agree. I play violent video games, and I would never dream of bringing out a gun and shooting people. my morals are still here and fully intact, and that's because i have the ability, like many people do, to separate reality from fantasy.

Furthermore, i was recently watching an episode of Penn & Teller's bullsh*t on this subject. They went out to prove that video are not as bad as people mock them up to be. They took a 9 year old who's mother allows him to play violent video games named Harrison. They took Harrison and his mother to a shooting range (with all the safety precautions) and showed him how to fire a gun. They loaded the gun with three rounds, asked him to fire, and he did. The recoil really shocked him. He put the gun down after one shot, and when asked if he would like to try again, sheepishly shook his head no.

Now, Penn & teller, at the end of the show explained that the game football, since it's introduction in the early 1900's, has killed over 600 kids in high school or community leagues. Far less than video games are killing at this rate (which is 0 since their introduction).

Penn & Teller left us with one final image, one that they did not want to show, but felt that it should be seen. It showed Harrison, the 9-year-old that enjoys shooting hundreds of people in video games all the time, crying in his mothers arms after he shot a real gun one single time.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peLMsYqlDd0&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6lv3A0iMTI&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu1H-fF5DtQ&feature=channel

parts one, two, and three of the episode, respectively.

[lamboman43]

What really pisses me off about people who say video games cause violence is that they only blame games for violence not anything else. What about racing games? They may provoke illegal racing or street races. What about hunting games? They might promote poaching. What about Mirrors Edge? It could promote people to jump on the roofs of buildings. They could fall and die.

It's not just the Grand Theft Autos and such that are supposedly provoking illegal activities.

[Perseus]

What really pisses me off about people who say video games cause violence is that they only blame games for violence not anything else. What about racing games? They may provoke illegal racing or street races. What about hunting games? They might promote poaching. What about Mirrors Edge? It could promote people to jump on the roofs of buildings. They could fall and die.

It's not just the Grand Theft Autos and such that are supposedly provoking illegal activities.

Lawl, the Mirror's Edge part made me laugh. :P
If anything, games do not "de-seneseitize" people, I've said it before and I will say it again, killing in videogames makes me feel bad for the people I've killed, unless their terrorists or it's in multiplayer. In GTAIV I try not to kill cops, I just incapacitate them.
Lol, but beating up civilians is always fun. :P

[CREAMCHEESE]

Violence in video games convincing teens to do horrible things? Training us to be cold, mindless killers? What a load of bullshit. If anything, video games would be an exhaust for violent teens, not a promoter.

[ManyPearTree]

The two murderers in the Columbine shooting were motivated by Doom partly


EDIT: I was just putting that out there

I love violent video games! The ESRB are just suck-ups for parents..

In BF:BC, when you win, the general of the us team says "time for margiritas in Maui boys"
And the ESRB has to add "alchol reference" in the rating thing on the back..

[CREAMCHEESE]

Music, movies, books, they all have a category that contains a possible motivator for violence. Should we ban that too because a few stupid people go ape shit? It is not fair to just "BAN violent video games" to the entire public, when only a few idiots are causing the problems. If we were to keep this policy up, everything that didn't have flowers shooting out of it's ass would be banned.

[Silverfist64]

The two murderers in the Columbine shooting were motivated by Doom p..artly

They were also motivated by 20 OTHER things. Just because someone has played a violent videogame and then killed people, it doesnt mean the videogame was the motivator. The real motivator is how people react to that person in everyday situations (bullying, family, etc) or mental disorders (depression, etc).

[Reality]

To be fair, if you let a 5 or 6 year old boy play a violent game like Grand Theft Auto or a First-Person Shooter for too long, they do begin to repeat the behaviour they seen in the game. I've seen it myself in cousins and my friends younger brothers. Although they don't pick up a real gun and go on a shooting spree, they are still influenced by it and do begin to get violent. My old friend Ashley's younger brother used to play violent games all the time on the PlayStation, and he'd begin to kick and hit random people and and run all over the place and repeat lines he's heard in the game.

I do agree that little kids should be kept away from violent videogames due to "copycat behaviour", but teenagers are a completely different thing. Teenagers are more mature than little kids, first of all, I have yet to find a 13 or 14 year old that thinks it's okay to batter up random people on the street or steal a car. I've been playing games like 007 Goldeneye since I was 7, and I admit even I used to role-play it, and I started playing Grand Theft Auto when I was 10, and I never copied any of the crimes. The reason I played GTA and found it fun in the first place is because I could use my imagination in it. I could go wherever I want, and do whatever I want, in the game itself rather than in reality.

It's not the video-game developers/publishers faults that irresponsible parents buy violent games for their kids who suffer from severe ADHD and end up copying everything they see.

[tripolar]

I think that when people say games promote drugs, sex, and violence its bullshit.

If you are that easily manipulated by a game, your parents should not let you play it. People do not want to accept that their kid got fucked up in this mind by there lack of parenting but the parents need to blame it on games or tv. There is a rating system for a reason to keep kids away from bad games but if little Danny or Joey are playing GTA at nine years old and they say "when i grow up i want to kill people" you failed at parenting by keeping that away from them.

I hate it when people like "mothers against fun" or Jack Thompson need to file countless lawsuits against Rockstar Games.

[Bougainvillea]

Well, some people are more impressionable.
I wouldn't want my child to be exposed to things like that.
They can be under that influence.
If you guys had a child, you would understand.
Would you let your 5 year old watch the Texas Chainsaw Massacare? No. Because it's inappropriate.

[Zero Beat]

What really pisses me off about people who say video games cause violence is that they only blame games for violence not anything else. What about racing games? They may provoke illegal racing or street races. What about hunting games? They might promote poaching. What about Mirrors Edge? It could promote people to jump on the roofs of buildings. They could fall and die.

It's not just the Grand Theft Autos and such that are supposedly provoking illegal activities.


haha, mirrors edge. "I can jump far- *falls*"

I dont think they do, i play GTA and tons of other killing games ect. I dont plan on killing a whole group of people, or doing hit and runs... I say, people pick if they want to go kill people. They have to have someone or thing to blame for people who kill.

[OneManArmy]

I play a ton of violent games, u just have to look a few cm's down. And I've never stole a police car and ran over a horde of pedestrians, or killed anyone, or even hurt anyone physically! seriously there's no big proof of video games doing this. And all the news says is "11 y/o kills parents, GTA VC found in his room." (I just made that up) and then say "In Vice city, the player can pick up prostitutes, sell drugs, and kill woman." blah blah blah. Hell I play game to calm myself down sometimes, just take my anger out on some pixelated cops, instead of doing something harmful in real life.

[mrmcdonaldduck]

what has the world come to?

what idiots blame violent games for violent acts?

if someone has been abused for 10 years they are going to be worse of than someone whp plays cod4 or gta for the same amount of time.

and everything is censored or there is a warning for everything.

[MadManWithaBox]

i love violent video games. but playing ggears of war, uncharted, call of duty, has never given me the urge to go out and start shooting people. games have age ratings for a reason. why are mothers, whose kids are only 10, 11, play GTA IV, then start saying those kinds of games are bad influences? hypocrites. you get idiots like jack thompson into the mix, and theirs a recipe for disaster

[obiwan94]

I play tons of violent games (Unreal Tournament, Left 4 Dead, GTA) and have never had any desire to shoot a real gun or harm anyone in any way. Though I can see a six or seven year old with bad parents could possibly get the idea that it was alright to go out and beat up little old ladies. Violent games aren't killing people GUNS are killing people. There need to be more restrictions on guns to keep them out of the hands of pyschos like the ones that shot up Columbine

[beedubs]

Actually obiwan, guns don't kill people either, people kill people

[cole g]

ppl dont kill ppl husbands that come home erley do lol

[Modus Operandi]

It really depends on the kid. I know some kids who could handle violent games, and others who couldn't.

[scuba steve]

[QUOTE=marty;596611]so, chances are if you are in this part of VT, you have heard of the opposition to violent video games. People are advocating that these video games are training kids to become murderers and that the games desensitize kids to actual violence.

First off, this is completely incorrect, I'm sure we all agree. I play violent video games, and I would never dream of bringing out a gun and shooting people. my morals are still here and fully intact, and that's because i have the ability, like many people do, to separate reality from fantasy.

Furthermore, i was recently watching an episode of Penn & Teller's bullsh*t on this subject. They went out to prove that video are not as bad as people mock them up to be. They took a 9 year old who's mother allows him to play violent video games named Harrison. They took Harrison and his mother to a shooting range (with all the safety precautions) and showed him how to fire a gun. They loaded the gun with three rounds, asked him to fire, and he did. The recoil really shocked him. He put the gun down after one shot, and when asked if he would like to try again, sheepishly shook his head no.

Now, Penn & teller, at the end of the show explained that the game football, since it's introduction in the early 1900's, has killed over 600 kids in high school or community leagues. Far less than video games are killing at this rate (which is 0 since their introduction).

Penn & Teller left us with one final image, one that they did not want to show, but felt that it should be seen. It showed Harrison, the 9-year-old that enjoys shooting hundreds of people in video games all the time, crying in his mothers arms after he shot a real gun one single time.




well actually for starters people have murdered other people and said it was video game influence. but i believe this is just bull shit the point of video games is to let you do these things in the virtual world so people don't do crazy shit like this in the real world

[Viral Death]

I dont get this so if I play Quantum Of Solace then that means I am going to get a silenced gun and shoot people because I think I am James Bond?

[JackOfClubs]

I dont get this so if I play Quantum Of Solace then that means I am going to get a silenced gun and shoot people because I think I am James Bond?
Yeah, what'd be wrong with doing that....:D

But I do think that sometimes, the ESRB goes a little overboard with their ratings. COD4 rated M, I mean really, there is nothing in it. And it has parents fooled too, because it took me since COD4 to prove to my Mom that there is nothing in it.

Things like this piss me off.

[Viral Death]

I meant shoot real people in real life

Jeeze people are retarded!

Games are games the people that think they are real are the ones that are fucked up in the head and people that do drugs and play games

[Bougainvillea]

Wow.
Okay, this is what pisses me off.
When people say "I play GTA, it not lyke im gunna go shoot ppl."
They're stating that violent video games can leave impressions. Some kids are more impressionable than others.
And having COD4 being rated "M" is perfectly acceptable.
It has people killing people. War. Things that are unsuitable for kids.
I don't know why people can't fucking understand.

[Dagenadriel]

Yeah, what'd be wrong with doing that....:D

But I do think that sometimes, the ESRB goes a little overboard with their ratings. COD4 rated M, I mean really, there is nothing in it. And it has parents fooled too, because it took me since COD4 to prove to my Mom that there is nothing in it.

Things like this piss me off.

Its even worse in Germany, they are crazy for game censorship over there.

[JackOfClubs]

I meant shoot real people in real life

Jeeze people are retarded!

Maybe I was being a bit, you know, sarcastic!!

[tripolar]

Wow.
Okay, this is what pisses me off.
When people say "I play GTA, it not lyke im gunna go shoot ppl."
They're stating that violent video games can leave impressions. Some kids are more impressionable than others.
And having COD4 being rated "M" is perfectly acceptable.
It has people killing people. War. Things that are unsuitable for kids.
I don't know why people can't fucking understand.

Listen. If those kids are too "impressionable" then the PARENTS should keep the games away from there child. As i said before if your child can be that easy manipulated and plays a GTA or whatever and wants to recreate it and does, your are a shitty parent for not keeping better tabs on your kid.

The video game rating system is fine. But when people go "hey what the fuck that kid is 6 or 10 or 15 and playing GTA then shot people". It is not the game's fault. The rating system bars the sale of games to minors, and if there kid got it the parent obviously bought it. And before anyone says what if a older friend bought it, the parents need to make sure things they don't want to see in the child's room are not there. And the worst thing is when a parent goes "i didn't think its bad" well look at the fucken box it says every bad thing in the game.

So whenever any kid shoots up a school and the parents or child blame a game. The parents FAILED at keeping control of the kid. as said before if the child is that easily manipulated keep them away from it.

[Bougainvillea]

Which is kinda what I said..?
And why I said "Things unsuitable for kids"

[tripolar]

Which is kinda what I said..?
And why I said "Things unsuitable for kids"

Not all kids, some can handle it while others can not.

[Bougainvillea]

Well, yeah, of course.
But to me, things like that are inappropriate for kids, no matter what. Even if they can "take it".

But I'm not against violent video games.
Where would the fun be without them, for us mature teens?

[The Batman]

TJP :arrow: ROTW

[Demonic Angel]

For older teens, I see no reason why violent video games would be a problem. They should be able to tell the difference between a video game and real life. People with the sense to know that it's just a game are the only ones who should be playing the game in the first place. And anyways, a video game may be an outlet for anger. I'd rather have people unwind by shooting fictional people in a then hit someone in real life.

I could see a little 5, 6, or 7 year old getting messed up over a game, but that's the parents fault, not the game's. The game was never intended to be played by someone that young, thats why we have ratings for games.

[scuba steve]

it's the same as movies. you wouldn't let your child watch scary movies because they'd shit there pants and wouldn't go to sleep. so why let your child play resident evil etc if you think they're going to get scared.

you wouldn't let your child watch the likes of Sin city because of sexual and aggressive content, so why let your child play GTA if you don't want these influences to affect their childhood.

i think one reason for this influential shit happening to kids is because some adults don't realise how much influence these games hold. they need to get more involved in what their children do with the likes of video games, and in video games defence they by law have looked over these things with age ratings and writing adult supervision recommended on the box, so you can't leave them directly to blame but majoritaly the parents

[Donkey]

I'm thirteen years old and I've recently been shooting cops, car jacking and randomly beating down civilians because I did it on GTA.

I also have recently painted myself yellow and ran around my garden eating white dots because I saw it on pacman.

[liveyoungdiefast]

I think a kid who has access to 20 M rated games at age 8, vs. a kid dragged to a fundamentalist church at age 8, the kid with the games will be a hell of a lot less fucked up.

[Sage]

I think a kid who has access to 20 M rated games at age 8, vs. a kid dragged to a fundamentalist church at age 8, the kid with the games will be a hell of a lot less fucked up.

That's a different debate in itself.

The way I see things, blaming crime and violence on videogames is much like blaming spoons for Rosie O'Donell's weight problem.

[INFERNO]

I think a kid who has access to 20 M rated games at age 8, vs. a kid dragged to a fundamentalist church at age 8, the kid with the games will be a hell of a lot less fucked up.

The two are completely different issues. Video games are clearly not real whereas going to a church is very real.

But for the video games, I think it's wrong to say it doesn't cause any violence or aggressive behavior at all. Certainly while a person is playing them they may become more prone to aggression and possibly some minutes after playing. However, I don't view that aggression to be the same as grabbing a gun as depicted in the game and blowing someone's head off.

I think it does desensitize kids to a certain extent but not enough to where they'll all go out and hijack cars and going on killing sprees. For the ones that do end up showing violent behavior that the video game showed, they probably were going to do that behavior regardless of the game. While some kids may be more impressionable, most of them would realize that shooting a human in real-life is not only illegal but it's also morally wrong for them. In the game, they can easily see and are told it's not real.

So do I think that after playing a game, a kid will go out and exhibit those same behaviors? Probably not. If the kid does, then there's a good chance the kid was already more prone to doing such behaviors and the video game didn't cause it.

Another thing though, the games that are more violent have a higher rating on them. If parents buy the games knowing this or if they see the game with that rating, then something should click in their heads "My kid is 8/9/10/11/12 and they're playing a game that's so violent it's meant for only people 18+". The parents should take that warning on the game with some significance and not simply brush it off.

When the parents advocate for the violent games causing the same or similar violent behavior, I ask why don't they blame the parents? The kid legally cannot buy it so the parent has to. If a friend or relative buys it for the kid, then the parent should step in. The kids are not to be at fault so much, after all, they're given a game that appeals to them.

It doesn't matter how impressionable the kid is, the ratings apply to the kid regardless and the parents should enforce them. If the parents don't then they should be at fault.

Whenever people say that the game caused the kid to kill someone, beat someone up, etc..., I always wonder how they can answer the questions of causality and directionality? How do they know it was in fact the game and not the other 100 possible factors that were all affecting the kid? How do they know that the kid sees violence around them, gets desensitized and then plays the violent game?

[ManyPearTree]

I remember when I was 8 or so and imitated the way the wizards cast psychological spells on enemies from dungeons and dragons. I thought I was the coolest but I never threatened anybody I just thought it was pure fun.

But the thing is, I was taught that killing was wrong. Other individuals that haven't learned that killing is wrong and so may imitate videogame violence for enjoyment or social status

[Viral Death]

Maybe I was being a bit, you know, sarcastic!!
its hard to tell if people are sarcastic on here!

[Jacobim Mugatu]

I think this thread is too one sided on this issue, So I will provide some opposition. I understand that most people are relatively normal and don't go on shooting sprees. However most people are somewhat influenced by video games and other digital media to some degree or another, for me its usually jokes or funny sarcastic remarks I like to take and use in real life. There are many children however, especially in the united states that have parents who have no control of their kids and let them do whatever they want whenever they want. they are influenced at a young age by violent graphic video games. they eventually think "gee, why can't I do that", so they go do it. now it may not necessarily be murder, its usually some stupid act of vandalism. it really all depends on what they think they can get away with. Now, cases like these are probably very rare, but I have heard of a few cases where things like that have happend. I have also heard of kids committing suicide or killing their parents because they have their video games taken away. I think that if you aren't exposed to too much violence at a young age, and have decent parents who don't spoil you to death, you should be fine.

It is not video games alone that cause violence, certainly they may serve as inspiration and influences, but cutting violence out would do little or nothing to stop kids from being violent.

[INFERNO]

I understand that most people are relatively normal and don't go on shooting sprees. However most people are somewhat influenced by video games and other digital media to some degree or another, for me its usually jokes or funny sarcastic remarks I like to take and use in real life.

True, people are influenced by media, however, people also have their sense of morality, sense of right and wrong that they tend to keep in mind with the media. Sarcastic jokes or other verbal stuff, as harmful as it may possibly be, is clearly different from physical damage. I'm sure when you take whatever sarcastic remarks, you have a sense of which jokes are appropriate to use and which ones are not.


There are many children however, especially in the united states that have parents who have no control of their kids and let them do whatever they want whenever they want.

True, although I wouldn't say that the US has the largest amount of bad parents without some sort of objective proof.


they are influenced at a young age by violent graphic video games. they eventually think "gee, why can't I do that", so they go do it. now it may not necessarily be murder, its usually some stupid act of vandalism.

They may indeed be influenced but they're likely to interact with other people, whether they're family members or not, and it's also likely some of those people will help guide them in establishing their morality.

People who do vandalism probably see far less harm in doing that than they see in killing someone. Of course, they may also have no desire nor the will to do something as serious as murder. They probably also weigh the consequences and vandalism generally has punishments less severe than murder.


I have also heard of kids committing suicide or killing their parents because they have their video games taken away.

Do you have any sources of these events?


I think that if you aren't exposed to too much violence at a young age, and have decent parents who don't spoil you to death, you should be fine.

I think it's more than not being exposed to too much violence and not having terrible parents. People, even kids, can understand the emotions in other people, they can understand physical pain and they tend to show acts of sympathy and remorse. Chances are they'd be going to school and they'd be instilled those morals there even if the parents don't instill them.


It is not video games alone that cause violence, certainly they may serve as inspiration and influences, but cutting violence out would do little or nothing to stop kids from being violent.

This is very true. The games can increase the chances of violent behavior but even if one doesn't play violent video games, they can still be quite violent.

But suppose a kid (let's say the kid is between 9-13) plays violent video games, a lot of them in fact. The parents know that the games are very violent and are all rated as M for 18+ but they let the kid play the games endlessly with no objection. Suppose also that this kid goes out and commits some act of violence that is the same or similar to a scene in the video game. Who would you say is to blame, the kid, the parents or both? Assume that the parents were the ones who bought the game.

[Jacobim Mugatu]

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/10794-young-boy-commits-suicide-over-video-games/

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/12/boy_killed_mom_and_shot_dad_ov.html

I never really thought about who would be to blame. After all should a video game company be blamed for one instance? Video games are sold to millions of People, and most are fine. Depending on the situation, I would blame the parents, only to a certain degree though. The one who commits the act should obviously the one to take most of the punishment.

[Raynes]

Video games don't create murderers. If you don't have the ability to separate reality from fantasy in the first place, 9 times out of 10 you'll end up a murderer without the video game.

[INFERNO]

After all should a video game company be blamed for one instance?

They may be blamed for creating the game, however, there are two main reasons why I wouldn't put a lot of blame on them. First, if you look at the game box and read the information on it, you can quickly figure out if it's going to be a violent game. So the buyer cant really buy the game without having a clue what it's going to entail. Second, there are ratings on the game, and although the gaming companies don't put on these ratings, the ratings serve as a warning about the game's content. So when a person is to buy a game and they see it's rated M and they then read the information, then the person is very likely to understand the amount of graphic violence that there is.


Video games are sold to millions of People, and most are fine. Depending on the situation, I would blame the parents, only to a certain degree though. The one who commits the act should obviously the one to take most of the punishment.

True, the person who does the act should take the blame, however, if the parents knowingly buy the game for their young child, they should understand what the game roughly entails.

You're also right that millions of games are sold to people and most of them don't become murderers as a result. If someone is to murder due to what a game showed, then I do think that the person was going to murder regardless if they played the game. If they had the ability to contemplate and go through with the act, then it wouldn't matter too much if they played a violent game or not.

[SlappyTwinkle]

i think it's bullshit that people choose to blame shootings and such on violent gaming. there are tons of other sources out there that "promote" just as much violence. for instance Edgar Allen Poe, his writings contain numerous references or descriptions of some pretty gruesome things, and yet his work is still some of the most analyzed and studied literature in the world. explain that to me.

[Camazotz]

There is no direct link from violent video games to murders. In these instances, kids were deprived of video games and took the irrational approach. Suicide and homicide. Both kids were clearly not thinking logically. Not being able to play video games is not something to go berserk over, but these kids did. They are emotionally unstable and needed medical help.

[1_21Guns]

This subject annoys me. People are always trying to blame violent video games on well violence. In my opinion, they're just finding an easy excuse for the way people seem to be these days. Its rediculous, my eldest cousin played violent video games for years, he would never even concider harming somebody, along with the rest of my cousins. I've even been on the odd violent game for a while, it dosent brainwash you. I'm sure people have been playing violent video games for years and not turned into murderers or whatever. If you ask me, any excuse. Its just alot of bullshit. At what point does violent video game say its okay to go about hurting people? Oh yeah. They dont....

[tripolar]

This subject annoys me. People are always trying to blame violent video games on well violence. In my opinion, they're just finding an easy excuse for the way people seem to be these days. Its rediculous, my eldest cousin played violent video games for years, he would never even concider harming somebody, along with the rest of my cousins. I've even been on the odd violent game for a while, it dosent brainwash you. I'm sure people have been playing violent video games for years and not turned into murderers or whatever. If you ask me, any excuse. Its just alot of bullshit. At what point does violent video game say its okay to go about hurting people? Oh yeah. They dont....

Totally agreed blaming it on video games is a damn excuse.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/10794-young-boy-commits-suicide-over-video-games/

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/12/boy_killed_mom_and_shot_dad_ov.html

I never really thought about who would be to blame. After all should a video game company be blamed for one instance? Video games are sold to millions of People, and most are fine. Depending on the situation, I would blame the parents, only to a certain degree though. The one who commits the act should obviously the one to take most of the punishment.

Okay, if the child is that addicted to a game the parents should have noticed earlier and stopped it. If a kid shoots there parents they are internally fucked up. Really think about it if i kill them yes i can play but then the police will come and i will never be able to play.

[1_21Guns]

I agree with the parents being responsible too tbh. If the parents don't agree with the game, they shouldnt buy it, or if they are unsure, they should watch the child play it or look at the back of the case, its says whats in it there and how severe. At the end of the day the parents are responsible for the child, and the game isnt. The can blame the game all they want, but by the end of it, the game cant possibly be responsible for the few children out of probably the thousands who play them that comes off the game, grab a gun or something and goes around killing or seriously injuring people. So blameing the game is just an easy exuse. If you had a kid would you rather blame it on a game or you? I'm guessing most would say the game...

[Bankai15]

Responsibility should fall on the parents.