M-13 - Videogames and Violence

[HollywoodBob]

I just got through having a very heated conversation with my best friend over violent videogames. He contends that incidents like this one (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/South/03/13/deputy.killed.ap/index.html) are due to exposure to violent games like the Grand Theft Auto series. Also there was an incident in '02 where two teens decided to shoot into traffic, killing one person and injuring another, when caught they claimed the game was to blame for their actions. I'm sure we've all heard that Doom was to accused for the horrible incident at Columbine High.

So what do you think? Are the games at fault or is it just that these rare incidents are the blame of unstable individuals who would be likely to commit such crimes even without exposure to the virtual violence? Or are there other factors involved?

Here is an excellent article on the history of violence in gaming. (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6090892/index.html)

-HollywoodBob

[Animagi rock!]

I definately don't think you can blame the video games for violence. It might be so that violent people are more likely to enjoy such games, but I don't think they're the cause of the violence. It could just as well be reasoned that they'll be less violent because the games give them a chance to blow of steam. Most people I know that play games like Doom aren't people I consider to be more mentaly unstable or likely to kill me.
There are so many other things that could make those kids commit crimes. I actualy think that a bigger reason for violence is that parents don't have the time anymore to spend time with their kids and teach them right from wrong.

[lxs234]

I don't think video games make everyone violent. There may be some mentally unstable kids who should refrain from gun shooting games, but they aren't the only cause. There was tons of violence even before video games.

[Angora]

It's true that seeing something a lot desensitizes you to it. If you think about it, the only time you can be shocked by something is the first time you encounter it. You might be surprised after, but you can only really have that strong reaction the first time. I don't think that being desensitized to something is, by itself, going to lead you to doing the thing.

I think the problem with violence in games as in movies (if you consider it a problem) has to do with context. If you associate possitive feelings with doing something really horrific to someone or present it in a positive light where mass murder is a fun thing to do on the weekend or where there's a flimsy attempt to portray it as "justice" and taking the law into your own hands to go around killing people - I think the culture that promotes those values is the worst thing. And what you're seeing with game content is the values of the culture being reflected in the way that violence is portrayed.

I don't know about other parts of the world but I know that over here we have a culture that praises violence, to a certain degree, as an honorable way to solve your problems. And I feel personally that that's a big part of what's behind school shootings.

So I don't think it's the violence so much as the way that it's presented. And often If it's presented in a game format, in my opinion, there's something wrong there. If you want to play Super Mario, that's one thing. But nowadays they have these horribly realistic games where you're shooting people in the arm or the leg and they're screaming in pain, and I think there's something wrong if you enjoy doing that. Like, with sniper games and things like that, I think there's something wrong there. I don't think it'll cause someone to commit murder, but I think it removes a mental barrier that might stop you if you thought about committing murder for another reason.

[NeuroComp]

Its all about having too much free time. For children in our side of the world there is way too much free time for them. I know in alot of asiatic and middle eastern countries schools run from 7 to 7. They balance games and academia nad extracurricular well. I see some kids online in NA playing games frmo like 4-9. Thats way to much exposure to games but also to tv.

Unfortunately alot of extracurricular activities(sports,martial arts, art & dance classes) have fees which some parents can't afford let alone private schools. So the solution to me is expose them to more time in school adn hopefully integrate such Extracurricular activities. Allow for just enough break/recess times so their little minds don't get overexposed.

[Midnightsfire]

Have some links about Role Playing Games.

The Attacks on Role Playing Games (http://www.rpgstudies.net/cardwell/attacks.html)

Did Game Play Role in Suicide? (http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,51490,00.html) *sigh* Everquest...(Known to some as Evercrack, because we can't get enough...which just isn't true.)

Game Hysteria and the Truth (http://www.locksley.com/6696/rpgsatan.htm) by fantasy writer Michael Stackpole. (Ironic that I have most of the gaming material presented in link. This doesn't make me a bad man. Really.)

I absolutley refuse to list links connecting anything further about BADD. (Bothered About Dungeons and Dragons) or SADD. (Sickened About D&D

Funny. The case they make against White-Wolf publishing company:

Supposedly this killer (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,768267,00.html) was influenced by Vampire: The Masquerade.

Oh my, another Jack Chick (http://www.father-ramos.com/ramos/sermons.html) (aka Pastor Ramos). Makes prominent mention of Demon: The Fallen.

[rotsiepots]

Erm, perhaps all those people claiming that violent video games don't cause violent behaviour have never heard of Bandura's Social Learning Theory (http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/bandura.htm)?

In my opinion it's relatively straightforward; violent videogames and movies do encourage people, especially children, to behave in an anti-social, violent manner.

[Master Qui-Gon]

Some children are unable to separate fantasy from reality, so what happens in the video games is experienced as real. These few children shouldn't get their hands on video games at all, but I believe it's their parents' responsibility rather than the games' responsibility.

A few years ago, there was a school shooting incident in Germany, and many blamed Counter-Strike (the child supposedly played CS a lot). A known CS-player in Norway responded to this, saying that millions of people play CS and that pretty much everyone aren't affected by the game in a negative way, meaning that there was something special about this specific child. The point is that even though massive play of CS might have helped the process along, it was not the reason for the shootings! Problems at home or mental problems are far more likely reasons.

And as a wise gamer once said: ""Shooting somebody in a game is just like scoring a goal in a football match". Getting frags in CS or Quake has nothing to do with shooting people in reality.

[Picko]

I've played videogames - violent ones - and watched movies - violent ones - for probably over a decade now and I've never been involved in behaviour that could be considered anti-social. Therefore I had to contend that provided the child has a good head on his/her shoulders to begin with then it will make no difference.

But lets face facts, some people are screw ups. You can't just blame videogames and/or movies because they are crazy. There are usually far more underlying and serious reasons for things happening and none of these has to do with engaging prostitutes in casual relations and then brutally killing them in Grand Theft Auto.

[Master Qui-Gon]

Anyways, you might want to check this (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/emergingtech/0,39020357,2071912,00.htm) article.



On Monday, President Clinton hosted a summit to discuss the causes of adolescent violence and how to combat it. But Tapscott contended that healthy people can tell the difference between what is real and what is not. "Falling from a 20-story building and jumping from the same height using a bungie cord are physically exactly the same," he said. "However, the participant has a completely different experience."


"Kids can tell the difference between what's in a game and what is real," said Tapscott. "When I asked my kid if he thought games were making him more aggressive, he said, 'It's only a game, Dad.'"

[rotsiepots]

Video games obviously aren't the only contributing factor to anti-social behaviour, however, in conjunction with other factors they can be a catalyst to violence. Things such as parental discipline, reinforcement and punishment also determine how pervasive the violence in video games and the media is.

[HollywoodBob]

Erm, perhaps all those people claiming that violent video games don't cause violent behaviour have never heard of Bandura's Social Learning Theory (http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/bandura.htm)?

In my opinion it's relatively straightforward; violent videogames and movies do encourage people, especially children, to behave in an anti-social, violent manner.

It took me a while to find this, I'd read it some time ago, after the Columbine icident. Media Interactivity, Cognitive Flexibility, and Self-efficacy (http://research.haifa.ac.il/~jmjaffe/Dissert/) is a doctoral dissertation on the effects of media stimulus on self-efficacy, the core of Bandura's theory.

Analysis of pre-treatment and post-treatment test and survey measurements revealed no statistically significant effects of media interactivity on knowledge gain or self-efficacy gain.

Also Bandura's contention that witnessing violence inspires violence is based on tests with small children, and crimes committed by a small number of teens. Small children are much more impressionable so it's understandable that they would be effected. Nothing is said about these criminal teens other then they committed acts similar to what they'd seen in entertainment media. No mental background was given.

I believe that these actions are purposely recreated to allow for the scape goating of the movie/videogame, so that they don't have to take the responsibility for their willing and intentional actions.

-HollywoodBob

[LewsTherin]

I would think that violent movies also play a part. Just look at movies like The Matrix and Kill Bill, both of which glorify violence. But ultimately I don't think video games or movies are entirely responsible. Yes, they present you with a fantasy world in which you kill people like nobody's business, and for some people the line between fantasy and reality can get dangerously blurred, but as a player, you have to be pretty stupid to think that there's anything real about the game you're playing (even the so-called "tactical shooters" ala Counterstrike). I've played many violent games, and still do, but it's not real and I don't take it seriously. It's fantasy - entertainment - and should not be treated as such. If you can't treat it as such, then, you shoudl avoid playing violent games.

People make the decision to act in a violent manner. If they go out and shoot people, then blame it on games, then they're just making excuses i.e. not taking responsibility for their actions and trying to get out of the consequences.

[mirandam]

What Hollywood Bob said is right about the scape goat. Everyone is always looking for the blame of someone's actions. Why don't we look closer to the one who committed that action. In society I see so many people blaming others for everything that goes wrong in life and they need to take the responsibility for their own choice that created the problem. There have been violent movies and other things for a long time and we don't see people going out in force committing crimes because of them. I feel the person who does was already unstable to begin with. There are certain cases when a child is abused when we can place a blame, but to place a blame on a video game, movie, or the music they listen is going a bit too far. I am sure that stopping and violence in anything a kid can see is not going to stop it out there on the streets. It is a fact of life and we have had to deal with this long before there was even t.v.

[DrummerboyDT]

Why are there violent video games? Because, people want to play violent video games. If they didn't, there would be none so it's not the game company's fault.

[JofpGallagher]

I tend to think that violent videogames has a negligible effect in people. Since I was a child I have played videogames (Atari :rolleyes: ), and I still play videogames. I love the shooting ones (Halo, Half-Life, DukeNuken, Quake, etc)

I can't kill an ant without feeling remorse.

But again, I'm thinking on my own experience to give my opinion.

[lxs234]

On Monday, President Clinton hosted a summit to discuss the causes of adolescent violence and how to combat it. But Tapscott contended that healthy people can tell the difference between what is real and what is not. "Falling from a 20-story building and jumping from the same height using a bungie cord are physically exactly the same," he said. "However, the participant has a completely different experience."

Um, how old is that article? I am sure it still has good information, but Clinton isn't president anymore.
Just pointing that out, since him being called president is funny.

[Tane]

I do not think videogames increase violence; they act more of a release mechanism for some children and therefore decrease violence. Violence was around way before videogames where invented so I doubt they have very little impact in a child's aggressive behavior. Most children learn that on the playground anyway yet we do not ban playtime.

[NeuroComp]

Its all about freetime and parental supervision. If a kid doesn't feel up to living of course video games are gonna immerse into his reality. Thus it is the parents job to
diversify his culture and get him other hobbies as well. But unfortunately most parents can't afford alot of things thus it comes down to us as a society which means we need better education systems.

[Liselle]

I think that there is a link with between the two alright, and it doesn't even have to be agressive games loaded with guns that are to blame, even things like soccer games definitely cause people to be more agressive...instead of actually expending energy playing *again soccer for the example* you sit on your bum tapping buttons....its just not the same thing IMHO.

Course you can't blame video games or TV for all acts of Violence in people, society has alot to do with it, with both parents generally working longer/harder/more than say 10 years ago, kids are left to be entertained with a games console.....lack of communication ensues and people resort to violence as a cry for help or to communicate.

It happens

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

I do not think videogames increase violence; they act more of a release mechanism for some children and therefore decrease violence.

I agree. Grand Theft Auto seems to be a really popular choice with a lot of my friends around exam time; better they take out their stress on pixels than their professors.

Video games alone can't cause someone to snap. There have to be other factors involved.

[HollywoodBob]

I see games like GTA on the level of Tom and Jerry. They're so ridiculous in the level of violence that they display, that I feel there has to be mitigating circumstances that make a child unable to distinguish the game from reality.

But from the other angle, these are games that are targeted to mature teens and adults so really no one under 17 should be playing them anyway.

-HollywoodBob

[Tane]

I see games like GTA on the level of Tom and Jerry. They're so ridiculous in the level of violence that they display, that I feel there has to be mitigating circumstances that make a child unable to distinguish the game from reality.

But from the other angle, these are games that are targeted to mature teens and adults so really no one under 17 should be playing them anyway.

-HollywoodBob

Exactly in Britain the video games are rated accordingly to the content and therefore it comes down to the parents allowing their children to play them and buy them in the first place.

Then again some people do not see anything wrong in playing the game, bash the gofer and that’s done with a mallet held in the actual child’s hand and computers bread violence, especially when they do not work.:p

[Kaonashi]

I find the news can be more violent than games and nobody ever talks abot censoring that.

Also, whenever there's a school shooting, there's always a few right after the first. Why? Because they post the kids full name, show numerous shots of him on TV, have the "specialists' come in to explain why on earth these kids are so violent, etc. I think that videogames, music, and movies (all which have been blamed for killings) are scapegoats for other things. It's kinda hypocritical to blame music and games for murders when our own media is equally guilty of glorifying violence.

[Cosmos]

The most violent form of media I have ever seen is the news. It contains way more violent images than movies and games. So maybe the government should get rid of the news.
I personally think, computer games and movies have no connection with these incidents, but think that people will just always look for something to blame it on.

[OrbitingElle]

Remember the Beavis & Butthead episode where they tackled a similar subject? They were watching a documentary on Benjamin Franklin and afterward they went outside and flew a kite in the rain. They electrocuted themselves, and everyone was sure that it was the "rock music" they were listening to that made them do it.

It's nice to see that everyone is basically in agreement that this is a symptom of a bigger problem, not the problem itself. If someone thinks killing prostitutes is cool because they saw it on a video game, there is something VERY WRONG with that person.

A person in this mental state could just as easily use actual events for inspiration. The Manson family listened to the Beatles and claimed they were preaching of a coming race war. The Columbine kids listened to Marilyn Manson. The list is endless, but people who blame the Beatles, Marilyn Manson, and video games are missing the point entirely.

The Point Is: (in my humble opinion...) People don't get angry and kill people because they listen to rock music. They listen to angry rock music because it relates to the way they are feeling already. A child will not be a violent murderer because of a video game, but that ONE child out of a billion who happens to be mentally unstable might use it as inspiration/reason/excuse.

If parents would take 5 minutes out of their lives to say to their children, "Hey, tv is not real life, you know that, right?" all these things might be avoided altogether.

[Kate Johnson]

Look, Mods, I did a search! This topioc has recently been in British news so I figure that it's worth bringing up again.

Link to BBC Article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/3936597.stm)

I don't think that videogames directly influence anti-social or criminal behaviour. I myself have played games such as Grand Theft Auto, and I feel no wish to steal cars and kill people.

People may take ideas from games on HOW to kill someone, but the game directly does not make them want to kill someone.

[Classical_Wizar]

No because there have been violence in the world long before they were videogames. It seems to be a part of us, the fact that blaming a game is the way out for people. "So sonny why did you hit your sister," the father asks. "Well I was playing this game," the father thinks well it can’t be my son so therefore it must be the game. People don’t want to take responsibility for their own actions and would rather blame something else. It's the easy way out of wondering why something happened than what caused it.

[Pilum]

The Manhunt thing is complete bull. As for the 'ban'... well, Radio 4 quoted some intersting figures - Manhunt sold 100,000 copies, Vice City 11 million.

Interesting, however they did not press Dixon's or Game to answer the follow-up question, as it would have been the killer:

"As you are so concerned with the effects of videogame violence, will you now announce that you will not be selling GTA:San Andreas?"

We know the answer to that one!

In all honesty I can think of several reasons for Manhunt to have been withdrawn from the shelves, and chief among them was that I found it to be totally bobbins. Hitman whupped it at just about every turn. But it is easier to blame an inanimate object than chase the real issues here - namely that a young man didn't have that 'switch' inside him that says Killing People Is Wrong. That might involve looking at ourselves, so instead we'll return to medieval times where a man can admit murder, but claim it wasn't his fault as his sword had been forged by a pagan.

[Wab]

Games, books, movies have all been balmed over the years. People who will commit violent acts will commit violent acts. At worst media may inspire method, but they aren't the motivation.

[AS_Muggle]

Time to give my two cents worth….

The arguments about external influences creating violent tendencies in people has indeed, gone on forever. To simply blame an object as creating these thoughts is a gross oversimplification of behavioural patterns.

People do not simply play a game, watch a film, read a book and think “I know, I’ll kill someone”. It only gives them the ideas of how to do it. That’s why they’re called “Copy-Cat” actions.

To blame this game for this crime is merely attempting to leave behind our duty to society to bring up children that believe that violence against other people is wrong. It’s just sad that we have a society where violence is allowed to become a way of life, with people trying to find excuses about why he did it. After all, a game cannot kill someone, a person has to pull the trigger.

PS. Judging from news reports that I read, it just seems to me that the killer was going to do it anyway. I don’t know, I may be wrong.

[Hagrid442]

I've played perhaps a majority of the "Biggest Offenders" in great quantity. Playing Wolf3d, RTCW, Doom 1 and 2 (and 3 is coming out tomorrow!! CAN'T WAIT), Mortal Kombat has not turned me into a killing machine. Hell, I'm back to playing Diablo, which has a bunch of killing and a name that could be objectionable to some. Still, I'm a rather mellowed-out person, and have hit only a handful of people in anger. My brother is one of them, of course, but who hasn't hit their sibling?? :rotfl: He's not scarred for life, though.

I believe the vast majority of people that play these sort of games actually have a cathartic effect. It's that very miniscule minority that gains all the attention. The Harrises and Klebolds, for example. Too many want to scape goat the parents, heavy-metal music, and Doom for their actions, when in reality, even the two shooters admitted in their suicide note that they were responsible. (I could be wrong)

[roz]

I heard a very interesting interview with Bing Gordon, creative director of Electronic Arts, a few years ago.

He commented that our entertainments have always been full of violence. He uses Homer's Odyssey as an example. He talked about the section where Odysseus finally gets home the first thing that he does is he kills all the men in the court for courting his wife. Then he kills all the women for not stopping the men. I might have to dig it out this evening and get a couple fo exact quotes.

Roz.

If you want to hear the interview you should be able to buy it from www.audible.com. It was one of the Robin Williams @ audible.com interviews

[Dawn_Potter]

I don't think that you can blam violent videogames for violence in society!
There has always been violence around, long before videogames were invented!
I am pretty sure that Hitler didn't play videogames before he decided to start WW2 and so on...

In my opinion it's just a human necessity to search for explanations for violent behaviour and it is pretty easy to blame the video games...

[Mundungus Fletc]

Dawn Grey wrote
In my opinion it's just a human necessity to search for explanations for violent behaviour and it is pretty easy to blame the video games...

Exactly - in the stone age they were probably discussing the relationship between violence and cave paintings

[Dawn_Potter]

Exactly - in the stone age they were probably discussing the relationship between violence and cave paintings

Thanks...
Yes, that's really pretty much what I think as well.
There will always be someone to blame:

In the Middle Ages witches and heretics were responsible for the decline of society and nowadays we blame it on the media.

[Tane]

I have to admit after hearing about the most recent incident about a boy who killed a child due to playing a computer game did make me think about the effects of such entertainments. I know for a fact that I find violent games impossible to play as I just can't stomach them. I guess computer games can desensitize someone to violent acts and especially those that are completely interactive because the person playing the game becomes the actual killer at times and to me that is a little disturbing, especially when you consider the fact that they like playing out such violent in the game.

Them again a person must already be very ill to mix up reality with a computer game before you start playing them.

[quietmind]

I think rosie got to the heart of it by pointing out Bandura's experiments and conclusions.

When you're exposed to continued and possibly increasing amounts of violence (virtual or real), you can slowly become desensitized to it in the video game world, and I think it can carry over somewhat to a person's perception of violence in real life.

[Kangy]

I'm in agreement with the BBC, again.

This is not the fault of the video games, but the fault of society. Why were the vendors of these games not checking ID when selling these games, or if they did, why did the parents buy it for them in the first place, if they didn't, why weren't they taking an active enough part in their lives to pick up on this?

I'm not doubting the games content. Doubtlessly, it has some morally dubious content, but why were these children allowed to play the games in the first place. We can all play the blame game, but why not find the real problem?

[HollywoodBob]

Seeing violence in videogames doesn't desensitize the average person to violence in the real world.

Most people can understand the concept of fantasy, and differentiate between blowing the head off of a computer character and killing a real person.

Like Hagrid, and probably a good number of people in the nintendo generation, we've been exposed to tons of violence in video games, but yet we don't go out and murder people. I'd be honestly surprised if most of us wouldn't get sick seeing a person killed in a accident let alone murdered.

It's that small percentage of people that can't make those determinations, that are the danger. It's not the video games/movies/tv/books, it's their own mind not making them realize that when you stab a person in real life they're not going to respawn and come get you.

And I've really begun to think that whenever people commit these crimes, they claim it was the games in order to shurk the responsibility for their own actions.

-HollywoodBob

[Aoweil]

I don't think that violent video games can be blamed for violent behavior. It's true that a lot of content in video games is tasteless, but if someone is driven to murder because of them, they have a serious character flaw to begin with, and in that case anything could set them off.

Dawn_Grey said:
I don't think that you can blam violent videogames for violence in society!
There has always been violence around, long before videogames were invented!
I am pretty sure that Hitler didn't play videogames before he decided to start WW2 and so on...
In my opinion it's just a human necessity to search for explanations for violent behaviour and it is pretty easy to blame the video games...

You brought up an excellant point. Violence and violent people have existed since the beginning of time practically. Atilla the Hun's violent nature wasn't due to too many hours of playing Mortal Kombat.
Society is constantly looking for something to blame the actions of others on and ignoring the idea of personal responsibility.

[Kate Johnson]

This is not the fault of the video games, but the fault of society. Why were the vendors of these games not checking ID when selling these games, or if they did, why did the parents buy it for them in the first place, if they didn't, why weren't they taking an active enough part in their lives to pick up on this?

What I've put in bold text in your answer is a brilliant point. :tu: :agree: If I was 18 and buying an 18-rated game, I'd probably be like "Don't you need to see some ID?"

I see this sort of thing in cinemas as well- I frequently went into 15-rated films when I was underage. I think I only got ID'd once in about three years, and since turning 15 I've never been ID'd.

I think the problem is that too many people see it as "a sale is a sale". If they're going to make money out of it, who cares if they're underage? Profit is profit.

Also, many parents buy their kids videogames to keep them occupied. It's much easier for kids to sit infront of the computer or Play Station or whatever than to spend time with their parents.

[Spirit]

I think that violent games are partly to blame for violence. it isn't the root of the problem, but it does help it in two ways.

1. It helps people feel more okay with violence, because they're used to seeing blood (even if it is just an animation) and things like that. Notice that if we see an animal kicked (a dog for example) nearly everyone says, "Oh, the poor doggy!". But if I human is kicked or pushed against a wall, we don't feel nearly as much sympathy for them. We just say, "Well, he had it coming" or something.

2. It gets in people's heads. If someone makes another person angry, the idea of violence from a video game can resurface in his or her mind.

Also, it's been proven that if children grow up with violence in their homes, the children are more likely to be abusive when they grow up. It's just better if we don't see any form of violence.

[rotsiepots]

I think the problem is that too many people see it as "a sale is a sale". If they're going to make money out of it, who cares if they're underage? Profit is profit.

There are enormous fines, both for companies and individuals, for allowing minors to access inappropriate material when they are underage. "Profit is profit" really isn't an issue when an $80 sale results in a $20,000 fine.

[quietmind]

I'm curious: How closely are those companies watched by the government? Do fines somewhat match how often the violations occur, or is it impossible for the government to keep up with what's being done illegally?

[roz]

In The Next Fifty Years: Science in the First Half of the Twenty-First Century (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0375713425/qid=1091521488/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/002-8626098-0696065?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) there is as essay by a child psycologist.

She says that the problem is that we will never be able to prove that there is a connection even if there is. It is another time when the question is nature vs nurture.

Do children become more violent because they spend alot of time watching violence on the TV or playing violent games? Or is it the children that already have violent tendancies who spend alot of time involving themselves in violent activities?

Roz.

[Kate Johnson]

There are enormous fines, both for companies and individuals, for allowing minors to access inappropriate material when they are underage. "Profit is profit" really isn't an issue when an $80 sale results in a $20,000 fine.
Is this sort of system in place in the UK, do you know? I know that selling alcohol to under-18's here will get you a hefty fine, but I've never heard about the fines involved for video games.

[rotsiepots]

I received a phone call at work today that instructed me to remove copies of the PS2 and X-Box game Manhunt from our shop. This was a reaction to the murder of a 14-year-old in England who was murdered by someone who admitted to being "obsessed" with the game.

Here are some relevant news stories:

Video game blamed for boy's murder sells out (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040805/323/eznv0.html)
"Manhunt" pulled after teen murder (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040729/325/ez5t1.html)

Now, discuss. :D

[Classical_Wizar]

First of all it said that the game was supposed to be sold to 18 years and older and that the kid was 17. Tragedy and all but one has to know what the kid situation and mind set was before the incident happened. How was he treated at home? At school, by friends? Was this pent up rage or not? What comments were exchanged during the park?

[theseeker]

That comment the father made about "if this sort of videogames encourages kids to commit violent acts" or whatever he said, annoys me. Who bought the game? The 17 year old SHOULDN'T have been able to buy it himself, but I mean, if his parents bought him that game, they really don't have anyone to blame but themselves. That may sound rude, but why don't parents pay more attention to what their kids are doing and playing? He can't really get all angry about the game when he was the one who bought it (if he even was, I have no idea).
Violent games are not the cause of the problem, but, as many people have said, are really just a scapegoat when people feel they need to blame someone.

[Pilum]

Rotsiepots, see my earlier comment.

Additionally, the police have been saying that LeBlanc didn't own the game. It was actually Pakeerah's room they found it in. But now that the tabloid-inspired "Ban this evil filth" furore is dying down, we may just start to learn the truth in all of this.

EDIT: Found it. Here you go. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/3538066.stm)

[Kate Johnson]

Pilum- it's a little worrying that HMV sales of the game in question have risen in light of the case. I'm still pretty skeptical of the connection between violent games and criminal tendencies.

[Pilum]

Worrying, perhaps, though not much and hardly surprising. Why? Simple. Walk into a video game store. Especially for the PS2, there are stacks and stacks of games, more than anyone could ever realistically hope to buy. So you rely on reviews (well, I don't, but that's because I've not found a magazine I can trust), word of mouth or simple chance to find a good one.

Now to digress a little, personally I bought Manhunt on two grounds: It was 'from the people who brought you GTA' (wrong as it turned out - it was from the same publisher (Rockstar), not the same development team) and because I was waiting for Hitman and thought it would be similar. As I said before, I was wrong on both counts. It just didn't do anything for me at all. In fact it was somewhat dull, I did not feel the controls were as responsive as they could have been and it all seemed incredibly childish, in the sense it had been designed to get the Daily Mail outrage meter ticking to tray to shift stock.

And I was not the only one. Again, I refer back to my earlier post. It wasn't stated whether those figures were worldwide or UK-only, but by any standards the game was a flop. It just didn't ignite and become a 'classic', or even a 'nice to have'. It was dying. Then came this case.

It is now a cliche that when something is to be banned it is the best publicity you can hope for. People want to see what the fuss is over, or, especially with kids/young adolescents, want to prove how 'hardcore' and 'down with it' they are by having it. I've done it in my not-so-long-ago past. Look at the Sex Pistols. The original GTA. More recently we had The Passion Of The Christ. This is the origin of the old saw "no publicity is bad publicity."

As for the effect on kids - I remain to be convinced, however it stems from videogames still being a 'kids pastime'. I think the reasoning may go like this: "Can't let the kids play outside because the media have brainwashed me into thinking there's a kiddie-fiddler on every corner, so they can watch TV. Oops, Mary Whitehouse is on saying how it's all bad and the evil controllers want to show live hardcore porn at 3pm. I know, I'll buy them this console, that will keep them safe".

Humanity has a distinct tendency to look for scapegoats. It is far easier to blame Manhunt/D&D/Satan :rolleyes: than to confront the real devils within ourselves. Or to have to ask difficult questions. Such as why wasn't this lad raised with the knowledge that Killing Is Bad?

(PS I'm a computer-game-playing, roleplaying, shooting, fencing, internet-loving horror-movie-and-heavy metal fan. You'd think I'd have racked up a decent bodycount by now. :D )

[Aoweil]

(PS I'm a computer-game-playing, roleplaying, shooting, fencing, internet-loving horror-movie-and-heavy metal fan. You'd think I'd have racked up a decent bodycount by now. :D )

:rotfl:

I still don't see how videogames can be blamed for that case. Would it really have made a difference if he were 18? LeBlanc was 17 and I'm not so sure that the mindset of a 17 year old is all that different from the mindset of an 18 year old. In any case, those ages are old enough to know the difference between right and wrong, what's real and what's fantasy.

I'm going to go back to what I said in my previous post. If someone is driven to kill because of a video game, they have a character flaw to begin with, in which case anything could set them off. Suppose LeBlanc had become obsessed with a Tarantino flick?

[Kaonashi]

I don't think that video games make people more violent. When something horrible happens, the media automatically looks for a scapegoat. If that kid read "the brothers grim" repeately, then by god, the Brothers Grimm fairy tales must have been "what set him off." I think it has to do with our "blame everyone and everything but the people involved" culture we have here.

On the other hand, you have to be aware of what your child can handle. If you know that your child has a problem separating fantasy from reality, then running out and buying them Syphon Filter and other sniping games might not be such a good idea. I've seen 9 - 11 year olds boasting of playing GTA...copies of which their parents have bought them. Obviously, that's not something you want your young child to play, but parents do it all the time. mostly becuase tey don't bother to find out about a game in the first place. As an avid videogamer myself, there's not a lot that my son can slide past me, but I can't speak for other parents.

[MarcKal]

People, it's not the games, it's the kid/person/moron! See, like Kaonashi said, the media likes to blame games all the time. See, I've been video gaming ever since I was 4 (I was even playing really violent games by then) and look at me, I never murdered/stole from/harmed/ate anyone!

[Dollmage]

I cannot begin to blame video games entirely for the violence we see in the world. Sure there are a few cases where someone obsessed with a game ends up doing something violent but that person had a problem before they played the video game. Not every person who picks up a controller goes violent. My brother has grown up playing video games all of his life, I swear. Our great grandma would sit with him when he was 2 or 3 years old and they would play Atari and from then on he has been adicted to video games. He sometimes picks a fight, yeah, but so do a bunch of other guys but he has never once taken a weapon to go and attack someone. But when I was younger, one of our nieghbors got mad and me and a couple of my friends and threw a butcher knife at us. Her violence didn't come from video games, it had its sources other places. Violence is an everyday part of our lives now, sadly. People who look at video games and tv violence as real or something have a different problem.

[DragonBlk17]

I don't think that video games are causing the violence that happens today. People blame their actions on video games, songs or movies. They do it because they're either depressed or crazy. I really don't think that people will create more games so that more people can kill each other everyday.

[Tane]

I don't think that video games are causing the violence that happens today. People blame their actions on video games, songs or movies. They do it because they're either depressed or crazy. I really don't think that people will create more games so that more people can kill each other everyday.If most murders where depressed or crazy they would be sent to a psychiatric secure unit and would not have a trial as it would be deemed that the person in question is not mentally fit enough to defend themselves. Most murders are tried and convicted then place in a normal jail, it’s very stereotyping to say that depressed people are the only ones that kill, and sane people do too.

I also think that parents should foot some of the blame if they allow a 15 year old to play video games rated for only 18 year olds. The rating is there to give some idea on violence content, any shop keeper selling a video game to an underage user can be prosecuted so in a way I think parents should be if they buy the game for there children to play if they are underage.

[MarcKal]

Yo, I get mature videogames all the itme and I'm only 11. Stop blaming SMART kids....like me!

[Tane]

Yo, I get mature videogames all the itme and I'm only 11. Stop blaming SMART kids....like me!No one is blaming you but the person who sells those games to you can be prosecuted for that in the UK, I know this because of where I work.

[HollywoodBob]

Well in the US the ratings system on video games has a "voluntary enforcement" policy. So if the store doesn't want to sell "M" rated games to kids they can choose not to, but when it comes to any penalties if they do sell it, there really aren't any.

But I don't think it should be up to the media dispenser to try and play parent in these situations. Movies, music, games, it doesn't matter, if you feel your kid is too young to be exposed to the mature content of it, don't buy it for them, and don't let them buy it themselves. Make an effort to get involved with the kids life and see what it is they're doing. No one would leave their kids with a babysitter who showed the the kids horror movies, so why leave the same kids to play these games that are interactive horror movies.

That's not to say that I think that any kind of media has any effect on a person's willingness to commit a violent crime, quite the contrary, I know many people for whom violent games are a way to release the tension of restraining their emotions in situations that are unpleasant. I myself used to get home from school every day, after spending 8 hours wanting to beat, pummel and rend the lot of jerks, creeps, and <enter pluralized expletive noun here> that teased me all day long, only to play Doom for a few hours and have all the accumulated anger of the day would fall away with every little sprite that got his innards handed to him. :D

I firmly believe that in situations like this where a person commits a horrible crime, then doesn't want to take the responsibility for their heinous actions, they look for anything to pass the blame to, and at the present it's games.

-HollywoodBob

[red_fairy]

I firmly believe that in situations like this where a person commits a horrible crime, then doesn't want to take the responsibility for their heinous actions, they look for anything to pass the blame to, and at the present it's games.

-HollywoodBob

I agree with you whole heartedly on that. After Columbine, I was so frustrated because everyone was checking on violence in the entertainment media when I thought that it was the kids responsibility to know right and wrong. I've played those types of games, watched violent movies, listened and owned music with parental advisory warnings, and I'm fine.

And your right about there being no penalties to selling the games. A CD store did give my cousin a full refund when my Aunt saw the Kid Rock cd and made him take it back (This was way back when he first came out). She said that there was a warning and demanded a refund and they gave it to them

I also had a friend who wanted a CD with a parental advisory tag on it and asked the cashier if she was allowed to get it. The cashier said something along the lines of, "Only if you promise not to do drugs, have sex, or kill somebody because you listened to it."

[FirefightingMuggle]

I do think that in some people violent games can lead to violent behavior, but I also think that the people who see it in a game, where it is fantasy and made up, and then try it in real life have a serious problem distingushing fact from fiction.
Most people, kids and adults, know when something is made up. I played Mario Brothers for years growing up, and while it is not a violent game, I never once thought that any of it was real, and I never tried to do any of the things that Mario could do, like fly with a racoon tail, or jump on a turtle's head to see if I could score points. I always knew that it was made up. If you don't realize that the things in games like Grand Theft Auto or any other game is not real, the you probably aren't mature enough to be playing the games in the first place.
Not to make light of this topic, but I would have to wonder if people who do these things take their Monopoly money to the bank and try to deposit it. It's the same thing.
When you take a game out of the context of the game and try to put it in real life, there is something messed up upstairs. People need to be smart enough not to try to drive on the sidewalks in their home towns, not to shoot people because they might be "zombies", not to drive at excessive or unsafe speeds, just because they saw it on a game. Those little people on those games will come back every single time you turn the game on. People in real life don't do that. If you lack the common sense to realize this, then you should not be playing the game in the first place. It's a shame that there isn't some way to test video game consumers for common sense.
But, in most people, I don't think that games lead to violent behavior, because I think that most of the general population can distinguish between reality and fantasy, and I think that most people know that doing what you see video game characters doing is not always a smart thing.

[HollywoodBob]

I agree with you whole heartedly on that. After Columbine, I was so frustrated because everyone was checking on violence in the entertainment media when I thought that it was the kids responsibility to know right and wrong. I've played those types of games, watched violent movies, listened and owned music with parental advisory warnings, and I'm fine. I think the most frustrating part was that Eric and Dylan, knew exactly what they were doing, and were not doing it because of the videogames or music they were exposed to. They are two prime examples of how the predatorial nature of school society can destroy those that don't "fit in". It's really rather sad. :(

-HollywoodBob

[red_fairy]

I think the most frustrating part was that Eric and Dylan, knew exactly what they were doing, and were not doing it because of the videogames or music they were exposed to. They are two prime examples of how the predatorial nature of school society can destroy those that don't "fit in". It's really rather sad. :(

-HollywoodBob

Yeah, I can say that High School kids can be pretty brutal. I can't beleive I had not thought about that when I was posting previously.

Was anyone else bothered about how they were focusing all this attention on the media, when they could have looked at the reason why the kids felt that way? That it could have been a result of the school society. I knew the kids did it willingly and as a choice, and obviously had problems that may have been able to be worked out if they were caught earlier. Or maybe not. I can say firsthand that high school is pretty brutal and a thing I would never repeat. I'm sure few people would want to repeat it. Or maybe I'm just not making sense.

[HollywoodBob]

It's much easier to say "it's Doom", or "it's Marilyn Manson", or "it's the latest action movie", then to say "Hey maybe these were just a couple of kids that were fed up with being treated miserably by all their butthead classmates." Plus you can pull games/music/movies off of store shelves, you can't tell kids to be nice to each other and expect them to do it.

-HollywoodBob

[Kaonashi]

Amen to that. It couldn't possibly been because there was a huge problem with bullying that the school dodn't look into, so those two teens decided to take matters into their own hands with horrible results. It had to be because of the music they listened to and the games they played!

On the other hand, you have people like that 11 year old in Japan who apparently watched and read "Battle Royale" one time too many and decided to slit her classmate's throat with a razor for kicks. Completely missed the whole message of the movie, which is pretty anti-violence, if you ask me, but this was an 11 year old reading and watching material IMO she was too young to understand in the first place. So who do you blame? The film company, her parents who apparently allowed to to watch such material, or the girl herself for being immature?

[MarcKal]

I blame the girl. It was her fault. She should know the difference between fiction and reality.

Oh yeah, I'm 11 and I understand a lot of things perfectly well! Just because someone is young doesn't mean they can't understand something!

[Kaonashi]

That's true too, but at the same time you can't assume that they understand everything either. There are ratings for a reason, and just because you can handle that sort of material doesn't mean that other 11 year olds can.

[MarcKal]

Yeah, you're right.....

[mirandam]

I have to say in any case that it is not the fault of the video game, movie, music, book etc. There is a problem with any person that can commit a violent act upon another person. Unless you are defending your life. Yes, some may get the idea from what they have seen, but seeing it did not cause the problem, it was already there festering. My son is only 8, and he understands the difference between fantasy and reality, and he understood it some time ago. This is something that I talked to him about. Maybe some parents need to be more aware of what their children are doing and try some communication with them. It wouldn't hurt that is for sure.

[Tane]

I have to say in any case that it is not the fault of the video game, movie, music, book etc. There is a problem with any person that can commit a violent act upon another person. Unless you are defending your life. Yes, some may get the idea from what they have seen, but seeing it did not cause the problem, it was already there festering. My son is only 8, and he understands the difference between fantasy and reality, and he understood it some time ago. This is something that I talked to him about. Maybe some parents need to be more aware of what their children are doing and try some communication with them. It wouldn't hurt that is for sure.I don't like games that show violence towards other humans, it is unnecessary and I don't see where the fun is in seeing someone get blown up in a game and I sure would not allow an child to see such a thing. It is not the understanding the difference of reality and fiction but more the fact that ideas that can be done in reality might be implanted in children’s minds. It is also the desensitization towards violence that these games promote that concerns me. Why are children becoming more violent in schools, using knifes and guns for example?

[Kaonashi]

Lots of kids are coming from more violent home situations, period. If you live in a house where Dad secretly beats Mommy, or in a neighborhood where drivebys happen often and you actually see dead bodies shot up in the streets, it's really not going to matter WHAT games you play because of the environment you are in.

[red_fairy]

Lots of kids are coming from more violent home situations, period. If you live in a house where Dad secretly beats Mommy, or in a neighborhood where drivebys happen often and you actually see dead bodies shot up in the streets, it's really not going to matter WHAT games you play because of the environment you are in.

I completely agree. Very Well said. And even the kids who come from the wealthier homes still have problems, whether family or the school society. I don't think the answer lies in the game in many of the cases. In many of the cases, it is just an excuse. In many cases, it is the world surrounding the kid. I guess it is easy to point to lethal weapon or man hunt or grand theft auto. Easier to sleep at night cause the videogames, music, and movies kids listen to/play/watch is something that you can control more than trying to control the outside environment.

[mirandam]

I agree with both of you there, and I also believe that another factor in children being more violent is that the parents are not there as much either. Most families have both parents working and the time is not there for their children. I see it happen right here in my neighborhood. Parents are not there to control what the child is doing. A lot of times when a child gets in trouble in school, the school is threatened with a law suit, and parents that do discipline many times have the child services called on them by their children. Here, it is considered child abuse to stand a child in the corner, you have to give them a chair to sit in. Then there are many parents who just don't care.
I don't get into violent games either, and my son does not play them, but just look at the violence in cartoons-then is when I started to teach him you can't jump off a cliff and just get back up like they do in the cartoons. There has been violence in all forms long before any video games ever existed. I believe they may give a child a way of doing things, but I don't believe that they are the cause of the problem to begin with.

[peddlerofdeath]

It's obsurd to blame video games for violence. The media is just looking for a scapegoat on which they could place the blame for violent children. It's geting riduculus, recently I heard that in California they're trying to ban arcade games that use light-gun controllers because they make kids better marksmen. I myself am a good marksmen because I fire real guns, under close adult supervision where I was taught how to safely handle firearms, and I can tell you there is a huge difference between shooting in a video-game and shooting an actual gun. Real guns require a lot more skill to hit your target whereas video games are just point and shoot. Most of the video game guns dont even shoot straight ahead.

Anyway, blaming video games for children who commit violent crimes is completely preposturous. If someone kills another human-bieng it's not because they saw it in a video game it's because they are messed up. There is no other way to put it. If you comit a violent crime it's because other aspects of your life are messed up it has nothing to do with the game you played or that movie you saw last week. People need to stop blaming entertainment industries for societies problems and start blaming the real problem... orther problems in society.

[Locdog]

I actually posted a long rant about video game violence and the effects it has in the movie thread before I saw this one. Anyway, a shortened version. I believe video games causing violence is one of the myriad of things people try to use to blame violent behavior. My friends and I have played the grand theft auto games, but there has never been violent behavior among us. To quote chris rock: ( :wow: ) "Whatever happened to crazy?" And I think he is right. Kids who are violent are what they are not because of video games, but because they are, for lack of a better word, crazy.

[Firebolt_2007]

Once again people are blaming videogames for bad parenting. Give me a break!

[DougJohnston]

It's obsurd to blame video games for violence. The media is just looking for a scapegoat on which they could place the blame for violent children. It's geting riduculus, recently I heard that in California they're trying to ban arcade games that use light-gun controllers because they make kids better marksmen. I myself am a good marksmen because I fire real guns, under close adult supervision where I was taught how to safely handle firearms, and I can tell you there is a huge difference between shooting in a video-game and shooting an actual gun. Real guns require a lot more skill to hit your target whereas video games are just point and shoot. Most of the video game guns dont even shoot straight ahead.

Anyway, blaming video games for children who commit violent crimes is completely preposturous. If someone kills another human-bieng it's not because they saw it in a video game it's because they are messed up. There is no other way to put it. If you comit a violent crime it's because other aspects of your life are messed up it has nothing to do with the game you played or that movie you saw last week. People need to stop blaming entertainment industries for societies problems and start blaming the real problem... orther problems in society.

Well said peddlerofdeath.
I myself also fire guns, have a family which is involved with the military and police force, I love the GTA series, I watch violent movies, I watch war movies, I play violent games BUT I am NOT a violent person. I know right from wrong and imagination from reality. If a person is unstable enough that they dont know that killing/hurting a person is wrong, then they shouldnt be allowed to play video games like GTA or whatever. I do believe that video games could be a cause for some and it is something that should be taken into consideration, but does that mean we are going to stop making violent movies, songs, and tv shows? The world needs to grow up and stop acting so immature. Its fun to play games like Vice City because you can break the rules, you can do whatever you want, but plain and simple, leave that on the PS2 or whatever. I think that parents should monitor their child's behavoir closely for signs of anger or hate...Its their job to raise their children into something proper and well behaved.
:wow:

[Adalbert Waffling]

I hate how misinformed some people are about game violence. After the Columbine shootings(which pretty much kicked off the 'violent videogames make violent kids' thing), I was observed to be a "not-very-popular person." So I was called into the guidance counselors office, and asked if I played Doom. I, of course, said yes, and do you know what happened? THERAPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Because I played violent video-games, I was labeled a "potential killer." I am a very nonviolent person. I've never even been in a fight. I play GTA games, I watch violent movies, I play games where bullets are more common than blades of grass, and guess what? I can distinguish between right and wrong! But of course that's impossible, because I play violent videogames, and am an honor roll student.
And By the way, the reason kids are more violent is because it is no longer ok to spank your children, or even stand them in a corner without a chair. Lets see, older generations that were raised properly behaved properly. Today, a parent cant even discipline their kid. It's crzy. And yes, Chris Rock does have political genius. He says it like it is.

[LuvHP_001]

I'd like to just throw in my opinion. I think that it defintely is inflicted upon kids since they spend so much time playing it anyway and most of them aren't old enough to understand that it's wrong and it's just a game. I just think that it's so unneccesary to have videogames with violence where the whole purpose is just to kill something and it's stupid that there is 100's of these kind of games.

Now don't get me wrong; I love videogames! I'm a nintento 64 and Game Boy Advance SP freak but I play games such as SuperMario,not violent games.

What bothers me the most is when they take the graphics to a level when it's just plain gore and explict. I don't like the Grand Auto Theft is just a unnecessary game altogether.

[~oSiRiS~]

The friends and I used play all kinds of violent video games. We played paintball. Most of us were gun collectors and frequented the shooting range. We had this type of secret handshake thing that we kinda, well, shot at each other when we seen them in the hall ways.
No one ever said a thing to us about it. But they were pulling kids into the councelors office doing to the same as Adalbert said. Not one of the kids they questioned would of hurt a fly. But the kids that all they did was talk about how many people they shot in counter-strike the night before and the guns they own did not get questioned once.
Kinda funny if you ask me.

[Azimuth]

I'd like to just throw in my opinion. I think that it defintely is inflicted upon kids since they spend so much time playing it anyway and most of them aren't old enough to understand that it's wrong and it's just a game. I just think that it's so unneccesary to have videogames with violence where the whole purpose is just to kill something and it's stupid that there is 100's of these kind of games.

Now don't get me wrong; I love videogames! I'm a nintento 64 and Game Boy Advance SP freak but I play games such as SuperMario,not violent games.

What bothers me the most is when they take the graphics to a level when it's just plain gore and explict. I don't like the Grand Auto Theft is just a unnecessary game altogether.
The whole point of a video game is to be fun. The reason that the GTA games are so popular is that they're fun to play. You can't blame a game, which is trying to entertain people, for violent children. And they're not just about killing. No game is just about killing.

[LuvHP_001]

The whole point of a video game is to be fun. The reason that the GTA games are so popular is that they're fun to play. You can't blame a game, which is trying to entertain people, for violent children. And they're not just about killing. No game is just about killing.

I guess so. I just don't see how people find pretending to kill to be entertaining but I guess that's just me. :sigh:

[~oSiRiS~]

I just enjoy shooting people. :lol:

There is soo much strategy involved in these shooting games. Most people do not realize that. Its like a giant chess match. Then you get games like Counter-strike that teamplay is involed. It adds a whole other dimension to the game. Thats what people are drawn to. Not just the shooting aspect. Its about out smarting your opponent.

[HollywoodBob]

The point of games like Doom and GTA is that it is a break from reality. None of us are a mob hit man or a space marine, but if we want to we can pretend to be. The reason there is violence in videogames is because there's a market for it.

Videogames don't force violence upon their players, the players force the developers to produce violent games. If we didn't want to play them they wouldn't get made.

I guess so. I just don't see how people find pretending to kill to be entertaining but I guess that's just me. :sigh:You said you play Mario, do you realize that it is no less violent than most first person shooters? All that throwing fireballs and bouncing on the heads of goombas are acts of violence. Why is something like GTA or Doom different? Because you think they're simulated reality, but they're not. In reality there are rules of behavior that are created by society, in videogames society's definitions of behavior are gone. And people who are of a sound mental state realize that.

-HollywoodBob

[LuvHP_001]

I just enjoy shooting people. :lol:

There is soo much strategy involved in these shooting games. Most people do not realize that. Its like a giant chess match. Then you get games like Counter-strike that teamplay is involed. It adds a whole other dimension to the game. Thats what people are drawn to. Not just the shooting aspect. Its about out smarting your opponent.

Oh,good point! Actually, I can see where you're coming from because I don't like many people around me (in real life) and sometimes I feel like shooting them,but those kind of games can help me get rid of the urge. :lol: Strategy? "Should I shoot in the head,chest,or maybe....the stomach?" :rotfl:

[HollywoodBob]

Oh,good point! Actually, I can see where you're coming from because I don't like many people around me (in real life) and sometimes I feel like shooting them,but those kind of games can help me get rid of the urge. :lol: Strategy? "Should I shoot in the head,chest,or maybe....the stomach?" :rotfl:When I was in highschool I was brutally teased and tormented. Had it not been for Doom and Duke Nukem 3D, it's very likely that I would have acted out upon my tormentors, but instead of taking a gun to school and killing them, I shot rockets at the sprite of my best friend and his little brother.

As for the strategy part it's more like "how can I best shoot them without giving my position away so their team mates come shoot me?"

-HollywoodBob

[~oSiRiS~]

Strategy? "Should I shoot in the head,chest,or maybe....the stomach?" :rotfl:

Its about what gun should I use in a given situation. How I should go about clearing a room with 4 guys in it.
Which entrance should I use, should I throw a flashbang.
Should I take path A instead of Path B to sneak up behind them.
Should I just run to a location, Or should I walk quietly.
Should I knife the chicken in the market as I walk by or not.

Most shooters have different objectives you have to complete. Plant/Disarm a bomb, save a hostage, Escort a VIP, protect a certain area(king of the hill).
The shooting part is just another way to say you out. Like in Dodgeball.

[LuvHP_001]

Its about what gun should I use in a given situation. How I should go about clearing a room with 4 guys in it.
Which entrance should I use, should I throw a flashbang.
Should I take path A instead of Path B to sneak up behind them.
Should I just run to a location, Or should I walk quietly.

Most shooters have different objectives you have to complete. Plant/Disarm a bomb, save a hostage, Escort a VIP, protect a certain area(king of the hill).
The shooting part is just another way to say you out. Like in Dodgeball.

Wow,you really thought that out! I can REALLY see your point.

[mina]

I may not always agree with the content in videogames nowadays (I do believe we have gone too far at times), but to blame the games for violent acts is absurd. Like so many have already said, the people who do those horrible things are already mentally unstable. If people think that this is such a problem, then why is there no non-voluntary rating system that the stores have to uphold? I will never understand why parents are usually so uptight about their children going to see an R rated film, or listening to CD’s with an explicit lyrics label, but will pay no attention to the ratings on the games their children play. After almost every school shooting we hear about how the troubled young student got their ideas from the games that they played, yet I see few actions being taken to keep these games out of the hands of minors.

Part of being sane is understanding that you can cause harm to others, and feeling remorseful when you do hurt them (physically speaking. We hurt each other mentally without regard or knowledge every day). Most people who play games can determine what is real and what is fantasy. It is those few who can’t tell the difference that are made to represent the entire game-playing community. I myself have played videogames since the age of five, and I harbor no desire to hurt anyone because of it.

On a second note...violence being used for others enjoyment is not a modern thing. The Roman Colosseum was opened in 80 AD, and was home to vicious gladiator battles and public executions, all before a crowd of thousands. Watching people brutally murder one another live was publicly accepted. I don’t know about anybody else, but I’d say video games, no matter how realistic they may be, pale in comparison to those practices. Everyone has violent tendencies. It is in our nature, though we would all like to think we are above it. I would rather see someone take their aggression out on a fictional character made of pixels and polygons rather than a living human being.

I do, however think that there is something to be said for developer responsibility. Is finding new ways to shock and horrify us really that necessary? I do hope that one day game developers will learn the value of good taste (before anyone can criticise me on this...I am NOT trying saying all developers are irresponsible in the images they show, or that we should censor games, I just ask that they think a little about the content before creating the game). Perhaps then it wouldn't be so easy to place the blame on gaming ;)

Some of this was taken from a paper I wrote on game violence for an ethics class. It seemed applicable here as well :D

[~oSiRiS~]

I do hope that one day game developers will the value of good taste (before anyone can criticise me on this...I am NOT trying saying all developers are irresponsible in the images they show, or that we should censor games, I just ask that they think a little about the content before creating the game
They do a little bit. Atleast you don't see all those porn games or dating sims like you get in Japan.

[HollywoodBob]

They do a little bit. Atleast you don't see all those porn games or dating sims like you get in Japan.That's only because sexuality is a still a taboo, while violent imagery is widely accepted.

Like any other media types, artists who make video games will continue to shock and suprise us, it's part of any expressive art form.

-HollywoodBob

[mina]

They do a little bit. Atleast you don't see all those porn games or dating sims like you get in Japan.

Not games that are all out porn, but what about Leisure Suit Larry (the uncut version of the new one features an AO, or adults only rating from ESRB) or BMX XXX? We definately are not as bad as they are about game content, but we are only getting worse.

[~oSiRiS~]

yeah thats true. I was surprised to hear at E3 they were making another Leisure Suit Larry.
I don't understand those types of games though. Like the stupidness of DoA beach vollyball. I mean cmon thats getting a little sad.

I guess we will have to change that by starting our own studio and making games of good taste.

I wish I could find it now. But sometime in the past two years there was an excellent article on the topic of game violence in Game Developer Magazine. I have to go through my many years of magazines to find it. The article brought up many good points.

ETA: I would like to add a point made by Mina and how Parents do not pay attention to the rating system.
My Aunt and Uncle baby my cousin very badly. They won't let him watch certain movies, tv shows, ect. But they go out and buy him GTA. Then they hear something about it on the news and come to me asking me about the game.(I am only one in the family that knows about video games)
They were shocked to hear about the violence, Hookers, and the general content of the games.
So I told them about the rating system and they said they did not know there was one.
I think the problem is with CDs and movies parents know R is bad and if there is a Lable on CD's its bad. For the games they have no clue that the rating system means. I don't know what all the ratings there are and what they mean for video games.
I did see a commercial not to long ago that had a sports star explaining the rating system for parents. I think they need more of these to help the parents learn what the rating system is.

[Adalbert Waffling]

*Nods* I think that the rating system isn't very widely known outside of people who play video games. I do think that they should make different ratings for different mature content. My parents won't usually get games unless I make them go into Gamespot and ask the employee what type of content is in the game. For example, she see's the M rating, and immediately thinks, "woah, strong sexual content." Outside of GTA, I really don't buy games with much sexual content. If I buy an M game, it's pretty much rated that way because of violence. My parents don't really mind that. What I would like to see is subdivisions, like for violent games: M:V. For sexual content: M:SC. That would make things much easier for me.

[~oSiRiS~]

I am not sure, its been a while since I looked at the rating system. But doesn't its say M- Mature then in the box say Stong Violence, Blood. Or give a slight discription of the game content?.

I can't say I actually payed attention to the video game rating system.
I always knew what the game was before I bought it and knew if it was going to be violent/bloody, ect.
The rating system would seem pretty difficult to place games. Because 65%+ of the games would fall under the mature rating.

[mina]

I think the problem is more because parents/guardians don't actually look at the games their children buy (or they buy for them). The rating is on the front of the box, and on the back it has what ESRB referrs to as "content descriptors" that (I am quoting ESRB's website (http://www.esrb.com/esrbratings.asp)) "indicate elements in a game that may have triggered a particular rating and/or may be of interest or concern." My parents have no idea about the rating system either, but they do have the sense to come to me and ask about the content of a game before they purchase it for my little sister (much like ~oSiRiS~ I am also the only one in my family that knows anything about video games). I do agree having more commercials and the like that will teach about the rating system is a good idea, but I just do not understand why parents don't actually look at the game box before buying the game for a child.

In case anyone wants to see them, here (http://www.esrb.com/esrbratings_guide.asp#symbols) are ESRB's Game Ratings and Content Descriptors.

Like the stupidness of DoA beach vollyball. I mean cmon thats getting a little sad.

Yeah, actually I am surprised that the portrayal of women in video games hasn't come up much (or that it doesn't have it's own thread).

I guess we will have to change that by starting our own studio and making games of good taste.

Sounds like a good idea to me :D

[~oSiRiS~]

but I just do not understand why parents don't actually look at the game box before buying the game for a child.
I know, one would think after all the GTA3 controversy, or even Doom and Mortal Kombat from way back when, that parents would start to pay attention. Its just funny how anal parents can be with movies and music but not with games.
My parents were the same way though. Not once did they question any games they purchased me. Though back then it was the age of the 2d side scroller. Lots of Mario, Mega Man, and Zelda. Not really that violent of games.

Yeah, actually I am surprised that the portrayal of women in video games hasn't come up much (or that it doesn't have it's own thread).
Same here. I mean its getting pretty bad. I don't care if there is sexuality in games, as long as its in good taste. None I have yet to see have been in good taste though. I think it will start to get better. More and more females are starting to play video games. Its just not the horny teenage boys anymore. :p



Sounds like a good idea to me :D
I am working at getting the funding to start one. If everything goes well, then you never know :evil:

[HollywoodBob]

Well it seems that lawmakers in Washington have lost their minds.

Bill Holds Game Makers Liable for Violence
Washington state considers dramatic legislation.
by David Adams
March 2, 2005 - A bill under consideration in Washington state would hold videogame developers accountable for violent acts ostensibly inspired by a particular game.

Currently under review by the state legislature, House Bill 2178 would hold game retailers and manufacturers accountable for "injury or wrongful death" committed by a person under age 17, if the game "was a factor in creating conditions that assisted or encouraged" the perpetrator.

While the bill is still in committee stage and far from becoming law, its dramatic interpretation of criminal responsibility reflects growing concern and controversy about the effects of violent video games.

Seattle ABC affiliate KOMO quotes bill supporter Bill Hanson of the Washington Police and Sheriff's Association: "If you sit up and watch this and play these games over and over again... it seems that this is alright to walk up and hit a police officer over the head with a bat."

Needless to say, opponents of the bill point out that it simply shifts blame away from the person who actually commits a crime. Further, the connection between violent videogames and actual violence -- the controversy parallels a similar furor over violent films and television -- remains tentative at best.

Games sold in the United States carry ESRB rating codes warning parents of potentially objectionable material. Especially violent games are rated "M" for Mature, and are not intended for minors.

Legislation like this is such a mistake I don't know where to start. If laws like this pass, it will give everyone wanting to commit a crime a way to escape the blame for their actions. People will exploit these laws and claim "I wouldn't have done it if it weren't for the game." Then the game companies will be punished for the actions of criminal whackjobs. It's not the game companies' faults that there are people who are mentally deficient and can't determine the difference between their poorly rendered fantasy world and the real world.

-HollywoodBob

[mina]

Not that they don't already use the violent videogame excuse frequently already, however that just makes it easier for them to get away with it.

Here is an interesting story...
GTA and "Snowball rage" (http://wcco.com/localnews/local_story_033094730.html)

[Adalbert Waffling]

My parents were the same way though. Not once did they question any games they purchased me. Though back then it was the age of the 2d side scroller. Lots of Mario, Mega Man, and Zelda. Not really that violent of games.

I don't know about that. Take zelda. Running around killing things with swods, and destroying other people's property, like their pottery? Sounds pretty dangerous to me. :p


As I have stated before, I believe that the controversy about violent games making violent people all started directly following columbine. Instead of blaming the people who brutally teased and degraded the killers, the authorities pinned all of the blame on games such as "Doom" and "Dungeons and Dragons."
First person shooters do not make me want to run out and kill anybody, and neither does a game like GTA. If anything, they increase reflexes. I have excellent reflexes because of video games, and all that time spent searching through the scope for faint outlines in battlefield 1942 has had an excellent effect on my observation skills. I see little things much quicker than other people do.

There are some messed up people in the world, and toning down video-game violence isn't going to make them any less screwed up than they already are

[Kaonashi]

I'm a gamer myself, so I KNOW what the games are rated and why, so not much can slip past me!

But for parents who aren't gamers, a little research goes a long way, as well as common sense. With a game named "Grand Theft Auto" one can usually deduce from the title name that it's nothing nice, so why not go online and see screenshots, reviews, etc and make a decision based on that? It's becuase some parents don't want to be bothered to do that, but want to scream and yell when a game that they bough their children is inappropriate for them. THe ratings are there, but it doesn't do a bit of good if parents don't pay attention to them. It's like movie ratings...you know what the R is for if you live in the US, but I still see parents dragging toddlers and young children to these types of movies and being horrified at the violence, or the sex....it's like HELLO, what did you expect?

[Mundungus Fletc]

An Australian researcher has established that young burns patients can experience significant pain relief if they play 'monster shooting games The link is here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1430194,00.html)

[~oSiRiS~]

I don't know about that. Take zelda. Running around killing things with swods, and destroying other people's property, like their pottery? Sounds pretty dangerous to me. :p


Thats true... :p
Or having mario eating all those flowers and mushrooms... its drug abuse I tell ya!!!

First person shooters do not make me want to run out and kill anybody, and neither does a game like GTA. If anything, they increase reflexes. I have excellent reflexes because of video games, and all that time spent searching through the scope for faint outlines in battlefield 1942 has had an excellent effect on my observation skills. I see little things much quicker than other people do.
I totally agree with that. My reflexes and observation skills are alot better than most. Not to mention my listening skills(the footsteps or gunfire in counterstrike). I would say this is due to my years of video game playing.

[Pilum]

Don't know about where you are kaonashi, but in the UK GTA has always had a big, fat, movie-style "18" certificate symbol (I think that's equivalent to the US 'R') displayed prominently on the covers, so there's even less of an excuse in this neck of the woods.