I'm sick of the games cause violence debate.
Check it out here:
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/456/456086p1.html?fromint=1
While I agree that games are not to blame for violent behaviour but I wonder how much subconscious influence occurs when we watch violent movies or play violent games? Obviously not enough to want to blow people away - but could a diet of violent games be enough to put 'unbalanced' individuals over the edge? People who have mental issues and draw influence from their favourite violent activity. Any psychos out there want to comment on this?
I want to draw something to people's attention: Tonight we (workmates) were watching Reloaded fight scenes on our break and when we finished to go downstairs, about 4 of the 7 people who watched it threw a 'mock' punch of light kick to someone else. Just as a joke, of course -- we're all well-balanced folk. But I do note the amount of playfighting that goes on after violent content is viewed (we all imitated wrestling as kids, right?). It's all in good fun, but it's something that makes me think.
But I dont think it's fair to blame games, movies OR PARENTS. Hands up if you think your parents were really capable of controlling you. Once you start getting a bit of independence around the age of 14/15 or so, it gets harder for them to make you do what they want. So how can they possibly parent us? So much goes on out of the house when we are with our friends or social peers - parents can't do shit. And of course, with teens being the moody pricks they are (I know I was), parents do have cause to be worried or suspect that kids are up to no good. Did anyone here accept their parents offer to 'talk about anything'?
Just some defence for the parents out there.
i've been playing Halo PC this week, and i have an urge to travel a few hundred years into the future and start killing creatures that don't exict with weapons that dont exist.
as for everquest. phht the people who play that dont even see sunlight, let alone other people.
dick heads. they've been trying this hit since doom 2, and they haven't gotten anywhere really fast. take that as a hint.
people are capable of killing without having to play games, watch movies or listen to music.
just read your post Mr Kerr (i was replyied and then refreshed). i work in a supermarket, and kids may actually listen to their olds, if they started parenting them at a young enough age. parents now, just dont give a shit about their kids. they have sex (w/o protection) and then have some little screaming shit pop out 9 months later. they dont want them and they dont know how to deal with them. im sorry, but i am really passionate about this whole 'parenting' crap that doesn't go on. if parents would look after their kids and teach them when they are young enough, i wouldn't have to spend half my day cleaning up after the little prick... er.. darlings. maybe schools should be sued for not showing kids how to preform good oral sex in sex ed classes?
i do agree that when they reach 14 or so they do stop listening to their parents and start listening to their friends more. so who do these people sue? the entire human race for talking to each other?
as for more violent behavour after watching a movie? not me personally. sure i may want to become some arse kicking white guy carrying a Katana after watching Kill Bill, but i have wanted to do that since i first saw Japanese history in primary school. and that was WAY before i started watching movies (i got started really late on those).
i do agree that playing a violent game may induce more violent behaviour in a mentally unstable person, but so could walking into McDonalds and not recieving enough sauce on their burger.
this is one of the greyist areas of computer gaming. i hate it even more than MP3 debates.
Exactly - it's like you said -- it could even be down to not enough sauce on your burger (best argument ever!). I mean, if you lost your job, got dumped, found out it was with your best mate your (now) ex was cheating with, little shit like not enough sauce or slow service is usually the shit that pushes people over the edge. The straw that broke the camels back, so to speak. Those who are unable to think for themselves or have real trouble rationalising the consequences of their actions are hardly likely to think of coming up with their own ways to kill people if they end up flipping out. I imagine that they'd just draw inspiration from whatever their favourite 'thing' is.
quote:after watching Kill Bill, but i have wanted to do that since i first saw Japanese history in primary school. and that was WAY before i started watching movies (i got started really late on those).
Regardless, seeing something that intrigued you brought out these emotions. These things are cyclical - in my parents days, it was Rock 'n' Roll music is the devil, then it was comic books, then it was hippy music/weed/whatever, then it was violent movies and WWF wrestling or Garbage Gang collector cards. Now it's videogames. People will always point the finger at something.
When I was referring to kids, I wasnt referring to youngsters, they dont really seem to be the ones that get drawn into these game 'shock horror' stories (although I do remember an Arab kid who thought he could fly or something a year ago). I do agree that parents are to guide young kids at a young age and teach them things that will eventually enable those kids to grow into good adults.
Personally, I believe in educating kids (it's happening now, teachers are expected to call a penis a penis, not a 'wee wee' or 'pee pee') so that they can make decisions for themselves. Educate them about sex or drugs or whatever, because the bottom line is (are you listening America?) that banning something is not going to stop people from trying it.
But in saying that, educating someone doesn't mean that they'll always choose the right course of action.
I realise I've been taking both sides of the argument. For one, I dont believe games/media/whatever cause people to kill others, but I do think that there may be some influence drawn from these things if individuals do decide to cause havoc.
In the end, it's always down to the individual and many factors, NEVER just one.
This kind of debate has raged for centuries. I think we should just wake up and realise the violent nature of the human condition and get on with our lives (unless of course, you have been shot dead by some deranged kid with access to the power to kill with impunity, in which case you don't have any life to get on with).
It's not about the games, comics, rock'n'roll or drugs. It's always been about our lack of control over power that we give ourselves. This reflects both on our lack of control in regards to the power to give life (parenting), and our lack of control over the power to take life (killing).
I've probably already said this a million times before though.
However, on the topic of kids being effed up...I remember a time when kids were allowed time to be innocent, to enjoy what life is without the responsibility of telling a priest to go get laid by a prostitute or that a boy should keep his dick in his pants until he can grow hair on his balls.
Sex and violence is ***everywhere*** nowadays - I'm not personally offended by it...but it does irritate me that we force such realities onto kids at such a young age.
As far as games are concerned - I've said this before - but I find it slightly concerning that a very large portion of video games reward violent acts and display little sophistication in regards to problem solving. I think games need to grow in this regard - and I'm sure they will over time. Especially if we start getting forced to put effort into violent content reduction (and don't pretend it can't happen)
What really shits me, is how $246 million dollars is being claimed? Whoever is sueing those companies is clearly a total tosser. There is NO PRICE on a human life - getting money for nothing is the biggest load of bullshit.
Don't get me wrong, I feel for the victims, perhaps they should get free grief counselling and *some* monetary aid if they can't make it on their own for a while or if they are struggling etc.
But to simply greedily demand money to replace the life of another is such effing crap - it's this kind of capitalistic crap that is the cotton from which our society's fabric is woven, and quite frankly it sickens me.
quote:
But to simply greedily demand money to replace the life of another is such effing crap - it's this kind of capitalistic crap that is the cotton from which our society's fabric is woven, and quite frankly it sickens me.
"They talk about how many Communism killed and they talk about how many Fascism killed but they'll never tell you how many Capitalism killed because: a) They wouldn't know where to start and b.) it would never end." -- Julie Burchill.
My new favourite quote of the moment.
quote:Originally posted by Maitrek
As far as games are concerned - I've said this before - but I find it slightly concerning that a very large portion of video games reward violent acts and display little sophistication in regards to problem solving. I think games need to grow in this regard - and I'm sure they will over time. Especially if we start getting forced to put effort into violent content reduction (and don't pretend it can't happen)
that is very true. i have to admit that a lot of my favourite games of all time have had little or no actual violence. Myst, Sim City, Theme Park. and although i do like violence in games, so do take it WAY too far. Solder Of Fortune 2 is a prime example. do we really need to see people with half their head blown across the room and fragments of their brain sliding down the wall? i wouldn't mind if that wasn't there, in fact i would probably enjoy it more.
ther was in interesting article earlier this year in EDGE about gaming and violence. the writer came up with an angle that i found interesting. games have become a lot more violent, but in a different way. if you pile enough blood in there, to me, it loses a lot of believability and just becomes cartoony. ther is another way to look at the level of violence though, how it is done. in the past, games were generally left alone as they were games like Doom, Quake, and so forth, where you ran around and killed bizarre creatures with weapons that dont exist. sure people tried to say this caused violence and high school shootings, most people just ignored them as there really isn't THAT direct a connection. when games apeared where an actual person was harmed though, shit hit the fans. i remember that as soon as Lethal Enfocers on the arcades came out, people really got up about that as you shot reall photos of people. it didn't matter if they were terrorists or not. violence against another human being is still a lot worse than an alien. now we have gone from just wasting several hundred enimies in one go to having a more personal angle to the violence. games like MGS, where you are meant to stalk your enemies and then shoot them in the back of the head, have raised the violence level again. even if you take out all the blood, the act is still there. you dont just walk up and take out five guys in cold blood with an automatic rifle, you now learn to watch someone. see how they move, and then, when the perfect opotunity arises, jump down behind hem and stab them in the back of the neck. violence has become more believable, not more violent. GTA and State of Emergency shows this as well. we can laugh and say that we may never do the acts that are seen in those games, but a lot of americans have that ability right in front of them. they have large domesticated cities and high power weapons available. what is really stopping them from getting a weapon and walking into a shopping centre and killing two dozen people in cold blood? nothing really. as i have said, ANYTHING could bring them to do this, but the game does help to implant the ideas.
and i agree whole heartedly with the money crap. i think that is what works me up so much with this. so many people in life are driven so much by money that they believe that it can make them happy. even when a loved one dies. they need to learn that throwing enough money at something will not make it go away.
also, one last note. i work with a guy that is nuts about guns. has been for most of his life. goes out shooting, and not just a target. he shoots small animals on friends property and even watermellons. the thing is, he loved guns and violence before he liked games. he actually started to like games as he could carry out the killing of people in one form. he does play GTA:VC a lot, but does this mean that he will be more likely to go on a murderous rampage? quite francly, im not too sure. just though about him last night and thought that i would mention him.
a grey area indeed.
quote:Originally posted by JonathanKerr
But I dont think it's fair to blame games, movies OR PARENTS. Hands up if you think your parents were really capable of controlling you. Once you start getting a bit of independence around the age of 14/15 or so, it gets harder for them to make you do what they want.
Sorry but parents are easy to blame here. Who should have been teaching those kids common sense! Shooting people like they saw in a video game proves they had no common sense.
Common sense is something you should be learning from a -very- young age. This has nothing to don with being able to control the kids.
I also blame parents for not taking an active role in their kids lives. They see pc's as the ultimate babysitter so they let their kids use the pc's for what ever - but the parents know little about the computers themselves.
I play Vice City and it does not make me want to shoot people or beat up hookers in real life. And that is because I learned common sense. I was taught to understand what reality is. I was taugh common sense.
99.9% of people are reasonable enough to distinguish games from reality and not start doing bad things. If you are already a bit loopy then a game might trigger something in your mind, however like Aven was saying, not enough sauce on your burger could have a similar effect on someone (crazy) and set them off in some way. "Crazy" people are affected by many influences in their lifes everyday, some of which never play games. Games are just something easy to blame the problem on.
"I see you just killed 20 people, do you play violent videogames by any chance?"
From a personal perspective, I would say that violent video games are - if nothing else - one of possibly many contributing factors in some cases of extreme violence. Not that it is the only one, but it certainly can be a factor.
Computer games will *not* on their own, drive people to violence. People get driven to violence by frustration, anger, envy, fear, hatred.
Computer games contribute to the possibility of actual violence in many different ways, each unique to the individual. There's the possiblity of developing the realisation/actualisation process in the mind, turning the mind's thoughts into a semi-real situation. Then there's the desensitisation towards violence, there's also the ability for the consequences of violence to seemingly be forgotten and dismissed. Then there's the idea that generally speaking violence doesn't get solved by more violent acts, it's fuelled by it's own byproducts - playing computer games could easily drive an unreasonable individual into a more mad and enraged (possibly) psychotic.
All of these things won't do anything to someone who can tell what is real and what isn't - but fear, hatred and emotions in general have great power in their ability to confuse the mind (anyone ever been in love, depending on the relationship, it can get very confusing!).
My biggest problem, is I've never played a game where violence has had any *actual* consequences. People never see the horror that is murder (even in a good vs. evil situation). In some ways, I'm glad that fatally wounded soldiers don't beg and plead for their life, or say a final prayer or wish for their loved ones. Computer games tend to avoid the whole gravity of the concept of death.
In other ways, I wish someone would make a game like that as a wake up call to other developers to make them realise *exactly* what it is they are doing by simply solving every problem in a game with some clever way of murdering a portayal of a human being, or a living being in general.
p.s. I don't really mind violence in computer games, I guess I'm just bored/sick of it! What we really need to do is develop a better society so people don't feel such angst towards others.
p.p.s Nice quote JonathanKerr :)
quote:
Sorry but parents are easy to blame here. Who should have been teaching those kids common sense!Common sense is something you should be learning from a -very- young age. This has nothing to don with being able to control the kids.
The only problem is that common sense is not very commmon.
I think you may have misconstrued my meaning though. This debate usually is represented by two sides: 1) - the Moral Minority who say 'Games are doing this to our kids!' and 2) Gamers who say 'Bullshit. It's the damn gun laws and bad parenting'. I don't really know if anyone gives a shit about these articles except gamers and parents/moral activists. Just as the moral activists point the finger at games, gamers easily point the finger back at parents -- it's a kneejerk reaction.
I probably didn't word it properly -- but you can only only teach someone common sense. I've found a lot of common sense comes from experience. Just because someones told you 'not to go and sleep with girls' (or drink too much or whatever) it doesn't mean that it won't happen. As kids, how many of us stopped what we weren't supposed to be doing when our parents walked in the room? Even though I dont have any kids yet, I can imagine parenting getting pretty tough when children hit their teens.
Most people have some degree of common sense (sometimes ;) ) but it's impossible to exercise it all the time. That's why mistakes happen. We'd be perfect otherwise. Of course, we're talking about shooting people here, so I suppose that my point doesn't count as much.
We'd have to look at what causes people to become unstable -- the Columbine killers were harrassed like nothing else, that's always gonna put your back up.' Then, they got served alcohol at 16yrs of age and the looseness of the US's gun laws made things all fall into place.
To Maitrek: As for game developer attitudinal changes towards violence, Hideo Kojima is one such developer. MGS2 enables you to go through the game with just the tranquilizer gun (M9) and actually rewards the player for less kills and less 'alerts'. Guns a-blazing is fun, but sneaky stealth is better.
quote:I'm glad that fatally wounded soldiers don't beg and plead for their life
The do in MGS2 - 'dont shoot'. Although I imagine that a more heartfelt pledge would be more harrowing.
quote:My biggest problem, is I've never played a game where violence has had any *actual* consequences. People never see the horror that is murder (even in a good vs. evil situation). In some ways, I'm glad that fatally wounded soldiers don't beg and plead for their life, or say a final prayer or wish for their loved ones. Computer games tend to avoid the whole gravity of the concept of death.
Imagine if for an ending in a game, you got a montage of shots of the funerals of all the people you killed in the game. Kids/wives/husbands weeping at funerals -- all in black and white and moving from place to place.
But I suppose the whole point of videogame violence is that it's supposed to be the 'last resort' (although this isn't emphasised enough) and thus, becomes the justification for violence (think Max Payne). Given how people view the world (based on their own principles of right and wrong), it's possible to justify nearly anything...including violence.
quote:Originally posted by JonathanKerr
This debate usually is represented by two sides: 1) - the Moral Minority who say 'Games are doing this to our kids!' and 2) Gamers who say 'Bullshit. It's the damn gun laws and bad parenting'.
I don't point the finger at the parents for being completly responsible, however even people with the lowest of morals should know its not right to kill. Even if these people were mentally unstable I still believe bad parenting would still have to be a main factor (among many factors, no doubt). If they were mentally unstable a good parent would see this and the incident would have never happened. If Sony, Take 2 and Rockstar never made GTA there is a good chance the incedent would have happened. Legal Gardians are required to provide a safe environment for their children, this includes ensuring their Physical and Mental Health. Someone mentally ill should not be expossed to violence (in this case games). Someone mentally ill shouldn't be allowed out in public untill they've been treated.
I don't blame the parents alone, there are definetly others factors but the other factors aren't being sued for $246 million.
As for game companies they have resposibilties as well. I hope the industry moves away from the violent games but unfortunitly humans are violent by nature and there are those who crave violence.
I rarely play violent games anymore, I have lost the taste for them. I still play Halo, Splinter Cell, Battlefield and CS but they're not that violent. I've only ever really played racing games being a car and dirt bike nut. For every Shooting/fighting game I buy, I buy 2-3 racing/simulatiom/sports games. The best level of any game of any genre in my opinion is the FBI level in Splinter Cell were you're not allowed to kill anybody, only knock them out otherwise it's game over. I would love to see more of this in games, Specifically FPS games.
I'm Glad to see some new arguements and perspectives raised in this topic. Not the same old Blame Game.
Please excuse the rant. This is a topic that has bugged me for a long time.
Our acceptance of violence is becomming less and less. I can remember 1970's stuff that would make my Mums hair turn white and today I just laugh. I suppose it gets down to what you can handle and how you handle it. Personaly I think violent movies/TV/Games are realy bb b boooooooring so I steer clear of them unless the violence is used to enhance the story eg Reservoir Dogs.
**** WARNING WARNING WARNING ****
Complete load of rambling crap to follow...
**** WARNING WARNING WARNING ****
quote:Given how people view the world (based on their own principles of right and wrong), it's possible to justify nearly anything...including violence.
Another interesting statement, that kind of leads me on to another 'beef' I have with computer games. The villains are often presented as having no justification for their violent behaviour, they are just 'evil' like some kind of demon manifestation. Developer's are, again, over-simplifying the concept of violence. I mean for example, in your average counter-terrorism game, at what point do you question the motivation of these religious extremists?
(for example say Al-Qaeda)
Do you ever think "Hrm - at one point, the USA funded these guys to fight against the invading Russian army, then we turned against them and deposed them from any power over a country that we handed to them, so why should I kill these terrorists when we infact betrayed them".
It never happens. The 'bad guys' have no motivation, have no reasons, they are simply 'bad' and must be punished by death. It's a very simple view of the cycle of violence.
Presenting this concept of "fundamentally evil" people that cannot be reasoned with seems a little pathetic. Plus it doesn't really make for a very interesting enemy.
Not every game is like this, but there aren't that many well defined villains that display realistic motivated behaviour. Again, it's just me getting annoyed with the simplistic nature of violence that games demonstrate. If we actually showed what violence and aggression was made up of, then we'd probably have less popular violent games, and violence would be less glorified (in general).
Again, just for the record, I'm not against violence in games, I'm just tired of seeing it everywhere in the same over-simplistic form. We keep saying 'games are for adults' and we aren't marketing them to kids -> but it's not like we make many 'adult' games.
quote:unfortun(ately) humans are violent by nature and there are those who crave violence.
There are 'interesting' statements coming from everywhere in this thread. I would be surprised if there are many people who actually 'crave' violence. Sure there are some nutcases that do, but the nature and context of that statement seems to imply that you believe that a large portion of gamers have violence issues.
For 99% of people, no matter what, there is always a difference between real life violence, and simple competition/survival of the fittest games in a fantasy/computer game. Even if the competition is represented via a simulated violent activity. Craving some form of competitive survivalist activity is due to the sedate nature of our lives and I don't think it's because we 'fundamentally crave violence'.
I believe that we fundamentally don't want to be trapped in this arsed-up 'system' (sorry for sounding like some angst ridden anarchist, I'm not, it's just a point I'm making) and that it doesn't supply everything that the human psyce desires.
I think the biggest problem with this computer game violence issue, is it takes away our perception of violence for what it is, and replaces it with this sedate, easy to accept view that does not challenge us, nor does it provoke us into dealing with our inevitable fear of the reality of violence.
Computer games aren't the only medium where this is done on a regular basis, but seeing as it's what we are talking about, I'll stay with it.
As far as I'm concerned, we (as a society) lost our ability to deal with the fear related to violence, and from that lack of fear-control, we cultivated paranoia which leads to people getting defensive and accusative and creating exactly the sort of atmosphere that leads to more animosity, hatred and inevitable violent behaviour.
If we confronted violence in all it's reality, and dealt with our fear of it, perhaps then we could understand it and learn to live in peace.
(/rant)
Alrighty, that's pretty much that. Back to chillin'...
Malus -> don't let anyone take away your right to jump on their heads, or get stuck like a cork in a plumbing pipe waist deep in human excrement ;)
MGS2 SPoilers.
I think that MGS2's villain 'Solidus Snake' was not over simplified -- he was kind of a grey area. He wanted to take Manhattan Island offline to break away from the control of the Patriots. The fact that we (the player) stood in the way was moot. He believed in the ends justifying the means.
Interesting point about Al Queda. Back to MGS series -- the first game of the MGS series dealt with 'what is passed on by our genes'. The 2nd dealt with 'what ISNT passed on by our genes and the control of information'. Now to my point - MGS3 deals with the idea of how peoples perception of our enemies change with time. It used to be Germans, then Russians and now it's Al Queda. As Maitrek said, it wasnt long ago when Iraq and Iran etc were 'friends of the west'.
How times change.
Personally I'm a fan of education over censorship.
Maitrek -- you would have enjoyed 'Bowling for Columbine' I take it?
quote:Originally posted by Blitz
I played DOAXBV and it made me want to go shopping and watch girls play volleyball.
So, you see it's all true. GAMES OWN YOU ALL!!!
CYer, Blitz
here you go then http://www.tecmoinc.com/store/bikinis.asp :D
i would absolutely hate to see a game that REALLY showed the extent of violence. someone crawling around with half their lower body hanging out pleading for forgiveness and the mercy of god, would really get to me. the only reason why i can manage to play violent games is because i have the ability to tell the difference between violence in real life and violence on a screen. i know the difference between what blood is in reall life and what a set of little squares powered by a certain heat (or wattage) is. adding in the whole psycholigical reprocussions of violence changes it from death to murder. that would raise even more problems.
that is the thing that i also hate about movies and games. villians without any story or feeling behind them. that is one reason why i thought that Knives from Trigun was a really good villian. he had a reason for what he was doing. it was little extreme, the point he took it to, but there was still a reason.
Maitrek and Mr. Kerr's comment about hating different enemies was interesting as well. i was born in Germany and moved over here when i was 2. all through school i recieved idiodic remarks from people (not just kids) about being a Nazi. it was good to see that even though i was born nearly 40 years after the main Nazi threat dispanded, people were still stupid enough to make comments like that. ah childhood memories. i think i'll go and find a gun now.
quote: As kids, how many of us stopped what we weren't supposed to be doing when our parents walked in the room?
lol. brought back a lot of memories. mum walked into my room when i was in year 9 and busted me with a hustler. said she never wanted to see that filth again. i have always kept to her word. she has never seen one again :p
meh, These things happen all the time, someone attempts to take someone to court, the violence argument comes around for another pass. Some old thing again.
Just remember that the case has been put forward, and will probably be summarily dismissed as most often happen in these situations. Anyone can attempt to have anything go to court, but most of these things are just dismissed on the spot. To me the funny thing is that it becomes news. For me it isn?t news until the case has been to court and won by a member of the ?moral? fringe.
?Member of the ?moral? fringe supported by lawyer desperate for publicity, make yet another bogus suit, that will be laughed out of court, in a desperate attempt to make society conform to their conservative moral and social views?
Just don?t cut it as news in my book.
Pantmonger
i was just playing vice city for 30mins myself- i feel like going out on a killing spree now- you better watch out if you ride around on a motorbike, i enjoy shooting from them with my uzi while i ride around the city jumping from buildings and listening to my fav songs...:p
all because some wacko with a shit parenting cant take responsibility for his own actions...give me a break.