Violent Video Games

[Squish]

Well besides the intial " NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" when I first saw it, I realized that it would be practically impossible for them to destroy an entire industry because one family believes the game "Manhunt" could be at hand for the thoughts that someone would be murdered because of it. PHL reported:

Ban called for on Violent Games 
7/29/2004 16:24 PST | Community | by nagash
There's an article over at the BBC News website, telling of the recent murder of Stefan Pakeerah, 14, who was stabbed in Leicester (UK) recently. His parents are calling for a ban on violent video games, and specifically "Manhunt". Manhunt is the game being blamed here, which the parents of Stefan blame.

This has brought up the whole "Ban Violent Games" thing again, as we saw come about a few times in the past with Counter Strike. I'm sorry for their loss, but it's not video games that kill people, people kill people.

The bbc news website:
BBC News Report

the part that I found to be quiet hilarous was at the end of the PHL report:

So remember, if you ever see someone in a gas mask, it's not the Combine, don't kill them and give Half-Life a bad name.

So, to show how much I respect that "manhunt" was behind a HUMAN beings decision to kill a man, and that it wasn't a person decided for some reason to kill another person... the price listings for manhunt:

Manhunt- Prices

Yes I do respect the fact that this game is a highly violent,probably due to the fact that its rockstar... and it is a sensless killing game, out of all the violent games I've played, some demented(Twisted Metal: Black), I know I have never had the urge to kill someone due to the game, if someone had that feeling, it was, in my opinion, that the other person did something to piss the other person off to the extent of murder. So maybe they should try and find out what he did to the kid, instead of tossing blame at videogames because you were pissed off that your child played them. I also believe, that if your child is 14 years old, and he's playing a M game, you shouldn't toss the blame around for the fact that, you had to buy it for him, and maybe you should have payed attention to that label. Especially do to the fact that your a phsycopathic murderer in the game.

If you disagree with me, please post, after all, this is a debate:D

[Wha?]

Giselle Pakeerah said her son's confessed killer, Warren Leblanc, 17, had mimicked behaviour in Manhunt.

Not so clear-cut then. Warren's parents may have thought he was old enough.

That BBC report gave a lot of the stuff I was going to, so I won't reitterate.

[Annatar]

so why havent i felt the urge to throw razor sharp frisbees and try to decapitate people???


look.... if a guy has PTS syndrome or something similar then i might just about accept that he isnt responsible for his action. A computer game is not a good reason. its just frickin middle classers backlashing at anything in sight again, along with skateparks, rap music (not that i like it), football and pretty much anything that a normal teenager would like to do.

No wonder the kids arent alright.

[fritoman]

if the parents of the one child that killed, did go and rent/buy the game for the child, and that said game was the reason he killed then it was the games fault and the parents. sounds as thou the parents and child should be held responsible, and yes just because you say the game is the reason the kid killed isnt cause to ban it, thats why we have rules and laws, it is illigal for a child to drink alcohol in the US, that doesnt mean they dont drink and drive and kill people, and when that happens they dont call for a ban on beer. BUT you cant say that playing the game by some wont give them ideas and maybe even try and live the ideas out, thats where the adults come in to play, they are the responsible ones and its there job to make sure there kids dont play the games in the first place.

I personally think there should be a lot less 12 year olds playing CS, but not because it is too violent but because most are annoying when they start yelling or singing into the mic.:angry:

[[CAKE]anonymity]

I actually have a topic on this because I wanted to get people opinions on the subject. Since I love the subject, i wont put a link to it ^_^
I did this for a socities project and I got to present it to the class. It was really quite enjoyable because I got to represent video games, and violent ones at that, to a group of skeptics. I did read a few scientific journals, one by two psyhciatrists, from the American Pyshciatric Association. They belived that it caused things like frustration, but cant be the only, or even most predominant factor causing someone to kill or injure another. Yet, a social scientist (forget her name) belives that they do. I surveyed a few ppl, and from those who played video games, only one belived that they did cause violence. There were a few non gamers who belive that they do. I gave them a few examples from my life, and told them that I had never done drugs ect. I followed it up with my theory that a lot of ppl do it out of boredom, the class generally agreed, and then i said, why not let them play HL. It may not completly detur, but it doesnt hurt. I also said that violence, is probably the most unacceptable thing in society today, and its the most punished in our court of law (murder charge). Its so forbidden and bad that you cant help being at least a little bit curious about it. I said that violent video games were the best alternative in exploring that. Someone brought up movies, after i had said that, and i followed it up by saying, it didnt fullfill the interactive desire of it. I asked them, how many kids they thought, after seeing star wars were outside playing with sticks pretending they were lightsabers. A game lets you do that, without the risk of getting poked with a stick. <_<

I think in the end they were at least less firm on their position about it.

[Wha?]

Can't forget that destroying stuff in flashy, intricate, or explosive ways is cool. That's why the games are like that in the first place.

I find that when I have a craving to sneak around and shoot people, I pop Raven Shield into the drive, and fire away. Violent games are actually reducing the liklihood of me lashing out.


Just had a thought.. the perceived 'togetherness' created by online play--and more specifically, clans--might be fulfilling the basic herding instinct, lessening the need to be in a gang. Somebody should look into that (I would, but I have no idea how to conduct a social experiment).

[Zerox]

A kid who has the urge to kill someone in the first place, is because they were raised badly by the parents, and they have a mental problem. Nothing about games, games just let those kids see how they will kill people. If parents are going to blame games then they might as well blame the TV also, there are very violent shows on TV also.<_<

[Gwarsbane]

I've played violent video games, listened to heavymetal music, watched violent TV shows, animes and movies most my life, I have never killed anyone.

There are lots of people in jail for murder who have never played a video game violent or other wise in their life.


This is just like people who blame murders on music, tv, movies or what ever. They never turn their eye towords the person who killed or even how they raised the kids. Most of them first blame everyone else for the kids problems.

[Wha?]

Good point. The statistics speak a totally different story. The people who want a ban just take the overlapping area in the ven diagram with Violent People and Gamers. Of course there's a trend if you only look at information which fits it..

[PIX]

"Garbage in---garbage out."

[Olbest]

Most gamers do not have any mental problems and do not kill other people. Of course there are some psychologically ill people but those are a very small minority. I know that there are more murders in america than in europe. I think it's what the people expect from the games. People here really play "out of boredom", i guess it's not the same there.

Although there are not so many murders we got very strict laws for computer games because of Erfurt.

April 26, 2002
In Erfurt, Germany, a nineteen-year-old runs amok at his high school, killing 14 teachers, two other pupils and himself. The event sparks a discussion about stricter weapons laws in Germany, and about banning violent computer games and movies.

(Quote from http://www.wordiq.com/definition/April_2002 ) Another report

The new laws include that the age restriction for violent games is at least set to 16. It's 16 because you get your identity card when you reach the age of 16. If you want to buy a violent game with the age restriction of 16 you will have to show your identity card to the cashier. This also applies to computer magazines with CDs with include stuff "ab 16".

Counter-Strike e.g. is "ab 16" here and Condition Zero is "ab 18" this means that you have to be at least 18 to buy this product. Well I doubt that these laws are so effectively. Most cashiers forget to require the identity card. And if they do so youth go to another shop and buy what they wanted. I personally don't care about those laws, I'm still 15 but I don't have any mental problems so far although I play violent games. I ask my parents for buying a game if I am not allowed to buy, same with violent movies.
You can't exclude that youths play the games they aren't allowed to play. I think the government should better try to help solving mental problems by spending more money for the "youthhouses" (a place where youths can meet and chill out together) Guess many youths would welcome this and go away from their computers.

[Annatar]

Theres a problem with this particular debate... we all agree with each other. Nevermind im going to carry on making the same point....

People always want something to blame, and for some bizarre reason its never the parents. Why?? because the people writing these reports and making all the noise dont like the idea of someone like them being the cause of this stuff, and anyway its fashionable at the moment to blame everything on culture.

So keep blaming it on the kids and what they like to do.... why not??? they cant vote!!

[PIX]

Yes....the majority of child problems are attributed to the parents. Parents today pay no attention to their kids. They are too wrapped up in their careers or in their hobbies and they use Television or X-box as a babysitter for their kids. Kids brought up with Playstation2 as their teacher and instiller of morals will perchance have problems when they grow up. Come on....people who sit in front of a PC for 5-8 hours a night are NOT doing themselves very much good. Think about how much harm that does to a developing adolescent. I know most of this group in in that growing age 20 and under. You will be the ones saying "it doesn't harm me....I'm normal...see?" This is the same groups that gets angry when they can't buy beer because older people say they can't handle it yet.

I think if a young person is exposed to CONSTANT violence (gaming or TV or real life) then it will 100% affect their development somewhere down the line. Didn't you ever see Clockwork Orange??;)

[[CAKE]anonymity]

Murder and the idea of murder has been around way longer then TV, movies and video games. 100 years ago, if i killed someone and blamed it on a book, then the victims parents would want to ban all books. 100 years ago if harry potter was around, the book would be very contreversial because of the witchcraft and wiziardry aspect of it. It would probably be the thing you blame for killing someone 100 years ago. Doesnt this just sound completly ridicolous? Blaming a childs book for the death of another person. I thought parents encouraged their children to read. This is how crazy you will sound in the future, keep that in mind.

[PIX]

Apples and oranges. If books were on the same intensity level as video simulations, then why do we have more youth playing video games instead of reading
exciting books?? I bet if you put the stats beside each other you would see much bigger numbers of youth playing video games than reading. I see the perspecive
thing you are getting at but the intensity of a video game experience is much more intense and doesn't allow you to fill in the blanks for imagination. It fills them in for
you and at a harrowing pace. Parents did encourage their kids to read and should still do it. I find great fault in a parent who encourages their kid to play video games
if there is a choice however. I am currently in rehab for video game abuse myself. Well..not a 'real' rehab...but a self imposed one. I have no witness to my kids if i play too
much on the internet and tell them they shouldn't do the same.

[FreeFall]

If books were on the same intensity level as video simulations, then why do we have more youth playing video games instead of reading
exciting books??

We live in a differrent age. People grew lazier, children realized they could take a short-cut and just go to a video source rather than excercise their brains. I mean really, to read you gotta go to the effort of holding the thing and concentrating, move your eyes across the pages and all that, but with a video game all you have to do is click a bunch of buttons and watch stuff go boom! hehehe

[[CAKE]anonymity]

There is still a lot of reading in some video games, RPG's for example. When the kids were playing pokemon it exercised their minds quite a bit, the reading aspect, since none of it is narrated, their memories, in remember diffrent attacks, and diffrent creatures (last i heard they were up to 250). With each pokemon, with some unique attacks thats a lot of information to remember. You would think with ADD flourishing in our children that they couldnt sit there and read and remember information, yet they do it all the time. Reading and remembering information are pretty much the two most important skills they will need to succed in school. Now pokemon isnt a very violent game, but some RPG's are, like diablo. If you've ever played DOD, you will find its pretty heavy on communication. You get ppl saying, mg or sniper in the church, in the dark room, broken window ect or even stuff like just in the next room, or grenade. You have to remember to check certain popular camping spots on the map (memory again). You have to co-operate and work as a team, I dont see a problem with this. I know some teenagers play video games with their dads and it lets them spend some time together. I know snowdawg has played rico with his son. Frito and Josh. My brother and I play all the time together.

Back to the book thing. I'm not sure that they are better because your imagining an image. A good author will describe a pretty violent scene, and quite well to, so that image is in your head, and is in your head for longer then a quick one or two second flash in a movie and its over. The readers mind can also play with diffrent possibilities of the same violent act. Which is twice, three times, four times as worse depending on how many times the reader dwells on it. The time spent fixated on a violent act in a book is much longer then in any movie. Since you do it many times in a video game, you dont spend much time dwelling on it at all. But in a book, your spending at least a few minutes fixated on this one act of violence. If you ask me I'm much more worried about someone who can create violent imagery in their mind, then someone who just sees a one or two second flash of it.

[Wha?]

There is no amount of reading in any game that's comparable to a book. Even a comic book has more to read. It's not that there is no reading in games, it's that there is no need for it. If a picture is worth a thousand words, a moving picture is worth a thousand stills, and an interactive picture is worth a thousand of those.

Visual violence needs no descriptions, and you can have things like complex martial arts fights, since every detail of the action can come through. Whereas written violence isn't as intricate as visual violence. It just can't be. There's a pace to maintain, and parsing long descriptions slows that pace to a crawl. With words, the violence is all in your head, minus the few defining actions that get described. This is a double-edged sword however, since what the reader gets out of it is user-defined; a disturbed mind will get a more disturbing scene playing out in their head.

Personally, I find that books create the most desire to take part in the events.

::PostScript::
Text based games do exist, and I realize this. However, they are such a minority, that they are not included in the scope of modern games.

[PIX]

Best text adventure game ever was ZORK in early 1980's. I played it for hours on Commodore 64 PC...lol.

[Wha?]

Check this out then. Hilarious parody of a text game in there. You can play it too, if you wait a bit after it ends. They had a longer version of it for a while. It was much more fun.

[Annatar]

"it doesn't harm me....I'm normal...see?"

This is the same groups that gets angry when they can't buy beer because older people say they can't handle it yet.

I think if a young person is exposed to CONSTANT violence (gaming or TV or real life) then it will 100% affect their development somewhere down the line. Didn't you ever see Clockwork Orange??;)

I bet if you put the stats beside each other you would see much bigger numbers of youth playing video games than reading

1. i dont claim to be normal

2.i can already buy beer (legally too!!)

3. Ill agree with you on that one. Thats why i have these things called friends, a job and a couple of other things too.

4. I read about as much as i play games.



On the other hand, Id be more worried about the real life violence than the simulated stuff. I girl i used to know turned up at work one day hiding in the staff room because her brother had been beating up her parents and/or the rest of the family, and she had called the police on him. Her brother threatened to kill her, so naturally she ran away. The police found the guy waiting near her house with a knife


That family doesnt have a computer.

[[CAKE]anonymity]

written violence isn't as intricate as visual violence. It just can't be. There's a pace to maintain, and parsing long descriptions slows that pace to a crawl.

I think its much more intracate, and if anything the need to keep the pace up is greater in visual violence. An author can write a book thats 100 pages or 1000. TV and movies dont have that kind of flexibility, they have some, but not that much. Authors go on tangents all the time in their books because they have the time to. Therefore its pretty reasonable to assume that they will and do, spend much more time setting the mood. Lets assume that your right and they do need to keep the pace up. My point still remains that even a half decent description of what is happening will take longer then a flash of it, therefore violent imagery will still be in your head longer, then it will from a movie.

You are right that it is user deffined, but the whole media causing violence is obviously dependant on the persons mind, otherwise each one of us would killers.

My whole book point was that these people are targeting TV, movies and video games, while books could easily be targeted, but they're not because of the litteracy benefit.

The idea of TV, movies and video games is a very recent one, yet the idea of killing someone isnt. I think that along makes them very segregated.

[PIX]

I don't think anyone is saying computer use created violence. I don't think Cain was hooked into STEAM when he killed his brother Abel 6000 years ago nor was he strung out on a good Stephen King novel. All I'm saying is that violent video game stimulation for hours and hours has got to do something to your thought processes at some point. I believe that the eyes ARE the windows to the soul.

[FreeFall]

Clockwork orange was a good movie. . . and yes that point does make sense. But there is a difference between forced viewing and a complient viewing. Naturally when being forced into something one would want otherwise, and thus that event would have a greater impact on a person rather than if they decided "yes i will watch this huge video tape of mass death and violence"

[[CAKE]anonymity]

I guess I sorta agree with you there PIX, but I think its other factors then the eyes being connected to the soul. A lot of people think that children shouldnt be exposed to so much violence on TV/movies/games because they wont know whats real or some crap like that. As a kid, I always remember watching TV and knowing it was TV. I'm not saying let a 4 year old watch kill bill, I'm saying they do know the diffrence. I just think that they dont fully understand or think about the consequences to their actions if they do become violent. Of course some adults are like that to, and I think a few of them have just used this idea to scapegoat it, and hope the judge/jury buys it and goes easier on them.

[PIX]

I don't know how many times I have been on a 5 hour CS binge in the past and then try to go to bed. I would be replaying
all the action in my mind and would be hearing the radio commands and audio also. I would even dream about it during the night.
Now I am a pretty stable person:wacko: so I can only imagine how a violent game played for a long time would affect a kid or young person.
Now don't get ME wrong...I like action games just like anyone. My kids would play 'fighting games' on Nintendo Gamecube for long periods
of time in the past and then I would see them emulating the characters by kicking and hitting each other. Same thing after they watch Power
Rangers and other like shows. They emulate the action they see. Be it is not always guns and bombs....fighting can be just as bad and they
get into trouble alot after exposure to these. I have now cut out fighting games for them and ONLY allow them action games like Mario, Sonic,
Star Wars...etc. No arena fighting or such. I'm pretty sure they won't grow up to be murderers (God and prayer helps on that one too) but I can
see the direct effects of these stimuli on their behavior.

[[CAKE]anonymity]

How old are your kids? It might also have something to do with my consequences theory.

[FreeFall]

That's almost every kid pix. I did the same when I was younger, it's fun for children to just imagine. Pretend your one of those super strong unrealistic tv, movie, or video game characters. They know they aren't really and know they could never do something of the sort of magnitude shown in video games. But children pretend. Mario jumps on some baddies head, your kids aren't about to jump on each other's heads in an attempt to mimic mario because they know it's not good. Perhaps if there was no proper parenting then they would attempt to seriously harm another, but I don't think that's the case with your children.