Of Video Games and Violence

[Redwolf]

This is an article I worte just now. I was going to post it as a TIMO article, but it's really too opinionated. Realize this is my opinion, and that if any of the facts are wrong tell me and I'll change it accordingly. Happy reading:

As I sat down watching FOX talk about the so called 'Serial Sniper', I see something that makes me very mad. They just had to bring up video games, didn't they? They basically came out and said 'Hey, maybe tyhe sniper learned how to snipe by playing a video game with a sniper rifle in it.' Then they show pictures of a training mission from Counterstrike. They show a player using an AWM/P to shoot paper targets (like the ones at the firing ranges). Then, they say 'This is a game called Counterstrike [...] In this game they reward points for what part of the body is shoot, as well as mow many people you shoot'. Okay, if you played counterstrike, you know that that's not true. See, Counterstrike awards 'points' (actually money) for the team that wins, either by killing the other team, or completing the goal(either rescuing the hostages, planting the bomb, or escorting the VIP, or trying to stop the opposing team from doing one of those). You get a sense that no one at FOX actually even read the manual, much less play the game. But does the public know this? Does the public know what the rules of Counterstrike are? Most don't. So now they are all fired up about a grossly exaggerated issue.

'So wait a minute? Do video games even cause violence?' Maybe. 'Woah, wait a minute dude! Weren't you are about to argue why they don't!' Not exactly. See, it's arguable that religion causes violence. Doesn't it though? We have Islamic terrorists flying hijacked planes into buildings. We have renegade Christian groups putting abortionists on hit lists and sending them bombs in the mail. The KKK was a group that was strongly protestant. These groups are religious. The problem is that they are pervertivly religious. They believe that killing gets them closer to their god. They believe that they are immune to their religious laws such as the 10 commandments, when they are in fact not. Video games are the same way. Violent movies, music, and games cause violence in some kids. But these kids take up a perverted view of reality that they were taught not to accept. They look at video games as practice for what will happen in the real world and see them as simulators of what can and should be done in real life. The vast majority of people, however, know better than that. Video games are simulators of what shouldn't be done in real life. They are an escape form reality. They are designed to create a fun and enjoyable experience. So how does it create such an experience form gritty violence? The violence isn't real. Game payers know that. No matter how realistic, the gamers know that the situation the game puts them in is not real and they are free to do as they like. Many argue that the perverted carry out this violence in real life because they cannot distinguish between the game and reality, so they assume the situation they are in is not real and they can do as they like. Sorry, that isn’t the case. If it is, something else is involved, such as hallucinogenics or mental disorders. The case is that the perverted see the game as not reality, but as a simulator for reality. A person who sees death and destruction as a reality to live in needs help. The signs of such a person show up, but are very subtle. If this person kills however, it is to late. Once you kill a virtual person, odds are you’ll be okay. If you kill a real person, you have lost part of your soul. This is why serial killers find it easier to kill every time they do kill. Soldiers are excluded from this, because they are commanded to kill in defense of their homeland’s territory, beliefs, ideas, or whatever else. They kill because they have to, not because they feel the urge to.

However, you must see that no game itself has caused the murder or massacre of people. No person plays Counterstrike, or Doom, or Unreal and then exits the game and says ‘Hey, let’s kill someone’ without something else being wrong. Just as no one comes out of their church saying ‘Hey, let’s go kill some abortionists!’ without something being wrong. No one comes out of a mosque (sp, may not be right) thinking ‘Hey, let’s hijack some planes and kill a bunch of random people all because they are in America’ without something being wrong. Whatever may be wrong with these people varies, but it is never something minor.

The Maryland sniper is not a product of games. No one will know what he is a product of until he is caught. But him playing a session of Counterstrike did not make a monster out of him.

Games do not sell because they are ultra-violent. They sell because they create conflict and are fun. The Sims is now the top selling game on the market for PCs, yet it has little in the way of violence and gore. The conflict in this game is simply dealing with every day life. There is not killing in Myst, yet it is the #2 top selling PC game of all time. It too had conflict: you had to figure out where you were and what the heck is going on. Soldier of Fortune is one of the grittiest, most violent games of all time. Yet it didn’t sell all that well. Why? It wasn’t original. It didn’t bring anything new to the table that games like Goldeneye and Quake already had, except for the massive amount of gore. There was definitely conflict as you took on and picked off Islamic militants like mosquitoes to a bug zapper. But the thing was gamers have already been the guy way behind front line picking off bad guys by the thousands since 1993. The extra gore doesn’t help. While it’s fun to watch a bad guy scream in pain is you took his arm off with a Desert Eagle, it actually gets….old, after a while. After you made a headshot for the 60th time or so, you realize it’s just the same thing over and over, and the game is revealed for what it truly is: a game where you just kill everything that moves. There isn’t variety. And variety keeps the gamer interested. In counterstrike, you play as team vs. team where almost anything can happen. And that keeps the gamer interested, and happy. In The Sims, literally anything can happen, from the stove bursting into flames to your sim falling for another sim, creating variety and making the gamer interested.

So I hope you can see from a different, opinionated perspective how senseless using video games as scapegoats is. Thank you for your time in reading this.

[mAdMaLuDaWg]

Redwolf,
I'm an avid gamer (you should know that by now ), I follow the gaming industry a lot, and I aspire to become a game developer one day.
Although, I do agree that video games aren't to blame here, and that no one could get to know how to use a weapon by using a mouse and keyboard , I do agree that playing video games does have a psychological effect. I believe that games I played when I was a kid, had an impact, in a very small way atleast, on what kind of person I am right now. Or the games people play before they could fully understand what is right and what is wrong, does effect their personality.
I read an article on msn.com that does agree with this, but taking TV as an issue, http://go.msn.com/0000/5/26.asp?targ...2F1739%2E51287
With games becoming ultra realistic, studies to show the effects of long term gaming on peoples minds have to be done. I'm not implicating that games should be banned, but the studies will educate people on what gaming does.

[NeoStarO1]

hmmm interesting perspective. I'd have to think about what you said before posting my thoughts.

yes cause you know counterstrike shows you how to relaod the weapon and has the same recoil effect with a mouse

when in doubt blame something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

didn't they blame the columbine shootings on Death metal and video games?

People blame things they do not understand or just don't like


and its sad cause they won't take the time to research and learn about it

[Blood_Luster]

I like you're Artical... I give it a A+. You made some very good points in there, and I can say I can agree with all of them.
Good work, Redwolf...


What I think is:

People pick somthing that they can blame on; use them as a scapgoat. Kinda like what happend when Eminem( the "Artist") when he sung about how he didn't like gay and lesbains. Then GLAAD and other Gay Organizations came at him, saying that HE MADE people do anti-gay things, and kill Gay's, weither it be true or not(IMO it wasn't) they used it.

EDIT:

Scary.. look at all the post times, all a +2mins each post, ekk! lol! I'm so wierd...

[Ruler2112]

I've played some of the most violent games that've come out. I like action games and getting very bloody. I don't play for the gore, I play for the release and escape from reality. Frankly, I don't think I'd have made it through HS without having Doom and Syndicate to release my tension and anger at pretty much everybody.

Am I ruthless and blood-thirsty in games? HECK YEAH!!!

Am I this way IRL? Couldn't be farther from the truth.

Do I think the game is reality? Nope.

Do I think it's a representation of what will be expected of me in the future? Nah.

Do I think it makes people act out the games actions on others? Get real- stand up and take responsibility for your actions instead of blaming it on everything else.



My sense of humor is rather dark and morbid at times. My alias, Ruler, is actually short for Ruler of Death. This was the alias suggested for me back in early 1992, when I first logged onto a buddy's BBS. He knew about my sense of humor and thought it would be appropriate. I used the same alias on Concentric when I logged on the internet in 94 (when the HQ for concentric was in a garage in the south end of bay city, MI). Now, I use Ruler for all my gaming characters, as it more accurately personifies my personality when playing games than my real name does. (As yet another side-note, I even went out with AngelofDeath from Concentric- she was very nice looking and even understood my sense of humor! ) I'll stop digressing now.

Good article RedWolf.

[muno]

Let's have an analogy.
You chop wood with axe, does that make you an axe murderer?

That someone takes someone elses life with an axe doesn't mean axes should be banned.
(that is an analogy made by someone at my wifes class after the mall bombing here in Vantaa, Finland)
//start edit:
My wife is a chemistry student at the university here, and they regularly make 'bombs' in their class. Also she teaches junior high school students. By bomb I don't mean some nuclear device but something like adding baking powder to an enclosed holder with water (which will eventually blow up because of the pressure inside).
//end edit

I see it as a great example.

It's very disturbing to see movements that wish to ban something that's meant to be as entertainment (movies/games).
Heck, I think that false statements made by politicians are a greater reason for someone to kill someone than seeing Steven Seagal busting a kneecap.

And furthermore, what's forbidden intrigues people.
-M

//start edit:
A side note. Why not ban football and ice hockey and everything that has caused massive destruction on property and people.
How many people have you seen go out and trash few stores and beat the living c??p out of opposing clan members after watching a counterstrike session etc.?
//end edit