The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Video games : the scourge on the world, and the perfect scapegoat for the problems of society (or at least, so says the Culture Minister). It seems that possibly the best thing to happen to youths of the 20th century, give or take music and film, has been ripped apart by politicians and damned by parents who feel they ‘encourage violence in children’ in what mostly are accusations backed up with weak or even no evidence. Quite on the contrary, videogames, from the basics of Space Invaders in the seventies to the advanced plots of the 21st century (such as games like Grand Theft Auto : Vice City, a gangster game which objectives such as ‘Kill the Jury’), seem to be the perfect medium for ridding the mind of violent thoughts, in the safety of a virtual world.
The idea that videogames can be used as a channel of frustration, anger and annoyance is one that I, and most other gamers, firmly believe in. Shooting someone down in a game has no consequences, no jail sentence, no guilt, no grieving families. It’s quick, a rush of adrenaline, and quite simply, fun. It allows youths to release negative feelings, and violence, in a world where people aren’t born, they are re-generated, and people don’t have skin or teeth, but are made of pixels and shapes. And surely taking out anger in a virtual world is infinitely times better than leaving home with a baseball bat in one hand and a shotgun in the other?
If people who play games can switch off a game (for example, a shoot ‘em up) where guns are key and killing is an objective and go out to converse with non-gamers without trying to kill someone, or even just hurt someone, surely the argument that video games encourage violence is void. Unfortunately, the media, amongst other things, seem to enjoy emphasising this concept that video games cause violence. And it is not only this subject the media over-exaggerates, for example, paedophilia was almost as rife 100 years ago as it is today, but only recently has the media (especially tabloids) made name-and-shame campaigns common place. And with many people in high political positions blaming events such as the Birmingham deaths on music (and also violent games) with very little evidence except content and lyrics to go by, it is not really fair to say this.
“While it is quite possible that fixation on violent video games may herald problems for a disturbed child, the average child probably just plays his games and grows up fine” – An excellent quote which sums up essentially what the gaming community feel about video game violence.
Videogames, contrary to popular belief, are not a spark to discover hidden desires to hurt in society. They do not encourage violence, which is proven simply by the fact that of the millions of people who plays games on a weekly or daily basis, there are only a few cases of assault or murder which can be partly related to games, and an even smaller amount of attacks which can be completely linked to violence in videogames. A recent incident in America where a boy was shot in an internet café after beating another youth at a violent war game was immediately blamed on the fact that the youth had beaten the other player, and was boasting. However, it was later found that there was a long-standing grudge between the two boys, a prime example of how videogames are simply an ‘easy option’ for people looking for a motive for an attack.
A game, or its content, is not enough to make a mentally stable human cause or perform in a violent or illegal act. In the same way that those who play games where jumping is the key don’t attempt to run and launch themselves 30 metres in the air, those who play games where the basic idea is to kill to progress don’t go outside with a machine gun, ready to rip havoc. Quite conversely, they go out feeling good, and have let out frustration on computer generated things rather than real people. And this is all without any negative consequences.
Unfortunately, the popular belief that games are key to violence amongst youths will probably stay, mainly due to the ignorance of the people who choose to keep the stereotype. However, by censoring these games, or there content, they will simply become more sought after, and developers will make more gory, more violent games as a result, through the simple law of supply the demand. And maybe having a break from reality is something all of us, old and young, should invest in once in a while.
Thanks for reading and all comments welcomed.
The idea that videogames can be used as a channel of frustration, anger and annoyance is one that I, and most other gamers, firmly believe in. Shooting someone down in a game has no consequences, no jail sentence, no guilt, no grieving families. It’s quick, a rush of adrenaline, and quite simply, fun. It allows youths to release negative feelings, and violence, in a world where people aren’t born, they are re-generated, and people don’t have skin or teeth, but are made of pixels and shapes. And surely taking out anger in a virtual world is infinitely times better than leaving home with a baseball bat in one hand and a shotgun in the other?
If people who play games can switch off a game (for example, a shoot ‘em up) where guns are key and killing is an objective and go out to converse with non-gamers without trying to kill someone, or even just hurt someone, surely the argument that video games encourage violence is void. Unfortunately, the media, amongst other things, seem to enjoy emphasising this concept that video games cause violence. And it is not only this subject the media over-exaggerates, for example, paedophilia was almost as rife 100 years ago as it is today, but only recently has the media (especially tabloids) made name-and-shame campaigns common place. And with many people in high political positions blaming events such as the Birmingham deaths on music (and also violent games) with very little evidence except content and lyrics to go by, it is not really fair to say this.
“While it is quite possible that fixation on violent video games may herald problems for a disturbed child, the average child probably just plays his games and grows up fine” – An excellent quote which sums up essentially what the gaming community feel about video game violence.
Videogames, contrary to popular belief, are not a spark to discover hidden desires to hurt in society. They do not encourage violence, which is proven simply by the fact that of the millions of people who plays games on a weekly or daily basis, there are only a few cases of assault or murder which can be partly related to games, and an even smaller amount of attacks which can be completely linked to violence in videogames. A recent incident in America where a boy was shot in an internet café after beating another youth at a violent war game was immediately blamed on the fact that the youth had beaten the other player, and was boasting. However, it was later found that there was a long-standing grudge between the two boys, a prime example of how videogames are simply an ‘easy option’ for people looking for a motive for an attack.
A game, or its content, is not enough to make a mentally stable human cause or perform in a violent or illegal act. In the same way that those who play games where jumping is the key don’t attempt to run and launch themselves 30 metres in the air, those who play games where the basic idea is to kill to progress don’t go outside with a machine gun, ready to rip havoc. Quite conversely, they go out feeling good, and have let out frustration on computer generated things rather than real people. And this is all without any negative consequences.
Unfortunately, the popular belief that games are key to violence amongst youths will probably stay, mainly due to the ignorance of the people who choose to keep the stereotype. However, by censoring these games, or there content, they will simply become more sought after, and developers will make more gory, more violent games as a result, through the simple law of supply the demand. And maybe having a break from reality is something all of us, old and young, should invest in once in a while.
Thanks for reading and all comments welcomed.
Is Kim Howells the culture minister?
The one who attacked gangster rap and things like that too?
The one who attacked gangster rap and things like that too?
I feel pretty low at the moment but you don't see me imitating GTA3. Although...
phuzzy wrote:
> “While it is quite possible that fixation on violent video games may
> herald problems for a disturbed child, the average child probably just
> plays his games and grows up fine” – An excellent quote which sums up
> essentially what the gaming community feel about video game
> violence.
So what about that problem child?
Of course, most people will play violent games, know that kind of stuff isn't acceptable in reality and that'll be the end of it.
And most disturbed people who go out and copy what they've seen in games would end up committing similar acts with or without a videogame for inspiration.
But as your quote, and the use of the term 'most', indicates, there are pretty much inevitably going to be some people, albeit in a tiny minority, for whom gaming does cause them to go out and harm others.
As said, it'll only be a tiny minority, and there will always be other factors in some kid developing into such a twisted individual. But do you think that'll be any consolation of the family of their victim(s)?
Still, drunk drivers kill hundreds, but just because a minority can't use alcohol responsibly it doesn't get banned.
To open the principle a little wider, thousands are killed in car accidents at the hands of normal, usually competent drivers. Yet still we drive.
Why? Because you could take all the risks out of life, but if you did all that would be left was people who although alive, couldn't actually live, couldn't do anything to enjoy life.
Risks are a part of life, a necessary part of having any quality of life.
Probably still not much consolation to families of victims, but had you asked them before the death if they'd like to live with risks or spend the rest of their natural life locked in a padded cell in a 1000ft deep bomb shelter, wearing a giant ball of cotton wool, so that nothing bad could happen to them,
I think there's only one choice.
And back to video games?
More legitimate research into games' effects and the risks of pushing unstable individuals over the edge, coupled with a well thought out and adequately enfoced age rating system, and maybe we could all recognise an acceptable risk in video games and stop treating it as a scapegoat.
> “While it is quite possible that fixation on violent video games may
> herald problems for a disturbed child, the average child probably just
> plays his games and grows up fine” – An excellent quote which sums up
> essentially what the gaming community feel about video game
> violence.
So what about that problem child?
Of course, most people will play violent games, know that kind of stuff isn't acceptable in reality and that'll be the end of it.
And most disturbed people who go out and copy what they've seen in games would end up committing similar acts with or without a videogame for inspiration.
But as your quote, and the use of the term 'most', indicates, there are pretty much inevitably going to be some people, albeit in a tiny minority, for whom gaming does cause them to go out and harm others.
As said, it'll only be a tiny minority, and there will always be other factors in some kid developing into such a twisted individual. But do you think that'll be any consolation of the family of their victim(s)?
Still, drunk drivers kill hundreds, but just because a minority can't use alcohol responsibly it doesn't get banned.
To open the principle a little wider, thousands are killed in car accidents at the hands of normal, usually competent drivers. Yet still we drive.
Why? Because you could take all the risks out of life, but if you did all that would be left was people who although alive, couldn't actually live, couldn't do anything to enjoy life.
Risks are a part of life, a necessary part of having any quality of life.
Probably still not much consolation to families of victims, but had you asked them before the death if they'd like to live with risks or spend the rest of their natural life locked in a padded cell in a 1000ft deep bomb shelter, wearing a giant ball of cotton wool, so that nothing bad could happen to them,
I think there's only one choice.
And back to video games?
More legitimate research into games' effects and the risks of pushing unstable individuals over the edge, coupled with a well thought out and adequately enfoced age rating system, and maybe we could all recognise an acceptable risk in video games and stop treating it as a scapegoat.
Simply put;
Child plays violent game.
Child bored next day.
Child remembers violent game.
Child wants to copy violent game.
Wonders what the character feels like.
Goes outside to act like violent character.
Child plays violent game.
Child bored next day.
Child remembers violent game.
Child wants to copy violent game.
Wonders what the character feels like.
Goes outside to act like violent character.
It's the easiest thing to do for any person in authority - whatever the situation, blame it on video games (so long as it's a bad thing). It's probably because games offer us a means of controlling a fictional situation, whereas music etc. is pasive entertainment. We can be seen as being responsible for our actions in these games, but only through listening or watching other media makes us responsible. It's all very strange.
Good post. People need to realise that violence was around long before gaming were.
It's annoying, but true.
They use that as an easy escape from the problems of violence.
But they honestly must be mad if they think a virtual world, completely different from reality can cause a violent outburst from an individual.
Madness.
Anyways, good post.
They use that as an easy escape from the problems of violence.
But they honestly must be mad if they think a virtual world, completely different from reality can cause a violent outburst from an individual.
Madness.
Anyways, good post.
True...
It's just I get so annoyed by politicians and parents who blame games for, well, the worlds problems.
Thanks for the comments :)
It's just I get so annoyed by politicians and parents who blame games for, well, the worlds problems.
Thanks for the comments :)
Well, you're preaching to the choir. Or whatever the phrase is. Everybody that plays games knows they're harmless. Who knows why others don't.
Video games : the scourge on the world, and the perfect scapegoat for the problems of society (or at least, so says the Culture Minister). It seems that possibly the best thing to happen to youths of the 20th century, give or take music and film, has been ripped apart by politicians and damned by parents who feel they ‘encourage violence in children’ in what mostly are accusations backed up with weak or even no evidence. Quite on the contrary, videogames, from the basics of Space Invaders in the seventies to the advanced plots of the 21st century (such as games like Grand Theft Auto : Vice City, a gangster game which objectives such as ‘Kill the Jury’), seem to be the perfect medium for ridding the mind of violent thoughts, in the safety of a virtual world.
The idea that videogames can be used as a channel of frustration, anger and annoyance is one that I, and most other gamers, firmly believe in. Shooting someone down in a game has no consequences, no jail sentence, no guilt, no grieving families. It’s quick, a rush of adrenaline, and quite simply, fun. It allows youths to release negative feelings, and violence, in a world where people aren’t born, they are re-generated, and people don’t have skin or teeth, but are made of pixels and shapes. And surely taking out anger in a virtual world is infinitely times better than leaving home with a baseball bat in one hand and a shotgun in the other?
If people who play games can switch off a game (for example, a shoot ‘em up) where guns are key and killing is an objective and go out to converse with non-gamers without trying to kill someone, or even just hurt someone, surely the argument that video games encourage violence is void. Unfortunately, the media, amongst other things, seem to enjoy emphasising this concept that video games cause violence. And it is not only this subject the media over-exaggerates, for example, paedophilia was almost as rife 100 years ago as it is today, but only recently has the media (especially tabloids) made name-and-shame campaigns common place. And with many people in high political positions blaming events such as the Birmingham deaths on music (and also violent games) with very little evidence except content and lyrics to go by, it is not really fair to say this.
“While it is quite possible that fixation on violent video games may herald problems for a disturbed child, the average child probably just plays his games and grows up fine” – An excellent quote which sums up essentially what the gaming community feel about video game violence.
Videogames, contrary to popular belief, are not a spark to discover hidden desires to hurt in society. They do not encourage violence, which is proven simply by the fact that of the millions of people who plays games on a weekly or daily basis, there are only a few cases of assault or murder which can be partly related to games, and an even smaller amount of attacks which can be completely linked to violence in videogames. A recent incident in America where a boy was shot in an internet café after beating another youth at a violent war game was immediately blamed on the fact that the youth had beaten the other player, and was boasting. However, it was later found that there was a long-standing grudge between the two boys, a prime example of how videogames are simply an ‘easy option’ for people looking for a motive for an attack.
A game, or its content, is not enough to make a mentally stable human cause or perform in a violent or illegal act. In the same way that those who play games where jumping is the key don’t attempt to run and launch themselves 30 metres in the air, those who play games where the basic idea is to kill to progress don’t go outside with a machine gun, ready to rip havoc. Quite conversely, they go out feeling good, and have let out frustration on computer generated things rather than real people. And this is all without any negative consequences.
Unfortunately, the popular belief that games are key to violence amongst youths will probably stay, mainly due to the ignorance of the people who choose to keep the stereotype. However, by censoring these games, or there content, they will simply become more sought after, and developers will make more gory, more violent games as a result, through the simple law of supply the demand. And maybe having a break from reality is something all of us, old and young, should invest in once in a while.
Thanks for reading and all comments welcomed.
The idea that videogames can be used as a channel of frustration, anger and annoyance is one that I, and most other gamers, firmly believe in. Shooting someone down in a game has no consequences, no jail sentence, no guilt, no grieving families. It’s quick, a rush of adrenaline, and quite simply, fun. It allows youths to release negative feelings, and violence, in a world where people aren’t born, they are re-generated, and people don’t have skin or teeth, but are made of pixels and shapes. And surely taking out anger in a virtual world is infinitely times better than leaving home with a baseball bat in one hand and a shotgun in the other?
If people who play games can switch off a game (for example, a shoot ‘em up) where guns are key and killing is an objective and go out to converse with non-gamers without trying to kill someone, or even just hurt someone, surely the argument that video games encourage violence is void. Unfortunately, the media, amongst other things, seem to enjoy emphasising this concept that video games cause violence. And it is not only this subject the media over-exaggerates, for example, paedophilia was almost as rife 100 years ago as it is today, but only recently has the media (especially tabloids) made name-and-shame campaigns common place. And with many people in high political positions blaming events such as the Birmingham deaths on music (and also violent games) with very little evidence except content and lyrics to go by, it is not really fair to say this.
“While it is quite possible that fixation on violent video games may herald problems for a disturbed child, the average child probably just plays his games and grows up fine” – An excellent quote which sums up essentially what the gaming community feel about video game violence.
Videogames, contrary to popular belief, are not a spark to discover hidden desires to hurt in society. They do not encourage violence, which is proven simply by the fact that of the millions of people who plays games on a weekly or daily basis, there are only a few cases of assault or murder which can be partly related to games, and an even smaller amount of attacks which can be completely linked to violence in videogames. A recent incident in America where a boy was shot in an internet café after beating another youth at a violent war game was immediately blamed on the fact that the youth had beaten the other player, and was boasting. However, it was later found that there was a long-standing grudge between the two boys, a prime example of how videogames are simply an ‘easy option’ for people looking for a motive for an attack.
A game, or its content, is not enough to make a mentally stable human cause or perform in a violent or illegal act. In the same way that those who play games where jumping is the key don’t attempt to run and launch themselves 30 metres in the air, those who play games where the basic idea is to kill to progress don’t go outside with a machine gun, ready to rip havoc. Quite conversely, they go out feeling good, and have let out frustration on computer generated things rather than real people. And this is all without any negative consequences.
Unfortunately, the popular belief that games are key to violence amongst youths will probably stay, mainly due to the ignorance of the people who choose to keep the stereotype. However, by censoring these games, or there content, they will simply become more sought after, and developers will make more gory, more violent games as a result, through the simple law of supply the demand. And maybe having a break from reality is something all of us, old and young, should invest in once in a while.
Thanks for reading and all comments welcomed.