The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
***
Three Kids at my school in a younger year:
kid 1: where the hell is my gun?
kid 2: actually i want to do it Tenchu style and slice someones neck!
kid 3: humming the goldeneye theme tune and pretending to have a gun while running around the playground!
narrator: Kids 1and 2 have argument other who shot who first and why they aint lying on the floor dead.
they start to fight and it turns into a punch up.
The tenchu kid runs out and slices there necks with his fingers and laughs.
The other two get up and beat th crap out of him whiile doing wrestling moves with random foreign objects.
One of them gets hurt, through the act of violence!
****
And yet where am I going with this seemingly weird story, well I have been reading the posts in the last few days on video game violence, and so far everyone seems to have there own fair point.
With this new topic of my very own I have decided to air my never heard before views.
In one way or another most games present violence to anyone that plays them wether it be through the act of a slicing of the neck or simply shooting someone in the head. Children are incouraged to not go into violence, but how can they do this if everthing they view has sources of violence in it. TV has violence (Phil just got shot in eastenders, a day previous he had a fight including a metal pole), films have it (nearly every film has violence), and yes games have violence. (Kingpin being probably the best example because the majority of the people that brought it were 14).
Governments and Parents solely blame the games for the violence outbreaks, sure in Japan kids copy what they have seen to the point of murders, and yes sure kids pretend to be Bond at school, with outpointed fingers or the dreaded pencil case attack.
Surely TV and films have also influenced some of this?
Wrestling matches are aired on TV and Wrestling is so popular now (Ant), that how can kids avoid to copy there so called idols moves! The incredible choke slam, or the Rock Bottom are two moves that can hurt a lot.
Sure Kids copy what they have seen in games, they probably copy it more because they have played the game and been a part of the action, but Kids just want to have fun and surely kids mucking around over who is Bond and Joanna, is better then them copying the Bruce Lee kicks from a film. (not a good idea, believe me).
I can assure anyone here that the games of the future will get more and more graphic and violent, but kids wont get more and more dangerous because the element of violence has always been here, and always will.
Thanks.
er-no
Three Kids at my school in a younger year:
kid 1: where the hell is my gun?
kid 2: actually i want to do it Tenchu style and slice someones neck!
kid 3: humming the goldeneye theme tune and pretending to have a gun while running around the playground!
narrator: Kids 1and 2 have argument other who shot who first and why they aint lying on the floor dead.
they start to fight and it turns into a punch up.
The tenchu kid runs out and slices there necks with his fingers and laughs.
The other two get up and beat th crap out of him whiile doing wrestling moves with random foreign objects.
One of them gets hurt, through the act of violence!
****
And yet where am I going with this seemingly weird story, well I have been reading the posts in the last few days on video game violence, and so far everyone seems to have there own fair point.
With this new topic of my very own I have decided to air my never heard before views.
In one way or another most games present violence to anyone that plays them wether it be through the act of a slicing of the neck or simply shooting someone in the head. Children are incouraged to not go into violence, but how can they do this if everthing they view has sources of violence in it. TV has violence (Phil just got shot in eastenders, a day previous he had a fight including a metal pole), films have it (nearly every film has violence), and yes games have violence. (Kingpin being probably the best example because the majority of the people that brought it were 14).
Governments and Parents solely blame the games for the violence outbreaks, sure in Japan kids copy what they have seen to the point of murders, and yes sure kids pretend to be Bond at school, with outpointed fingers or the dreaded pencil case attack.
Surely TV and films have also influenced some of this?
Wrestling matches are aired on TV and Wrestling is so popular now (Ant), that how can kids avoid to copy there so called idols moves! The incredible choke slam, or the Rock Bottom are two moves that can hurt a lot.
Sure Kids copy what they have seen in games, they probably copy it more because they have played the game and been a part of the action, but Kids just want to have fun and surely kids mucking around over who is Bond and Joanna, is better then them copying the Bruce Lee kicks from a film. (not a good idea, believe me).
I can assure anyone here that the games of the future will get more and more graphic and violent, but kids wont get more and more dangerous because the element of violence has always been here, and always will.
Thanks.
er-no
Well... another 15 year old American has done a school shooting session...
yes i know its getting tredious now, but I thought this topic would end it for a few months!
whatever your getting wheely boring.
My go!!!!
This is one of those endless debates that we'll never truly find an answer to. There are always going to be studies that land favourably on both sides of the argument, but the important thing to remember here is that even the most carefully balanced ones will always be influenced by the original opinions of those who carried them out.
Saying that there was violence before video-games is a valid point, but, of course, there was cancer before the introduction of asbestos but we didn't hesitate to ban that. I'm not necessarily saying the two issues are one and the same, but if you could prove that there was a definitive link between some games and dangerously increased levels of violence then I think those games should be banned, or at the very least restricted.
The problem is, of course, that you'll never be able to prove a definitive link between violence and games. In order to do this, you'd have to study in-depth the actions and history of those involved in violent acts and see whether they often play violent games. In all these cases, though, you would, to be truly accurate, not only prove that they played violent games, but also that they were the sole factor in provoking the violent act. Alternatively, you could take the more general statistical approach and see whether there was a correlation between the number of violent acts committed and the amount of violent video-games consumned in a particular society or generation. However, this would also run into the problem that you would never really be able to show whether games were the sole reason for increased violence levels, simply one of many factors involved, or whether its just a coincidence that they're there at all.
I would argue that, since not everybody who plays violent video-games goes out and commits a violent act, that they cannot logically be the sole determining factor. Therefore, there may be other more important factors (such as upbringing, education, prior mental instability, easy access in some societies to firearms, etc.) that need to be looked at before we start blaming games.
This is one of those endless debates that we'll never truly find an answer to. There are always going to be studies that land favourably on both sides of the argument, but the important thing to remember here is that even the most carefully balanced ones will always be influenced by the original opinions of those who carried them out.
Saying that there was violence before video-games is a valid point, but, of course, there was cancer before the introduction of asbestos but we didn't hesitate to ban that. I'm not necessarily saying the two issues are one and the same, but if you could prove that there was a definitive link between some games and dangerously increased levels of violence then I think those games should be banned, or at the very least restricted.
The problem is, of course, that you'll never be able to prove a definitive link between violence and games. In order to do this, you'd have to study in-depth the actions and history of those involved in violent acts and see whether they often play violent games. In all these cases, though, you would, to be truly accurate, not only prove that they played violent games, but also that they were the sole factor in provoking the violent act. Alternatively, you could take the more general statistical approach and see whether there was a correlation between the number of violent acts committed and the amount of violent video-games consumned in a particular society or generation. However, this would also run into the problem that you would never really be able to show whether games were the sole reason for increased violence levels, simply one of many factors involved, or whether its just a coincidence that they're there at all.
I would argue that, since not everybody who plays violent video-games goes out and commits a violent act, that they cannot logically be the sole determining factor. Therefore, there may be other more important factors (such as upbringing, education, prior mental instability, easy access in some societies to firearms, etc.) that need to be looked at before we start blaming games.
Ah this can we again! :D
***
Three Kids at my school in a younger year:
kid 1: where the hell is my gun?
kid 2: actually i want to do it Tenchu style and slice someones neck!
kid 3: humming the goldeneye theme tune and pretending to have a gun while running around the playground!
narrator: Kids 1and 2 have argument other who shot who first and why they aint lying on the floor dead.
they start to fight and it turns into a punch up.
The tenchu kid runs out and slices there necks with his fingers and laughs.
The other two get up and beat th crap out of him whiile doing wrestling moves with random foreign objects.
One of them gets hurt, through the act of violence!
****
And yet where am I going with this seemingly weird story, well I have been reading the posts in the last few days on video game violence, and so far everyone seems to have there own fair point.
With this new topic of my very own I have decided to air my never heard before views.
In one way or another most games present violence to anyone that plays them wether it be through the act of a slicing of the neck or simply shooting someone in the head. Children are incouraged to not go into violence, but how can they do this if everthing they view has sources of violence in it. TV has violence (Phil just got shot in eastenders, a day previous he had a fight including a metal pole), films have it (nearly every film has violence), and yes games have violence. (Kingpin being probably the best example because the majority of the people that brought it were 14).
Governments and Parents solely blame the games for the violence outbreaks, sure in Japan kids copy what they have seen to the point of murders, and yes sure kids pretend to be Bond at school, with outpointed fingers or the dreaded pencil case attack.
Surely TV and films have also influenced some of this?
Wrestling matches are aired on TV and Wrestling is so popular now (Ant), that how can kids avoid to copy there so called idols moves! The incredible choke slam, or the Rock Bottom are two moves that can hurt a lot.
Sure Kids copy what they have seen in games, they probably copy it more because they have played the game and been a part of the action, but Kids just want to have fun and surely kids mucking around over who is Bond and Joanna, is better then them copying the Bruce Lee kicks from a film. (not a good idea, believe me).
I can assure anyone here that the games of the future will get more and more graphic and violent, but kids wont get more and more dangerous because the element of violence has always been here, and always will.
Thanks.
er-no
Three Kids at my school in a younger year:
kid 1: where the hell is my gun?
kid 2: actually i want to do it Tenchu style and slice someones neck!
kid 3: humming the goldeneye theme tune and pretending to have a gun while running around the playground!
narrator: Kids 1and 2 have argument other who shot who first and why they aint lying on the floor dead.
they start to fight and it turns into a punch up.
The tenchu kid runs out and slices there necks with his fingers and laughs.
The other two get up and beat th crap out of him whiile doing wrestling moves with random foreign objects.
One of them gets hurt, through the act of violence!
****
And yet where am I going with this seemingly weird story, well I have been reading the posts in the last few days on video game violence, and so far everyone seems to have there own fair point.
With this new topic of my very own I have decided to air my never heard before views.
In one way or another most games present violence to anyone that plays them wether it be through the act of a slicing of the neck or simply shooting someone in the head. Children are incouraged to not go into violence, but how can they do this if everthing they view has sources of violence in it. TV has violence (Phil just got shot in eastenders, a day previous he had a fight including a metal pole), films have it (nearly every film has violence), and yes games have violence. (Kingpin being probably the best example because the majority of the people that brought it were 14).
Governments and Parents solely blame the games for the violence outbreaks, sure in Japan kids copy what they have seen to the point of murders, and yes sure kids pretend to be Bond at school, with outpointed fingers or the dreaded pencil case attack.
Surely TV and films have also influenced some of this?
Wrestling matches are aired on TV and Wrestling is so popular now (Ant), that how can kids avoid to copy there so called idols moves! The incredible choke slam, or the Rock Bottom are two moves that can hurt a lot.
Sure Kids copy what they have seen in games, they probably copy it more because they have played the game and been a part of the action, but Kids just want to have fun and surely kids mucking around over who is Bond and Joanna, is better then them copying the Bruce Lee kicks from a film. (not a good idea, believe me).
I can assure anyone here that the games of the future will get more and more graphic and violent, but kids wont get more and more dangerous because the element of violence has always been here, and always will.
Thanks.
er-no