The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Hello everyone. Years ago I wrote a discurrsive essay on whether or not video games promote gun violence. I have however been given another discurrsive essay to do on whether or not video games promote violent behaviour. I obviously couldn't hand in the same essay twice because my first one was on a slightly different topic and is not at quite as high a standard. I have however not put it to waste. I have taken the same basic essay and changed most of it in an attempt to make it acceptable. However I don't believe I have done a very good job and any help/ opinions would be greatly appreciated. Well with out further a do here is my essay, don't laugh! -
--------------------------
Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?
The question “Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” arises every few years normally triggered by a gun tragedy or when an extremely violent video game is released such as Postal 2. Whether or not they are actually responsible for the rise of gun crimes and other forms of violent behaviour however is a matter of serious debate. Recent figures show that crime as a whole has risen over the past few years and that gun crimes have doubled since they were banned! Britain may be the most unlikely country in Europe for you to be shot in but as long as that risk is there we have to deal with such violent behaviour in the best way we can. Should video games be targeted as the reason for these figures though? Or are we just using them as a scapegoat?
In America it is not uncommon for 10-year-old boys and girls to play up to 6 hours of video games per week and spend at least 1 hour a week at an arcade. Is it really a surprise that many of this time-spent gaming is gaming on games, which involve a great deal of violence, swearing and worse? Arguably one of the most controversial games of all time is Grand Theft Auto III and many people would argue that games likes these have become so realistic that it is hard for some people to draw the line between fiction and the reality.
Games such as these have been attacked on several occasions buy disgruntled parents and so on who believe that these games give impressionable youths a gaming experience with little morals that could quite easily be reality. To a certain extent this is true however technology will progress and games will become more realistic. It is not the fault of the games industry if easily influenced people take these works of fiction into reality. Children are obviously more likely to take what they see as fact with out question and showing them something as realistic as a video game may give them a distorted outlook on reality. As 13-year-old Lawrence Jones says in New York “It is as close as you can get to killing someone without being arrested or really killing someone.” And arguably if a young teenager finds a game so realistic that the next step towards reality is to murder someone it is understandable that people think that video games are a bit too realistic for store shelves.
Although there are a few “wholesome” family games out on the market such as Rayman, there are a much larger variety of games that have violence within them. This may anger parents and so on but they do sell a lot more copies. These story lines are there fore regarded, as a cause for increasing violence such as street crime. The fact that in many video games you not only HAVE to kill someone to progress to the next stage but you gain extra points for shooting people puts a positive spin on murder which is not wanted by many parents who buy these games for their children. In Grand Theft Auto III for example you earn yourself extra points by first sleeping with a prostitute and then shooting her to get your money back. This game and many of it’s sequels / prequels however were in such great demand for Christmas that they sold out in shops all over the UK! For so many people to be playing such a violent game it’s violent content can become second nature to people and even an addiction. This is why many parents and other people who are morally against violent video games find it hard to accept that they are “just a video game”.
Arguably the most demonstrable reason why people think that video games are responsible for gun violence is celebrity influence. Going to the cinema is used by many people as a form of escapism and when movie stars come to the gaming market the games double in more than just price. They double in credibility. Whenever a blockbuster film is released it is a safe bet that a video game based on it will appear sooner or later and when you are playing a fictional super hero portrayed by a world famous actor you can very easily be influenced by the video game. Some games such as first person shooters involve you controlling what a character on the screen does in every way and some people would argue that if you are learning how to fire real weapons used by your favourite actors then you are very likely to take notice of what is being done and you are more likely to act upon what you have learned. If this is proven true then this will effectively prove that there is a link between video games and the rise of violent behaviour such as street crime.
I will now progress to why I think that video games aren’t responsible for gun violence. Obviously murdering someone is not something many people do at all but we have to ask ourselves why not? If you argue that video games influence people to shoot one another you must ask why everyone who plays a violent video game doesn’t go out and shoot someone? The answer to this is; video games aren’t the cause of violent behaviour. The people who take it upon themselves to fire a gun are entirely responsible. The fact that most of these people already have mental problems or have had something traumatic happen in their life is what influences them not the creative works of others. It is not the video games that are to blame; it is the people who play them and I will attempt to prove it in the following parts of my essay.
Firstly we must acknowledge the fact that video games are only a small part of the media and can’t be totally to blame. Music, News, TV and Movies. All of these are just as or more violent than video games yet they are often deemed acceptable by society. If one form of media is the cause of violent behaviour then surely all these other forms of media must incite violence as well? However if other forms of media are just as violent as a video game or more violent than a video game then logically they are either all to blame or all acceptable and as the majority are accepted by society they must all be acceptable.
As well as looking at the path that lies before us which is the inevitable advancements of realism in video games we must also look at the path behind us. Violence has been around for millions of years and we can see that it is nothing new to society. If we go back in time as long ago as the time of the Roman Empire we will find out that people actually engaged in savage fights on a regular basis! Some times to the death. In many ways we have evolved from that and some would argue that video games are actually a safe way to release all our violent tensions in a safe environment. I agree with this argument one hundred percent and like most other people I am not a violent person.
In conclusion the answer to “Video Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” is no. I have reviewed the evidence and I believe that if you banned all video games tomorrow it would not stop violent behaviour. Video games such a Grand Theft Auto III have been banned in countries before and as 13-year-old Robert Crawford says “ I just think it makes it more exciting ‘cause you’re not supposed to have it” this is undeniable evidence that if you banned violent video games that people would just want them more. It happened when guns were banned and it will happen again if you do it to video games. When you actually consider all the possibilities the root of the problem is something very different and quite unrelated to video games. They do not promote violent behaviour they simply incorporate it.
By Stephen ******
AKA
Cubist
----------------------------
Well what did you all think? Any help/opinions would be great remember:D
--------------------------
Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?
The question “Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” arises every few years normally triggered by a gun tragedy or when an extremely violent video game is released such as Postal 2. Whether or not they are actually responsible for the rise of gun crimes and other forms of violent behaviour however is a matter of serious debate. Recent figures show that crime as a whole has risen over the past few years and that gun crimes have doubled since they were banned! Britain may be the most unlikely country in Europe for you to be shot in but as long as that risk is there we have to deal with such violent behaviour in the best way we can. Should video games be targeted as the reason for these figures though? Or are we just using them as a scapegoat?
In America it is not uncommon for 10-year-old boys and girls to play up to 6 hours of video games per week and spend at least 1 hour a week at an arcade. Is it really a surprise that many of this time-spent gaming is gaming on games, which involve a great deal of violence, swearing and worse? Arguably one of the most controversial games of all time is Grand Theft Auto III and many people would argue that games likes these have become so realistic that it is hard for some people to draw the line between fiction and the reality.
Games such as these have been attacked on several occasions buy disgruntled parents and so on who believe that these games give impressionable youths a gaming experience with little morals that could quite easily be reality. To a certain extent this is true however technology will progress and games will become more realistic. It is not the fault of the games industry if easily influenced people take these works of fiction into reality. Children are obviously more likely to take what they see as fact with out question and showing them something as realistic as a video game may give them a distorted outlook on reality. As 13-year-old Lawrence Jones says in New York “It is as close as you can get to killing someone without being arrested or really killing someone.” And arguably if a young teenager finds a game so realistic that the next step towards reality is to murder someone it is understandable that people think that video games are a bit too realistic for store shelves.
Although there are a few “wholesome” family games out on the market such as Rayman, there are a much larger variety of games that have violence within them. This may anger parents and so on but they do sell a lot more copies. These story lines are there fore regarded, as a cause for increasing violence such as street crime. The fact that in many video games you not only HAVE to kill someone to progress to the next stage but you gain extra points for shooting people puts a positive spin on murder which is not wanted by many parents who buy these games for their children. In Grand Theft Auto III for example you earn yourself extra points by first sleeping with a prostitute and then shooting her to get your money back. This game and many of it’s sequels / prequels however were in such great demand for Christmas that they sold out in shops all over the UK! For so many people to be playing such a violent game it’s violent content can become second nature to people and even an addiction. This is why many parents and other people who are morally against violent video games find it hard to accept that they are “just a video game”.
Arguably the most demonstrable reason why people think that video games are responsible for gun violence is celebrity influence. Going to the cinema is used by many people as a form of escapism and when movie stars come to the gaming market the games double in more than just price. They double in credibility. Whenever a blockbuster film is released it is a safe bet that a video game based on it will appear sooner or later and when you are playing a fictional super hero portrayed by a world famous actor you can very easily be influenced by the video game. Some games such as first person shooters involve you controlling what a character on the screen does in every way and some people would argue that if you are learning how to fire real weapons used by your favourite actors then you are very likely to take notice of what is being done and you are more likely to act upon what you have learned. If this is proven true then this will effectively prove that there is a link between video games and the rise of violent behaviour such as street crime.
I will now progress to why I think that video games aren’t responsible for gun violence. Obviously murdering someone is not something many people do at all but we have to ask ourselves why not? If you argue that video games influence people to shoot one another you must ask why everyone who plays a violent video game doesn’t go out and shoot someone? The answer to this is; video games aren’t the cause of violent behaviour. The people who take it upon themselves to fire a gun are entirely responsible. The fact that most of these people already have mental problems or have had something traumatic happen in their life is what influences them not the creative works of others. It is not the video games that are to blame; it is the people who play them and I will attempt to prove it in the following parts of my essay.
Firstly we must acknowledge the fact that video games are only a small part of the media and can’t be totally to blame. Music, News, TV and Movies. All of these are just as or more violent than video games yet they are often deemed acceptable by society. If one form of media is the cause of violent behaviour then surely all these other forms of media must incite violence as well? However if other forms of media are just as violent as a video game or more violent than a video game then logically they are either all to blame or all acceptable and as the majority are accepted by society they must all be acceptable.
As well as looking at the path that lies before us which is the inevitable advancements of realism in video games we must also look at the path behind us. Violence has been around for millions of years and we can see that it is nothing new to society. If we go back in time as long ago as the time of the Roman Empire we will find out that people actually engaged in savage fights on a regular basis! Some times to the death. In many ways we have evolved from that and some would argue that video games are actually a safe way to release all our violent tensions in a safe environment. I agree with this argument one hundred percent and like most other people I am not a violent person.
In conclusion the answer to “Video Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” is no. I have reviewed the evidence and I believe that if you banned all video games tomorrow it would not stop violent behaviour. Video games such a Grand Theft Auto III have been banned in countries before and as 13-year-old Robert Crawford says “ I just think it makes it more exciting ‘cause you’re not supposed to have it” this is undeniable evidence that if you banned violent video games that people would just want them more. It happened when guns were banned and it will happen again if you do it to video games. When you actually consider all the possibilities the root of the problem is something very different and quite unrelated to video games. They do not promote violent behaviour they simply incorporate it.
By Stephen ******
AKA
Cubist
----------------------------
Well what did you all think? Any help/opinions would be great remember:D
Page:
You might want to mention the fact that most violent games have an 18 certificate and most of the times the problem could be to do with poor parenting and not taking enough interest in their childs hobbies and maybe educate them more in what is right and wrong.
Didn't read it all, just skimmed through. Just hope the person who marks it isn't one of those mongs who believes games are the work of the devil.
Didn't read it all, just skimmed through. Just hope the person who marks it isn't one of those mongs who believes games are the work of the devil.
tl:dr
Hello everyone. Years ago I wrote a discurrsive essay on whether or not video games promote gun violence. I have however been given another discurrsive essay to do on whether or not video games promote violent behaviour. I obviously couldn't hand in the same essay twice because my first one was on a slightly different topic and is not at quite as high a standard. I have however not put it to waste. I have taken the same basic essay and changed most of it in an attempt to make it acceptable. However I don't believe I have done a very good job and any help/ opinions would be greatly appreciated. Well with out further a do here is my essay, don't laugh! -
--------------------------
Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?
The question “Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” arises every few years normally triggered by a gun tragedy or when an extremely violent video game is released such as Postal 2. Whether or not they are actually responsible for the rise of gun crimes and other forms of violent behaviour however is a matter of serious debate. Recent figures show that crime as a whole has risen over the past few years and that gun crimes have doubled since they were banned! Britain may be the most unlikely country in Europe for you to be shot in but as long as that risk is there we have to deal with such violent behaviour in the best way we can. Should video games be targeted as the reason for these figures though? Or are we just using them as a scapegoat?
In America it is not uncommon for 10-year-old boys and girls to play up to 6 hours of video games per week and spend at least 1 hour a week at an arcade. Is it really a surprise that many of this time-spent gaming is gaming on games, which involve a great deal of violence, swearing and worse? Arguably one of the most controversial games of all time is Grand Theft Auto III and many people would argue that games likes these have become so realistic that it is hard for some people to draw the line between fiction and the reality.
Games such as these have been attacked on several occasions buy disgruntled parents and so on who believe that these games give impressionable youths a gaming experience with little morals that could quite easily be reality. To a certain extent this is true however technology will progress and games will become more realistic. It is not the fault of the games industry if easily influenced people take these works of fiction into reality. Children are obviously more likely to take what they see as fact with out question and showing them something as realistic as a video game may give them a distorted outlook on reality. As 13-year-old Lawrence Jones says in New York “It is as close as you can get to killing someone without being arrested or really killing someone.” And arguably if a young teenager finds a game so realistic that the next step towards reality is to murder someone it is understandable that people think that video games are a bit too realistic for store shelves.
Although there are a few “wholesome” family games out on the market such as Rayman, there are a much larger variety of games that have violence within them. This may anger parents and so on but they do sell a lot more copies. These story lines are there fore regarded, as a cause for increasing violence such as street crime. The fact that in many video games you not only HAVE to kill someone to progress to the next stage but you gain extra points for shooting people puts a positive spin on murder which is not wanted by many parents who buy these games for their children. In Grand Theft Auto III for example you earn yourself extra points by first sleeping with a prostitute and then shooting her to get your money back. This game and many of it’s sequels / prequels however were in such great demand for Christmas that they sold out in shops all over the UK! For so many people to be playing such a violent game it’s violent content can become second nature to people and even an addiction. This is why many parents and other people who are morally against violent video games find it hard to accept that they are “just a video game”.
Arguably the most demonstrable reason why people think that video games are responsible for gun violence is celebrity influence. Going to the cinema is used by many people as a form of escapism and when movie stars come to the gaming market the games double in more than just price. They double in credibility. Whenever a blockbuster film is released it is a safe bet that a video game based on it will appear sooner or later and when you are playing a fictional super hero portrayed by a world famous actor you can very easily be influenced by the video game. Some games such as first person shooters involve you controlling what a character on the screen does in every way and some people would argue that if you are learning how to fire real weapons used by your favourite actors then you are very likely to take notice of what is being done and you are more likely to act upon what you have learned. If this is proven true then this will effectively prove that there is a link between video games and the rise of violent behaviour such as street crime.
I will now progress to why I think that video games aren’t responsible for gun violence. Obviously murdering someone is not something many people do at all but we have to ask ourselves why not? If you argue that video games influence people to shoot one another you must ask why everyone who plays a violent video game doesn’t go out and shoot someone? The answer to this is; video games aren’t the cause of violent behaviour. The people who take it upon themselves to fire a gun are entirely responsible. The fact that most of these people already have mental problems or have had something traumatic happen in their life is what influences them not the creative works of others. It is not the video games that are to blame; it is the people who play them and I will attempt to prove it in the following parts of my essay.
Firstly we must acknowledge the fact that video games are only a small part of the media and can’t be totally to blame. Music, News, TV and Movies. All of these are just as or more violent than video games yet they are often deemed acceptable by society. If one form of media is the cause of violent behaviour then surely all these other forms of media must incite violence as well? However if other forms of media are just as violent as a video game or more violent than a video game then logically they are either all to blame or all acceptable and as the majority are accepted by society they must all be acceptable.
As well as looking at the path that lies before us which is the inevitable advancements of realism in video games we must also look at the path behind us. Violence has been around for millions of years and we can see that it is nothing new to society. If we go back in time as long ago as the time of the Roman Empire we will find out that people actually engaged in savage fights on a regular basis! Some times to the death. In many ways we have evolved from that and some would argue that video games are actually a safe way to release all our violent tensions in a safe environment. I agree with this argument one hundred percent and like most other people I am not a violent person.
In conclusion the answer to “Video Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” is no. I have reviewed the evidence and I believe that if you banned all video games tomorrow it would not stop violent behaviour. Video games such a Grand Theft Auto III have been banned in countries before and as 13-year-old Robert Crawford says “ I just think it makes it more exciting ‘cause you’re not supposed to have it” this is undeniable evidence that if you banned violent video games that people would just want them more. It happened when guns were banned and it will happen again if you do it to video games. When you actually consider all the possibilities the root of the problem is something very different and quite unrelated to video games. They do not promote violent behaviour they simply incorporate it.
By Stephen ******
AKA
Cubist
----------------------------
Well what did you all think? Any help/opinions would be great remember:D
--------------------------
Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?
The question “Games Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” arises every few years normally triggered by a gun tragedy or when an extremely violent video game is released such as Postal 2. Whether or not they are actually responsible for the rise of gun crimes and other forms of violent behaviour however is a matter of serious debate. Recent figures show that crime as a whole has risen over the past few years and that gun crimes have doubled since they were banned! Britain may be the most unlikely country in Europe for you to be shot in but as long as that risk is there we have to deal with such violent behaviour in the best way we can. Should video games be targeted as the reason for these figures though? Or are we just using them as a scapegoat?
In America it is not uncommon for 10-year-old boys and girls to play up to 6 hours of video games per week and spend at least 1 hour a week at an arcade. Is it really a surprise that many of this time-spent gaming is gaming on games, which involve a great deal of violence, swearing and worse? Arguably one of the most controversial games of all time is Grand Theft Auto III and many people would argue that games likes these have become so realistic that it is hard for some people to draw the line between fiction and the reality.
Games such as these have been attacked on several occasions buy disgruntled parents and so on who believe that these games give impressionable youths a gaming experience with little morals that could quite easily be reality. To a certain extent this is true however technology will progress and games will become more realistic. It is not the fault of the games industry if easily influenced people take these works of fiction into reality. Children are obviously more likely to take what they see as fact with out question and showing them something as realistic as a video game may give them a distorted outlook on reality. As 13-year-old Lawrence Jones says in New York “It is as close as you can get to killing someone without being arrested or really killing someone.” And arguably if a young teenager finds a game so realistic that the next step towards reality is to murder someone it is understandable that people think that video games are a bit too realistic for store shelves.
Although there are a few “wholesome” family games out on the market such as Rayman, there are a much larger variety of games that have violence within them. This may anger parents and so on but they do sell a lot more copies. These story lines are there fore regarded, as a cause for increasing violence such as street crime. The fact that in many video games you not only HAVE to kill someone to progress to the next stage but you gain extra points for shooting people puts a positive spin on murder which is not wanted by many parents who buy these games for their children. In Grand Theft Auto III for example you earn yourself extra points by first sleeping with a prostitute and then shooting her to get your money back. This game and many of it’s sequels / prequels however were in such great demand for Christmas that they sold out in shops all over the UK! For so many people to be playing such a violent game it’s violent content can become second nature to people and even an addiction. This is why many parents and other people who are morally against violent video games find it hard to accept that they are “just a video game”.
Arguably the most demonstrable reason why people think that video games are responsible for gun violence is celebrity influence. Going to the cinema is used by many people as a form of escapism and when movie stars come to the gaming market the games double in more than just price. They double in credibility. Whenever a blockbuster film is released it is a safe bet that a video game based on it will appear sooner or later and when you are playing a fictional super hero portrayed by a world famous actor you can very easily be influenced by the video game. Some games such as first person shooters involve you controlling what a character on the screen does in every way and some people would argue that if you are learning how to fire real weapons used by your favourite actors then you are very likely to take notice of what is being done and you are more likely to act upon what you have learned. If this is proven true then this will effectively prove that there is a link between video games and the rise of violent behaviour such as street crime.
I will now progress to why I think that video games aren’t responsible for gun violence. Obviously murdering someone is not something many people do at all but we have to ask ourselves why not? If you argue that video games influence people to shoot one another you must ask why everyone who plays a violent video game doesn’t go out and shoot someone? The answer to this is; video games aren’t the cause of violent behaviour. The people who take it upon themselves to fire a gun are entirely responsible. The fact that most of these people already have mental problems or have had something traumatic happen in their life is what influences them not the creative works of others. It is not the video games that are to blame; it is the people who play them and I will attempt to prove it in the following parts of my essay.
Firstly we must acknowledge the fact that video games are only a small part of the media and can’t be totally to blame. Music, News, TV and Movies. All of these are just as or more violent than video games yet they are often deemed acceptable by society. If one form of media is the cause of violent behaviour then surely all these other forms of media must incite violence as well? However if other forms of media are just as violent as a video game or more violent than a video game then logically they are either all to blame or all acceptable and as the majority are accepted by society they must all be acceptable.
As well as looking at the path that lies before us which is the inevitable advancements of realism in video games we must also look at the path behind us. Violence has been around for millions of years and we can see that it is nothing new to society. If we go back in time as long ago as the time of the Roman Empire we will find out that people actually engaged in savage fights on a regular basis! Some times to the death. In many ways we have evolved from that and some would argue that video games are actually a safe way to release all our violent tensions in a safe environment. I agree with this argument one hundred percent and like most other people I am not a violent person.
In conclusion the answer to “Video Consoles – Do They Promote Violent Behaviour?” is no. I have reviewed the evidence and I believe that if you banned all video games tomorrow it would not stop violent behaviour. Video games such a Grand Theft Auto III have been banned in countries before and as 13-year-old Robert Crawford says “ I just think it makes it more exciting ‘cause you’re not supposed to have it” this is undeniable evidence that if you banned violent video games that people would just want them more. It happened when guns were banned and it will happen again if you do it to video games. When you actually consider all the possibilities the root of the problem is something very different and quite unrelated to video games. They do not promote violent behaviour they simply incorporate it.
By Stephen ******
AKA
Cubist
----------------------------
Well what did you all think? Any help/opinions would be great remember:D
Page: