Are Violent games really blameless?
A news report today in the UK tells of how a 17 year old boy brutally murdered his mate by battering him with a claw hammer and then stabbing him several times. He had called around to his house with these items in his bag and obviously had thought about the attack before.
The victims parents have claimed that an addiction to the game 'Manhunt' has a large part to play in the mental state of the murderer, which of course lead me to may normal replies "Well he shouldn't have been playing an 18 certified game when he is 17", " The boy's obviously got problems that the video game served rather than mastered" and so on.
But, and this is a big but, it does make me wonder what these types of games do to the minds of young people. I'm no prude in gaming and most of my favourite games are ones where I go around shooting people, looking for the headshot from 200 metres and so forth. In the 20 years that i have been gaming I don't feel that my exposure to violent images have effected me greatly, I just wonder what kind of effect they have had though.
I would never want a ban on violent games (that would wipe out everything but EA Sports! and that is a far worse crime to humanity), but I am interested (probably for the first serious time in my life) to question the validity of some games and the purpose for them. As a veteran gamer I've seen (as I'm sure many of you have) this argument come and go for years, but I would be facinated to see what you guys think.
We know the truth about these games, we have the experience that the media lack, can we stand back and be objective? Myself included...
sure. people iced other people with claw hammers before video games. nuff said.
also, it seems the parents have a lot of explaining to do when their children become little Lizzie Bordens, so why not start blaming marylin manson and grand theft auto.
Lizzie Borden''s parents might have blamed her actions on a particularly rowdy game of hop-scotch...had they not been the folks she axed.
A note left at the scene simply read: "Pwn3d" - Hubbinsd
I''m pretty liberal about violent games, but lately they do seem to be a bit over the top in the ""realistic"" department. Manhunt and GTA specially.
The more exposure a violent idea has, the more likely a willing receptor will consider it a ""good idea"". Videogames can be more potent that movies in that you''re way more focused in them.
So they can influence an already affected mind, they may not be the long term cause, but I can see how they can act as a ""trigger"" in a minority of the cases. But sick minds will snap from one source or another. There''s plenty of ""gruesome"" crimes in parts of the world where they still have no electricity.
That''s from a ""young adult"" perspective, I do have to wonder about kids growing up with videogames now.
The man wears a bucket of KFC on his head. I wouldn't expect anything less. - Pred
I agree of course with the fact that Violence was not invented by video games, just as sex wasn''t invented by porn. I suppose the question I am asking is whether it has no effect at all. Would that boy have murdered his victim without the stimulus of ''Manhunt'' or was he a complete wacko. Probably the latter but can the games we play really have no effect on our thought process at all?
i do believe they affect our thought process. i played EQ for 6 months and it definately warped me for the duration.
still, mex put it well, you need to be on the verge of going wacko, video-games or not.
i don''t think you go from rational responsible person to nutjob after playing manhunt.
i think you may very well go from wacked out nutjob to wacked out nutjob with a hammer and an address after playing manhunt.
A note left at the scene simply read: "Pwn3d" - Hubbinsd
Obviously we can''t cover everybody with a blanket yes or no statement, but from personal experience I''d say they don''t.
If I play a driving game and then head off to work, I don''t want to drive any faster or more offensively than I normally would. If the game doesn''t get me to consider pushing down another half inch on the accelerator, I cannot accept that its a game that helps some poorly wired kid to decide to actually murder someone.
Got any toast?
Yes and no. Research, e.g. by Bandura et al, has shown that there''s also the chance that the person to perceive violence might identify himself/herself with the victim - ultimately not considering aggression as a valid tool. Now videogames are a different topic, just wanted to point that out.
As Dr Awkward said, there''s no general ''yes'' or ''no'' since some handle perceived violence in a different way than others do. Of course, there''s always anecdotal evidence a la ""I''ve played games for more than 15 years and I have yet to kill someone!"" and I guess we can agree that it''s not a videogame that turns someone into a murderer, but I certainly would say that they do desensitize people towards violence. Now that again can mean that someone simply is capable of handling violence better than others, e.g. not being that disturbed than some brutal is being shown. Others, however, may consider it an acceptable method to achieve something - also because it does not appear to be that aggressive/violent to them. Now there''s no denying that in the case of murder there seriously had to be wrong something with the person in and its social environment in the first place. Games may be an inspiration, but they''re hardly the sole cause. It''s stupid to blame a game and not look deeper into this case. Of course, it also is the easist way to cope with the situation. It''s reasoning like this that got a company like Nintendo (!) sued after the Columbine massacre.
Still, Manhunt does seem like a questionable game to me. Not because it could turn anyone into a murderer - which it can''t. The content looks ''odd'' nonetheless. I remember the games that were considered ''edgy'' 5, 10 or 15 years ago - titles like Mortal Kombat, Wolfenstein 3D or Airborne Rangers - and can''t help but smile at the level of violence demonstrated in those compared to some games nowadays. Manhunt does look disturbing to me and I can only imagine what a person that''s not into games would think if he/she was to read about what the player can and has to do in the game. As Chris stated in ther Manhunt thread below, it also makes you wonder about what developers will come up next to top this.
And what ultimately angers me is that the whole violence issue (or sex) gives games a spotlight that don''t deserve that much attention. As far as I saw Manhunt it wasn''t really an übergame. Same for titles like Postal 2 or BMX XXX. But they got a lot more coverage than other games simply due to their nature. And that''s something the marketing department take into account and anticipate. Remember Manhunt being banned in Newzealand? Not a big loss for Rockstar since the market isn''t that large. But it sure get the game into the headlines. And it being banned in Germany now only helps spark some interest and curiosity in people who didn''t care that much about the game before.
I totally agree. The game itself could not be the sole cause because this would lead to several hundred kids lying dead in the street on release day.
It is also obvious that the media have no idea at all what they are talking about and only want to sensationalise the story and point the finger at someone. Rap music, death metal, voilent films and games etc.
Whereas society itself and bad parenting have a lot to answer for in the creation of those that carry out these atrocities.
But as we move into an era of photrealistic games should we really have games coming out that portray intense violence and have you take part? I remember years ago playing Barbarian on my ZX Spectrum and taking great joy in executing a move that resulted in my opponents head flying off. A servant gremlin then came on and dragged off his carcass kicking the decapitated head along the ground. It was funny and because of the low level of animation not in the least realistic. Now when I''m playing games like Rainbow Six 3 (Which I love) the graphics are a lot more realistic, although not filmic yet. when the next generation of consoles and graphic cards comes out the detail level will jump up and it can''t be long before we see a photorealistic game in the mould of Manhunt. That is a scary thought that doesn''t sit right with me. It''s not often that I paraphrase Jurrasic Park but it sums up the quandry I feel at the moment;
""The developers spent more time thinking about whether they could than whether they should.""
Am i just getting old? Never in computer history have games reached the level of graphical detail they are at now, we are moving into uncharted territory. I agree with you Spunior that desensitisation can have a nominal effect, or to those already a bit unbalanced give them creedance to do something. It can only be a matter of time before the governments of the world start to look at the next gen games and start to view them as virtual snuff movies. I love gaming and don''t want to see it censored and destroyed by over vealous politicians trying to make a name for themelves. Can we gamers take control of the output of publishing houses, and change them before they ruin it for everyone?
It''s comical that anyone, anywhere tries to make blanket statements about how video games, movies, books, TV, comics, music, etc. affect the human psyche, when in fact, we still know so little about it. Yes, we can predict, under specific circumstances, how someone will react to certain stimuli, but throw-in all the random variables bouncing around in everyone''s head and see how your results vary.
I am against all censorship except my own, but some people don''t think thats good enough so they will make rules to govern what I can see and do in videogames. It''s inevitable.
Let''s say it doesn''t happen when we get film quality games, what about when we are jacked into our game ala the Matrix? You know it''s gonna happen sooner or later. The ''gamer'' will then be able to kill/maim/slaughter in ''virtual'' reality. Does that mean it affects them more than it does now? Maybe the realism will make it so repulsive that no one will want to do it, and we''ll all play Colin McCrae Jr. instead.
Most likely we will see a watchdog group make some money off of violent games, they way countless organizations do with movies.
I think what we should do is form said group with a neat acronym like Gamers Against Morally Uncertain Realism (GAMUR). That way, anytime a developer wants to make a game with realistic violence, we reaise a stink about it and get paid nicely to shut-up. Then we can use the money to ''further our mandate'' you-know... cause people beleive that sh*t...
Codexica - GWJ Alliance
Well said, Spunior. Violence in the media is tricky. I think it affects you at some basic level.... making you aware of the possibilities. How an individual proceeds from there is determined my a myriad of factors.
My wife and I were talking about the teenage years last night. We were remembering how much stronger emotions can run through a young person... how overwhelming and euphoric those first crushes were, how scary it was to go to a new school and wonder if you''d fit it in and how all the little teasings and slights were so devestating. We want to protect our son from those incredible lows but are resigned to the fact that he will experience some of them nonetheless.
I also want to protect to him from a world of violence. I know that he''ll need to come to grips with it, that I can''t simply shelter him from it all. But as a parent, I''ll certainly try to minimize his exposure.
When these games came out, I was in college. I remember the visceral feel of Mortal Kombat and Wolfenstein 3D. Mortal Kombat''s violence was especially shocking and thrilling. That was over ten years ago, and I was an adult. I can still remember the feelings vividly. I can''t imagine what a child would go through encountering one of today''s violent games.
I have grown up with the computer game industry. Unlike with television or the movies, the level of realistic violence in video games has increased at an appreciable rate. I have matured right along with the industry. My ability to handle violence has expanded with games'' ability to provide it. Children today don''t have that luxury... that growing up period I had with games.
I''m not in favor of banning or censoring games. As an adult, I am capable of enjoying violent games for what they are. I believe in parental responsibility. I also believe children are more emotionally grounded when raised by more than one parent. More than two parents. I believe that there are benefits to being surrounded by an extended family and a community of adults looking after their best interest.
I don''t see that today in regards to violent media. It''s all too common to see that oblivious parent buying there 8-year old GTA. The husband and wife bringing their young children to a late night screening of ""The Rock"". Parents not caring what their kid is playing on the computer in the other room. And it''s easy to say that that parent is failing, not living up to his/her responsibility.
But there are so many! It''s not just a few parents. At some level, our communites are failing. It makes it that much harder on parents who are trying to do the right thing.
Wow! I really hadn''t intended to go off like this. I''m not arguing that there is some causality between video game violence and real violence. Or if video game violence is healthier/unhealthier than that of television''s or movie''s. I don''t think we need to censor games. I do believe that violence in games aaffect children and that we can only guess what that effect is since most of us have had the luxury of maturing along with the industry. As a community of adults, we have a responsibility to children to adopt something better than a wait-and-see approach.
- Joe
People need to wake up and realize that an addiction to a game like Manhunt is a symptom of a problem, not the source of the problem. That kid was more than likely disfunctional with violent tendencies long before he picked up a game controller.
WoW Baelgun: Omusa, Spits
From what I recall of the article the kids mother described him as ""inherently evil."" That kinda creeps me out... anyone who''s mom says that about their son really shouldn''t blame that on the games he was playing... maybe he had the Hitler gene.
Slambie is right, his fascination with Manhunt was merely an indicator of the fact that this kid was a little off-kilter - ok, a lot of kilter - My question is this, how did a minor get a mature rated game? My girlfriend, who looks younger than her 23 gets carded buying me games all the time, hell, she gets carded for R movies. Is there a different age for these ratings in the UK?
xbox live: Lester King 17
My opinion sums up to: Our parents and our peers teach us how to deal with conflict (and aggression) by their examples. If someone can take a very violent game and relate it to their life, something abuot their *life* is seriously messed up.
I recently read an article/study in my human development and learning class that showed that when children are in hostile enviroments and constantly under stress and threat of violence, it produces physical, chemical changes in their brain. The level of seratonin (neurotransmitter) goes way down, making them prone to: aggression, violence, and depression.
A game on the other hand can produce chemical changes in the brain on a very short term basis (half hour tops?), but you need to be in a literal war zone, not a simulated one, to produce the effects I described above. Here''s a way to sum it up for you:
It''s all about the home life, not the Half-Life(tm).
The more you are exposed to something, you''ll always be desensitized; whether you want to be or not. Whether its respect for women, ability to accept violence, etc.; the more you get of the opposite the more tolerant of it you become.
I''m probably one of the only people that can''t watch the planes crash into the WTC. When I still had cable(I don''t watch television anymore) I couldn''t believe they showed that, over and over and over and over and over. Tons of people dying, in real-life, and people wanted to see it?
Edit:This is in no way a commentary on 9/11 its just an example. Another would be how its very typical for men to degenerate into more and more hardcore forms of pornography.
Spiderman wouldn't sneak, Spiderman would go. -Elysium
XBL: TheZedian
Violent video games do not make me violent. But porn makes me wanna go f--- something.
So there''s that.
"Is that your blood?"
"Some of it, yeah."
I agree with you to an extent Zed, but I think that many of our reactions are hard-wired. While I think that people can get desensitized, I also think that people have inherently different thresholds. I have a cousin that throws up at the sight of blood, but his brother hunts religiously. My older brother is narcoleptic and has to take a nap if he gets too stressed out, while I don''t suffer from any stress at all. Thomas Wolfe wrote a great essay about the study of these types of things, but I''ve forgotten what it was called... Ultimately, my point is that some people are simply the way they are. If you say that obesity, homosexuality, and alcoholism are genetic aberrations, why wouldn''t a proclivity for violence be the same?
xbox live: Lester King 17
Nobody is really saying that obesity, homosexuality and alcoholism are genetic aberrations, which also drags us so far into P&C territory that it''s not even funny. If your argument is based on the supposition that these are all undisputed facts, you might want to go start a P&C thread to express it instead
"You just checked in to Hotel Califoni-getyourasskicked!" Steely Dan said to The Eagles
I don''t think he was trying to start a P&C moment, Pyro. Alcoholism has been classified as a disease for a while now, Obesity has recently been reclassified as such, and conventional wisdom has been saying that homosexuality is hardwired for a while now (don''t know what the studies say, but I imagine they back up this gradual shift in CW).
Psychotic Foreign Teenage Chicks are so hot. - Legion
I find it ironic anytime a healthy vaccinated person bitches about science...on the internet. - MaverickDago
Anything that leads us closer to Satan''s holyland is a good thing.
Do you ever walk alone like a drifter in the dark?
Not my intent at all, Pyro. And I''m sorry if I''ve offended anyone by anything I said.
xbox live: Lester King 17
It would be hard not to offend Pyro by that comment, he is all of the above.
Spiderman wouldn't sneak, Spiderman would go. -Elysium
XBL: TheZedian
If you weren''t a lady I''d say those were fighting words!
xbox live: Lester King 17
Three things here, one I didn''t think that was his intent at all, merely warning him that he was straying off topic into possible P&C territory. I just didn''t want to get something started, which it turns out happened anyway. Two, saying something is a disease is an entirely different thing than saying it''s genetic, and even further from saying it''s a genetic aberration. Genetics may play a role, but current evidence is a far cry from saying it''s the sole factor determining the innate nature of a person, which is what Lester was implying in his analogy. Three, believing that studies and scientific proof has anything to do with common wisdom on a subject leads me to believe you''d like to buy some Florida swampland from me
"You just checked in to Hotel Califoni-getyourasskicked!" Steely Dan said to The Eagles
[code:1:dc12d22d79]Zedian''s DNA Results:
GAY
BAD AT JOINT OPS
GAY
VIOLENT
SMELLS
GAY
[/code:1:dc12d22d79]
"You just checked in to Hotel Califoni-getyourasskicked!" Steely Dan said to The Eagles
You expect me to read all of that?
Spiderman wouldn't sneak, Spiderman would go. -Elysium
XBL: TheZedian
You''re the boss. Or one of them, at least.
Psychotic Foreign Teenage Chicks are so hot. - Legion
I find it ironic anytime a healthy vaccinated person bitches about science...on the internet. - MaverickDago
STOP IT STOP IT! I hate it when you guys fight!
Wasn''t that in a commercial about domestic abuse and it affecting kids?
I didn''t mean to start this type of a derail with my crazy theories... let''s please get back to kids killing other kids because of Rockstar games. OK?
xbox live: Lester King 17
This thread brought up some things I''ve been thinking about for a while now.
As an adult gamer, I''ve been playing games, violent or not, for over 25 years. In my heart, I don''t believe that playing games has changed me in any way (other than to have caused an allergic reaction to fresh air & sunshine, but I digress...).
And you know, the thing is, I LOVE the GTA series. Both III and Vice City have been my favorite games of the past few years (I went during my lunch hour at work to buy VC, in fact). And if someone would try to CENSOR me from buying these great games... well, I would be the first one up in arms. Joe Lieberman talking about controlling what games *I* buy!? How dare you, sir! I am an adult, and as such, I should be able to play whatever game I choose. Simple, right?
The catch to all this rambling is that I''ve recently become employed as an English teacher in a local high school, dealing mostly with freshmen (13-14 year olds). I relate to them a lot of times by talking about our mutual love of video games, and let me tell you... ESRB be damned. EVERY ONE of these kids either owns a copy of the GTA games or has played them extensively... most of them purchased by their parents (how else can many young kids afford a $50 game?).
I think we can all agree that parents are clueless in regards to keeping their kids away from adult games. I think that we all pretty much know that the ESRB is meaningless... and merely serves as a tool to get the government off the backs of the game industry. If parents aren''t going to do their job with this, do we just say ""oh well, it''s THEIR problem,"" while giving the industry a free pass?
I really don''t know. Right now, I am honestly worried about the upcoming release of GTA: San Andreas. Why? Well, while III and VC were violent as heck, they also featured a main character who was a member of an organized crime family. Because of this, at least to me, the games were in the ""wow, I get to pretend to play a mobster, something I could never do in real life"" kind of thing.
The more I see of San Andreas, the more I see an all too familiar world of street gangs and drive by shootings. Where I teach, we''re not a totally urban school, but we are pretty close. I already see dozens of kids a day wearing gang colors, flashing gang signs, and getting into fights. Last year, we had a shooting outside of our school right as everyone was leaving for the day. A kid in my classroom CAN''T just decide to go off and join a Mafia family after playing GTA... but he CAN easily walk out the door and join up with the type of ""gang banging"" organization featured in GTA:SA.
I know this is sort of dumb... I know that I''m probably overreacting. But I see these kids everyday... and I see their parents'' ignorance and/or indifference towards this media, and it makes me shudder to think what might be the long term result of all this sociental violence... At this point, I''m not even talking about just GTA, or just video games in general, or TV, or movies, or music... can this really be doing absolutely no harm? I honestly don''t know.
Maybe I''m just getting too old...
xbox LIVE: NatsuMatto
That's What She Said -- A Podcast About NBC's THE OFFICE
Well said Sommer. Your post here covers some of the reasons why I believe that it is the parents responsibility to bring thier kids up correctly, and as such, when these teenagers go out and commit these crimes, THE PARENTS should also be held liable. There is nothing more disgusting to me then a parent sitting there saying ""What could *I* have possibly done, it''s the movies/games/music fault!""
Stop buying them the stuff if they can''t act responsible.
Start bring your kids up to respect themselves and others.
Stop making excuses to alleviate your responsibility for what happend.
Unfortunately, if I slash my wrist with my lightsaber it cauterizes instantly. - PurEvil on emo Star Wars plots.
To add to what Ghastly wrote:
Spend actual time interacting with your kids...
I just overheard someone at work talking about kids and his idea was, to me, just great. He was talking about how he''s sick of people who say ""I don''t know if I want to bring a child up in this world"" and said that they should bring the child up correctly to make the world a better place, and that''s part of the problem we have today. The people who (generally) are raising kids are the ones who shouldn''t be, or if they do, they need to bring the kids up to make the world a better place!
Unfortunately, if I slash my wrist with my lightsaber it cauterizes instantly. - PurEvil on emo Star Wars plots.