Macheath

I just wonder why they would attack a game that actually rewards you for NOT going on a brutal rampage. The journalist could have pointed out that the top rating of "silent assassin" in the Hitman series is only achieved if you kill NOBODY but the person you have been tasked to kill...sometimes without a gun...in one case with a dead FISH!! (this is actually true).

<img src="http://macheath.customer.netspace.net.au/FishSlappingbw2.gif">

This issue shouldn't be black and white. It shouldn't be the "Shut down the gaming industry and go read a book" side <b>versus</b> the "<i>Adventures of Patrick Bateman 3</i> is out next week, YEAH!!" side.

In the game <i>Deus Ex</i>, The developers made it possible to play the game without killing a SINGLE person out of the hundreds of characters you encountered in the game. After learning of this on internet forums, many who played and loved the game went back to it months later to achieve this "ultimate goal". These are the kinds of games I enjoy above all others.

Why does it feel like this fascinating phenomenon has been COMLETELY ignored by many video game opponents. Wouldn't it make for a more interesting debate...to consider that games are maybe actually *evolving* without Orrin Hatch's help?

DelayedReaction

At most you can say a correlation exists between violent media and the problems you listed. It's not a question of "admitting" to anything; the research hasn't shown much more than that. They demonstrate tenuous links, using findings that show "an increase in aggressive thoughts" to theorize that all exposure is bad.

The only exception is that of desensitization; research has shown that repeated exposure to media violence desensitizes people to media violence. I have yet to hear of a study that shows that people who watch violent media become numb to real violence. It doesn't mean it's out there, but I haven't seen it yet.

Look, I'm not saying violent media doesn't have an influence on those who watch it. All stimulus does, from movies to that 8th grader down the street. The problem is that research like this is never used to say "Oh, you should let your kids watch TV in moderation." It's always used in a support of BANNING the media in question. The Lieberman's and Hatch's of this world desperately grab for any study which proves their side, and then twist it until things support their point.

70% of the gamers out there are adults (http://www.womengamers.com/articles/myths.html), and few people would argue that they need protection from violent media. For the remaining 30%, parents have the responsibility here. The government should not be in the business of "saving our children" from adult entertainment, when the parents can do it far more effectively and for less money.

__________________
If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

Rekna

A group of marines that are heavy gamers in Iraq this weekend lost their life. Apparently after encountering a group of enemy soldiers the men all started jumping up and down (to dodge bullets) while trying to shoot the enemy. One man almost escape but died when he tried to jump over a building by shooting a rocket at his feet while jumping......




In seriousness though, there was a study that showed that gamers have faster reactions and are better drivers. If video games caused people to be violent there would be a lot more crime in the world today. The people who commit crimes and blame video games are either mentally unbalanced before playing games or just looking for a scape goat.

kutulu

This is just the next trend in the "pass the blame" mentality for parents that feel justified when they admit they've lost control of their kids. In the 80's we wanted to blame the heavy metal and rap, so we slapped a warning label on the CD and all was good.

In the 90's there was Beavis and Butthead turning kids into arsonists. Beavis stopped saying "fire" and all was good again. Around the turn of the millenium, movies were too violent so studios opted to turn out more PG-13 movies and all was good.

Now we have the video games ruining the country and turning us into killing machines. Slap a sticker on it and wait for the next victim to blame as the pussification of America continues.

Brining that up wouldn't support their bullshit adgenda they are trying to force us into believing. Also, it's very likely that the author never sat down and played it. The article is probably based on second-hand information.

The problem with psych issues (especially controversial issues) is that for every study that comes to one condition, there is another that equally refutes it.

I guess someone forgot about the 1st Amendment.

sapiens

The research with which I am familiar on media effects and violence is weak. Most studies:
1) have unacceptably small sample sizes,
2) neglect to include female subjects,
3) do not include subjects of different age groups,
3) are unable to demonstrate an effect longer than a few hours,
4) are unable to demonstrate an effect at a magnitude that anyone should care, and
5) are unable to demonstrate an effect outside of the laboratory.

Because so many men and women are exposed to media violence every day and so few actually commit the violent acts that are causally attributed to media violence, I would guess that it's something about these individuals that's causing them to commit violent acts, rather than something about media violence.

That said, I don't discount media effects research entirely. I have seen some compelling theory and research on how media representations of women may affect the body images of girls. I've also seen compelling research on how media representations of women may affect married men's commitment to their long-term relationships and single men's likelihood of committing to a long-term relationship. (Media images of women may bias men toward pursuing short-term romantic relationships over long-term romantic relationships).

panbert

Sorry. Forgot to mention that the news article was from Australia. There IS freedom of speech and such, but we don't have the 1st Amendment. We probably have something similar to it.

The "local"context is that, here in Melbourne, there has been quite a bit of gangland shooting in the past 18 months.

Jam

hehe after reading the dont killpeople its bad mmkay i decided to append it to a video game splash screen

http://www.purgejihad.com/640X480SPLASH.PCX

GakFace

On the part of desensitization? When I see that someone dies every fucking day on the news.. playing a game with graphics that aren't near as real as what I see on the news, I don't see how the game will desensitize me.

See what I'm getting at is this. I'm not desensitized becaues I play violent games. I'm desensitized because I hear about killings, murders, and deaths on a weekly basis. If I had not habituated to hearing said things, I'd be having mental breakdowns all the time. Its just like how I've habituated to semi's on the freeway which is about 50 yards away. Its not extremely loud, but if you're new to the area, you'll pick it up. Live here a bit and you get used to it and it doesn't bother you... Same with violence when you hear about it all the time.

__________________
RoboBlaster:
Welcome to the club! Not that I'm in the club. And there really isn'a a club in the first place. But if there was a club and if I was in it, I would definitely welcome you to it.

Jam

Video Games Kill.

Someone I know had g.. err knew... had just gotten neverwinter nights and was going to another friends house of mine to show him the game on his motorcycle... when a pickup pulled out infront of him and he hit the back ....

jimmyjambam

I support the government censorship and banning of all violent video games, music, and movies... because people NEVER killed anyone before all this evil crap came along

*sarcasm*

bigoldalphamale

NIB HIGHSCHOOL FOOTBALL RULES!!!!!!!!!

and so do video games. and so does evolution. the weak willed, ignorant, imbalanced pussies in society will be bred out of existence eventually. we just have to have a little patience.

*looks impatiently at wrist watch*

Jam

uhh uhhh... i hate to do this... but uhh

strike 1 for video games

http://mdn.mainichi.co.jp/news/archi...dm003001c.html

hulk

You have to kill Anna Navarre =P

On this issue though, well, I can't really put anything forward that hasn't been covered.

Jam, that girl didn't push off the little boy because she had just finished playing Super Pushio Children VII, did she?

__________________
"'There's a tendency among the press to attribute the creation of a game to a single person,' says Warren Spector, creator of Thief and Deus Ex."
-- From an IGN game review.

todd

Thats the truest thing i've ever heard.

Haha thats actually kind of funny.

Nachimir

Games affect me. If I play driving games, then go out and drive, I generally drive faster than I usually would. I have several friends who report the same effect.

Thanks for a sources ART.

Google for B.F. Skinner, operant conditioning and army training. The basics: In WWII, firing rates, that is, "shooting to kill", were at 2%. It was because they were using bullseyes to train soldiers; due to innate empathy, an adept marksman could flake out when he actually had to point the rifle at other humans in combat. They started training with pop-up, man shaped targets, and firing rates climbed. Now, modern training methods can get firing rates above 90%.

The training, by simuating a real event, constructs a reflex that circumvents basic empathy. This is seperable from good marksmanship (which is a different set of reflexes), and it is highly likely that computer games also have a similar affect (Someone did try to blame video games for the Washington sniper, while he was still shooting people. Retarded logic...)

It should be noted that this reflex does not destroy innate species empathy; soldiers who have been trained to kill and then do so may have trouble dealing with the psychological effects of the action afterward.

I'd also like to say that I play violent games and I design levels for them. Why? Because I'm almost 100% certain that none of this conditioning actually supplies anyone with a motive to kill. It may increase their capacity to; it may also increase existing pathological desires, but I do not believe it creates the desire to kill or maim.

It seems violent games do predispose people to think of violent solutions to agitated situations, and I can see that in myself, though I can also see other likely contributing factors. I have still never resorted to a violent solution because I am able to control myself and think about consequence. I've looked too hard to believe media and entertainment have no effect on us, but I also believe people, and not media, are actually responsible for their actions.

Another interesting factor is that there is a market for violent games. People desire to enact violent situations, and it is a good point that there are countries where life is cheap, so to speak, and computer games aren't readily available. Violent media is clearly a factor, but I think something a bit deeper is going on...

Kalnaur

Guns don't kill people, video games don't kill people.

Crappy parenting, or the complete lack thereof, kills people.

__________________
PC: Can you help me out here HK?
HK-47: I'm 98% percent sure this miniature organic meatbag wants you to help find his fellow miniature organic meatbags.
PC: And the other 2 percent?
HK-47: The other 2 percent is that he is just looking for trouble and needs to be blasted, but that might be wishful thinking on my part.

the_marq

I'm so tired of this argument.

There is violence in media...

*violence on TV
*violence in movies
*violence in music
*violence in literature
*violence in art
*violence in the news
*violence in theatre
*violence in the bible

Does this violence affect people? Who knows?

But if you are going to "manage" only video games you're missing the point.

__________________
The Truth:

Johnny Cash could have kicked Bruce Lee's ass if he wanted to.

#3 in a series

kutulu

Sadly, a lot of America seems to be missing the point and looking for easy targets so that they can "save the children"

Macheath

Actually I remember a discussion on some forum about people who had managed to avoid her using a few gas grenades and a little luck.

It wasn't intended by the developers - really something a glitch; but a significant one.

Aaannyyway, back to the serious discussion.

Jam

well im: young, white, play video games, listen to rap, public enemy number one, watch out boys and girls I am one dangerous ma'fucka

SecretMethod70

Bingo. Amplifying something that is already there is hardly the video games problem. The fact is, the person's issues were already present.

Show me a well done study that shows that video games (or violent media in general for that matter) make people who would otherwise not commit violent crimes do so, and then I will stop sticking up for the industry. Problem is there are no such studies, because violent games/media do not have that effect.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Jam

well Ive been playing a dawn of the dead game... and let me tell you, if i ever see a zombie in real life.. im going to blast its fucking head off.... (supposedly thats the way to do it, not the stake in the heart hehe)

Phage

Jam, a stake in the heart is not for zombies, it is for vampires. Even then a vampire is only immobilized and you still need to chop of it's head and either fill it with garlic or burn it and mix the ashes with holy wafer.

See, if violent video games were banned the entire human race would probably fall to something as simple as a zombie invasion! Maybe those in the know should make a pamphlet...

Jam

ph crap your i should probably sleep more

but I thought you had to stake the lead vampire in order to kill them off

filtherton

I think if you can reason that videogames make people more prone to violence, it could also be reasoned that pornography/erotica makes people more prone to promiscuous, unsafe sex. I'm also sure you could dig up any number of studies to support that idea. So what? I don't think society should necessarily live or die on the whims of pandering politicians or pop psychologists.

Kian

I just got done killing several of my closet friend in an online WWII game. Does that make me a bad person. No, here is why: I had these things called parents, I know that many in the world may not have heard about them but they do exist. What these folks did for me was quite simply that they parented (another foreign concept) teaching me right from wrong... exposing me to the world so that I would know the difference between games and life. I have an infant son and one day I hope to be able to do the same thing for him. I do not think that it is a case of desensitization but rather that I and many like me have the ability to separate pixels from peoples. But go ahead Tipper..... tell me how the music made me a murderer.


Kian
- surrounded by idjits.... we pressed on -
Pat Garrett - "Young Guns 2"

analog

Beautiful, thank you.

Trisk

Yeah but we don't really know the backround behind that case. If that girl went as far as to push her little brother off the balcony to avoid her mom's punishment, maybe there is something they're not telling us. I wouldn't be suprised if they found out that her mother beats her or something like that.

Kalnaur

It's nice to know that so many other people in the world are quick on the uptake as well. This forum reassures me that we will not fall to the idiots of the world easily, if at all.

__________________
PC: Can you help me out here HK?
HK-47: I'm 98% percent sure this miniature organic meatbag wants you to help find his fellow miniature organic meatbags.
PC: And the other 2 percent?
HK-47: The other 2 percent is that he is just looking for trouble and needs to be blasted, but that might be wishful thinking on my part.

ARTelevision

Yes well.
I'm not convinced that the proponents of video games have demonstrated anything but their passionate love for this stuff.
I think the sort of mindlessness these games promote is indefensible except by passionate devotees in terms of self-proclaimed anecdotal statements that their own minds have not been ruined by playing them. Take that as you will. But it sounds very defensive to me. That's about it.

__________________
create evolution

yatzr

http://culturalpolicy.uchicago.edu/c...goldstein.html

I specifically liked this part.

__________________
Mechanical Engineers build weapons. Civil Engineers build targets.

Nachimir

I disagree. This is objective, albeit unrecorded, experience:

and this is a very interesting, unsolved problem that seems to indicate that games are a factor rather than a cause:

ARTelevision

Yes.
What I fail to understand is the need to defend the stuff.
I worked for one of the first underground comic publishers out of San Francisco. A lot of the stuff we produced was mind-numbing garbage intended for the diversion of drug-addled minds. In communities all over the country, people would picket "head shops" that sold the stuff because they didn't want their kids exposed to it. They weren't "idiots" and they were entirely right, of course. I still have a titanic collection of comic books. I have an affection for the medium. I have no problem stating that it is mind-dulling nonsense. But I like it.
Some honesty goes a long way.
Defensiveness goes nowhere.

__________________
create evolution

ngdawg

Would you NOT have defended the right to publish these comic books at the time? While 'defending' the games themselves seems trivial, the right to have them is defensible. It comes down to parental and personal responsibility.
To many of my parental peers, I was way too liberal in what I allowed my kids to view and play. They have loved the Simpsons since they were 4-they do not torment adults ala Bart Simpson. My son plays video games, albeit not the mature-rated ones, but he does not go around wreaking havoc or or jumping off ledges.
The desensitization of our youth happens, at least in part, because there is no discussion between the caretaker and child of what is seen before them. Too many young people witness real violence in their personal lives and if no one cares, they won't.
The 'leave me out of it' mentality is epidemic. Let's concentrate on turning our offspring back into caring, responsible people and these kinds of arguments wouldn't be necessary.

yatzr

So does understanding.

__________________
Mechanical Engineers build weapons. Civil Engineers build targets.

ARTelevision

ngdawg, at the time, I was a jerk.

I look at my loud-mouthed, self-righteous and self-involved, elitist youth as an extended character flaw. In any event, no one here has advocated banning anything.

A lot of the work that I do now also should not be experienced by children. I wouldn't defend my "right" to shove it in front of them via all available means of distribution.

yatzr, what I fail to understand is the refusal to accept that much of what is foisted on children these days is deleterious to their best interests. No one is interested in taking adult-oriented content away from adults. No one here, anyway.

__________________
create evolution

Jam

there is a rating system... just like movies.. though ratings have to be bought

Nachimir

I think there probably some truth to that also. While I take your point about pop-psychology in relation to video games (<-- Hey, American English is contagious ), I assure you that Skinner is about as far from pop as you can get. An interesting couterpoint is Maslow's "Is Destructiveness Instinctive?" from Motivation and Personality. The evidence seems to be that destructiveness is not innate, but instead learned (Though he does not exlude biological determinants; he simply breaks the nature/nurture dichotomy).

Now if, on the other hand, you were saying "Pornography makes people commit rape", then you'd be making a very similar argument to "Video games cause violent rampages".

I once read an article on porn that claimed almost all rapists had looked at porn before commiting rape, therefore porn caused rape. The argument completely ignores the millions of people who look at porn and don't commmit rape, and I think that's very similar to most people's arguments against games.

It isn't tenable to make such generalisations about any medium, and sometimes even content.

For example, in looking at porn I've seen a spectrum running from people having a tremendous amount of fun in front of a camera, to people being exploited and humiliated. The medium is ethically inert; neither good nor bad.

I'd also say the same for comics:

Nabiel Kanan, Paul Pope, Terry Moore, Dave Sim, Shannon Wheeler, Judd Winnick, Kyle Baker, Art Spiegelman, Robert Crumb, Will Eisner, Scott McCloud, Dave McKean, Jim Woodring, and Chris Ware are just a few of the people not doing mind-dulling nonsense with comics. In terms of the superhero cliché, I agree with you, but there is stimlating contemporary fiction out there in the medium. Again, proving that generalisations are inadequate.

Similary, a lot of computer games are mindless drivel, but not all. I'm not defending the content of games, because I'd agree with you that most gung-ho rambo type kill-a-thons are indeed mindless drivel. I am however defending games against the gross misapprehension that they can somehow take somebody's will and control it.

The same facile accusation was levellled at comics in the 50's. Psychiatrist Fredric Wertham wrote a book entitled "Seduction of the Innocent", which implicated comics in racism, "sexual perversion", and juvenile deliquency. Comics were burned in the streets, and publishers signed up to the strict "Comics Code", which forbade:

• Gore
• Sex
• Sadistic Behaviour
• Challenges to established authority
• The unique details of any crime
• Any hints of "illicit relations" or condoning of divorce
• Any references to physical afflictions and deformities
• Merest allusions to "sexual perversions" of any kind

(Scott McCloud, Reinventing Comics, pages 86, 87)

Now, while the pulp fiction and horror of the pre-code era wasn't exactly enriching fiction, restricting it in the manner of the code did not actually lift the medium out of the gutter. It turned it into a soulless, stagnant intellectual wasteland, and to this day intelligent, talented authors and artists are struggling to earn the medium the credibility it deserves.

All of this applies to games, and when combined with the similar examples from, literature, film, music, etc, it all points to a deeper cultural or even trans-cultural cause (My money's on the latter).

A lot of games are shit; they're about simply shooting "baddies" again, again, and again. Just as with comics, there are exceptions. Creators need freedom in order to make those exceptions, and stereotyping a medium according to a sampling of its content only damages widespread perceptions and makes exceptions less likely.

ARTelevision

All of the artists you've mentioned have created some amount of mind-dulling nonsense. This is a personal opinion. In fact, my personal opinion is that all artists create some portion of mind-dulling nonsense. That's just my opinion. The point is that adult content should be made available to adults. The rest is just matters of taste and not directly relevant.

__________________
create evolution

Nachimir

"Some amount" does not justify wholly discounting their work or the medium. With respect ARTelivision, you just failed to justify your generalisations about the medium of comics. Stating that a medium is in itself mind-dulling nonsense may well be an opinion, but it is a patently untrue one.

What ever it is applied to, any definition of "adult content" or a threshold of "adulthood" is bound to be arbitrary and peppered by exceptions. In just the same way that games have great difficulty in simulating organic realities, so too do other artificially constructed systems encounter massive difficulty in containing them.

Also, in respect of porn or anything else generated from reality, exploitation is a matter of objective harm, not taste.