On the Subject of Violence in Video Games

[SandyB]

Now, I know that everybody has their own diverse opinion on this subject and that the topic in question has been debated across decades by academics, politicians, software developers, so-called "moral" guardians and parent groups. Yes, it's the subject of violence in video games. I would like to begin by saying I am an avid gamer. I LOVE this medium. To me, video games are an art form on the same level as motion pictures, music and theater. However, the subject of controversy and video games does go hand in hand, but the focus on this controversy does tend to last for a very short length of time before focusing on something else. The tragedy of it is that when the controversy does get focused enough, the arguments from the "Against" lobby can get very exaggerated.

A good example would be saying that pressing buttons to shoot guns in say "Soldier of Fortune" or "Battlefield 4" is training me to shoot actual firearms, ever since Sony, Nintendo & Microsoft have made consoles with functional trigger switches. But just think about that for a second: I play Battlefield 4 online and other realistic war shooters. So by that train of logic, I should instantly know how to clean, strip down, dismantle, reassemble, reload and operate a SCAR-H rifle or a P90 sub machine gun. BUT I DON'T! The only thing I know about guns is what end makes the muzzle flash and loud noise. I'm gonna give you an example of a title from my VG collection that still strikes a mental chord with me: Rockstar Games' 2003/2004 release "Manhunt." I downloaded it recently of the Steam Store because Microsoft would not release a 360 port for it.

Now let me get a few things straight, "Manhunt" is NOT an exceptional game. After playing it for a few days I realized how tacky and lame it is. The graphics are poor, the way you dispatch your pursuers gets repetitive very quickly, the character known as "The Director" gets annoying after the first arena and half way through the game the thesis changes from a stealth tone to a shooter with elements of stealth thrown in. But the elements of "Manhunt" that drew me back in were it's bleak setting, it's gripping suspense and the feeling that you are truly alone in a world of pain, misery and death. The reason why controversy surrounds this VG is not only do you get to kill and maim people with a variety of everyday objects (even a plastic grocery bag is lethal in this games) but that the game produced close up and in detail demonstrations of how to obtain the most gruesome results. So you can imagine that defending this title is a little pointless on my behalf. However, after a few hours I realized something, I was genuinely having fun and it had nothing to do with the amount of violence. To me James Earl Cash (the protagonist) was just like Sam Fisher out of the "Splinter Cell" series only with more flexible ethics.

The turning point that made me care about J.E.C. was after a level in the game called "Strapped For Cash". In this level, "The Director" informs James that one the many, many, MANY gangs who have been stalking him have kidnapped his family and are using them as bait to lure him out. As long as you are not spotted by specific gang members, James rescues his family and sets them free. However, in the level directly afterwards called "A View of Innocence", the "Director" shows James a video of the family members he had rescued being brutally murdered - all appearing off screen with a close up of James's face as muffled screams are heard from an old TV set.

"Where were your family when you were facing your final moments in the (lethal injection) chamber anyway? I'm the only family you need now."

After witnessing the death of his family, James picks up the TV and smashes it. Now, I just want to clarify, in this game James Earl Cash is a convicted murder and had been on death row awaiting execution by the state. I would like to think that after watching his own family suffer made him reflect on his own actions. The reason why he continues on his bloody path is because he wants to get as close as possible to this "Director" to take revenge. It turned my opinion of "Manhunt" being like a movie like say "Saw" - which by the way isn't the genre of horror I go for these days. I prefer my horror movies to be more subtle and psychological - to being more like a revenge motive movie like "Fight For Your Life".

Moving on the broader subject, I had beforehand mentioned that defending a game like "Manhunt" as art is difficult. The British Board of Film Classification (The British version of the MPAA) had given the game a clear 18 certificate - stating that 12 year olds are not supposed to be playing it - the game itself was in the middle of media circus after a 14 year old youth in Liecestershire was murdered by his 17 year old best friend who had claimed to be a fan of the game and calls for it to be banned outright became louder and louder. However, Liecestershire Police said that the victim had a copy of the game and NOT the killer. Also, the Police had determined that the motive for the murder wasn't a "reenactment", instead it was a mugging for drug money that went horribly wrong. The same could be said for the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting or the Norwegian island massacre where it was implied that both killers were avid gamers. The most depressing thing about the whole matter is that people like them give more ammunition to the "Against" lobby. Remember, a majority of the people who are against video games, don't see them as an art form. They don't see a development team, a staff of gifted writers or a team of enthusiastic programmers. They see a bunch of toy-makers who have gone too far. VG's are not measured on their artistic merits in the branches of government, they are measured because they are "games". In their minds, the word that sticks out is GAME and they believe a game is something a child plays. A game's developer or publisher is NOT a toymaker. Even the sheer callousness of the NRA after Sandy Hook saying the only way to combat school shootings is to arm the teachers. Of course, that'll stop all the school shootings - put more guns IN American schools!

Here is my final word; I believe it shouldn't be up to governments, censorship organizations, or the law to defend against the corruption of young minds, it should be up to the parents themselves. An 18 or M rating is NOT part of the box art. It's there for a reason. It must come down to the parent's decision about which medium their children should or should not consume. Hey, if I were a parent I wouldn't take my child to see an 18 or R rated movie, so why would I want him or her to play a mature game? My dad's mistress sometimes brings over her 12 year old grandson to my house and if I'm playing something M rated like Fallout 3 or Battlefield I save and turn off my console or I put in another disk.
And since you can't end a post by doing one of these, my top 5 violent games are:

5. Fallout 3
4. Grand Theft Auto San Andreas
3. Dead Space
2. Manhunt
1. Spec Ops: The Line

Also check out this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSm-UzWzO2E

[Jetthebinturong]

I rather think that anyone over the age of twelve is able to separate a video game from reality and know that the fact that you are able to do questionable things in video games does not mean that it is okay irl and if they don't then they shouldn't be playing video games and should perhaps seek psychological help

[SandyB]

I rather think that anyone over the age of twelve is able to separate a video game from reality and know that the fact that you are able to do questionable things in video games does not mean that it is okay irl and if they don't then they shouldn't be playing video games and should perhaps seek psychological help

I totally agree with you. If you're stupid enough to reenact something you first saw in a movie of video game, you deserve to be in prison, a mental home or even death row.

[Cornflower MM]

I rather think that anyone over the age of twelve is able to separate a video game from reality and know that the fact that you are able to do questionable things in video games does not mean that it is okay irl and if they don't then they shouldn't be playing video games and should perhaps seek psychological help

Um, yeah. If you're not mature enough to tell that somethings you just don't do might be okay in a video game, but not IRL, then you should a) Not play video games, b) Go back to kindergarten, and c) GET SOME HELP.

[Rusvul]

Violence in games isn't going to make kids into psychopaths, however it can be disturbing. I don't play games that are really bloody- I'm fine with violence in games, so long as it isn't excessive or gory. I don't see the point of games being gory or excessively violent- I don't see any purpose- But I don't think that they should all be banned or anything.

[Tam and Martin]

Violence in games isn't going to make kids into psychopaths, however it can be disturbing. I don't play games that are really bloody- I'm fine with violence in games, so long as it isn't excessive or gory. I don't see the point of games being gory or excessively violent- I don't see any purpose- But I don't think that they should all be banned or anything.

Don't have much to say about this seeing as I am not a gamer but I would most likely agree with you, Rus.

[Cornflower MM]

I think that parents should think about nd decide if this one's too bloody or gory for their child. Anbd, ifd the parents are slump on that, well....

I rather think that anyone over the age of twelve is able to separate a video game from reality and know that the fact that you are able to do questionable things in video games does not mean that it is okay irl and if they don't then they shouldn't be playing video games and should perhaps seek psychological help

Um, yeah. If you're not mature enough to tell that somethings you just don't do might be okay in a video game, but not IRL, then you should a) Not play video games, b) Go back to kindergarten, and c) GET SOME HELP.

^^^^^^^^

[blindsimeonjtp]

gaming should be fun not something to argue about

[Wylder Treejumper]

Well, it has been proven that playing amounts of violent gaming has a psychological effect... not that it makes kids into mass murderers, but that it desensitizes them to violence... If you see people get graphically murdered every day, it's going to be less and less shocking every time.

I don't believe small children should play very violent video games anyways. Proven or not, that can only have a bad effect.

I myself far prefer strategy, building or puzzle games as more intellectually stimulating. The most violent I get is the occasional foray into Star Wars Battlegrounds II.

Regardless of my opinions or organizational ratings, it is not mine or a governments job to decide for parents what their children are allowed to play. Have educated, responsible parents, and hopefully, they will choose wisely. But it is a breach of personal and family freedoms to decide for them.

[Gwen A. Mouse]

This is kind of like the debate over Dungeons & Dragons and similar RPGs, though they are less popular and thus less of an issue now. It's really sad, because the tiny percentage of stupid or already-unstable kids that go out and kill people IRL make a bad name for the rest of us. Yes, I play Pathfinder every week and yes, I enjoy destroying enemies almost every week. No, this does not mean that I will go and murder someone to get the same feeling. That would be sick.

In my town, there was a horrible murder several years ago. A young girl was stabbed to death in her bedroom. Before the body was discovered, a man was caught leaving the scene. He had blood on his sweatshirt, and he was sent on his way. Despite this and the fact that the blood was soon discovered to be the murder victim's, the girl's brother and his friends (all young teens) were interrogated for hours by the police. They were not allowed to see their parents or leave the room even to use the bathroom. They were kept up all night, not allowed to sleep, and eventually coerced into signing a confession. Why? Because they played D&D.

There is an extreme prejudice against gamers and there shouldn't be. The same person who enjoys playing Pathfinder and Baldur's Gate can also enjoy classical literature and making origami birds.

[Rusvul]

I don't see why D&D is the subject of much controversy. Like, really. It's not at all graphic unless your DM makes it, and while it is violent, SO ARE BOOKS. If D&D is evil, literature is evil.

The other thing I've heard about D&D controversy is that some people don't (Or didn't) like it because it has magic in it. Like, really religious groups. To each their own, but I personally think that's ridiculous. It's a game, it's not demon worship.

[James Gryphon]

This topic is really better suited for Cavern Hole; the Cellars is just for outright spam.

---

I have played a wide variety of games in my life, so I have a fair amount of experience in this subject. It's worth noting that the best FPS I've ever played had no blood and no humans. You don't need flying body parts or the best guts money can buy for a game to be fun.

I believe graphic violence has a desensitizing effect, and that big companies generally put too much of it in their games, but I don't see that there's much that anyone can do about it.

That said, while things are still very bad, I think they're better than they have been. The indie game scene is becoming popular these days, with the proliferation of phone and tablet gaming, and their low special effects budgets generally means that they don't have too much in the way of violence.

I do think that as a general rule, games that include story modes should emphasize finding other solutions to problems besides killing every enemy in sight, especially if you're supposed to be the hero. That was one of the problems I had with the old "Jedi Academy" game -- your instructors in the game warn you about your proximity to the "Dark Side", but what they're really concerned about is *how* you choose to kill someone. They're perfectly cool with the huge body count you rack up in every mission, they just don't want you to use lightning when you're killing all those people.

I'm sorry, but that makes no sense to me. Either your character respects life or they don't. Apparently their game design people figured out that this was a problem, but instead of making later games more complex, and rewarding players who choose to avoid violence, they simply made your character in those games evil, so you'd have an excuse to kill everyone. That's a pretty big cop-out, if you ask me.

[Jetthebinturong]

That's why I like Star Wars: Bounty Hunter. Wait, no it isn't, I love Star Wars: Bounty Hunter because it has a compelling story, challenging levels, great graphics, Star Wars, a jet pack and lots of Jango Fett. Okay so I will admit that the mindless mass scale shooting is very fun but mostly because it's so difficult to win and when you do, you feel a sense of accomplishment. Perhaps it would be easier if I used weapons OTHER than pistols but then again, maybe not.

I don't understand the appeal of Call of Duty but I find futuristic shooters like Halo and Star Wars Battlefront absolutely awesome (Battlefront 3 will completely fail to top Battlefront 2, Battlefront 2 is too good to be beaten) and also medieval FPFs (First Person Fighters, because there were no guns in medieval times) but the LEGO games are also great as is the Portal duology and Spyro and Sonic games? Count me in

[James Gryphon]

SWBH came out before JKA, so it isn't really covered by the post-JKA design thing anyway, but I wanted to make it clear that I was referring mainly to "Force Unleashed". Although I'm still opposed to gratuitous violence, I don't have quite as much trouble with a non-superpowered character like Jango Fett "proactively defending" himself.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I subscribe to the 'Superman philosophy' -- that if a character has extraordinary powers, they should be above killing those who don't, except in the most extenuating circumstances.

[Rusvul]

I would agree with that, if they're a hero/good guy/good person. If they're an antihero or if they're just evil, then I suppose it makes sense to stab random people.