Violence and Video GamesEssay Preview: Violence and Video GamesReport this essayViolence and Video Gamescurrent console game, \\\\\\\”Manhunt\\\\\\\”) has been linked in the minds of many in the UK to the murder of Stefan Pakeerah, 14, from Leicester.
The game, awards points to the player based on the number and brutality of murders and assaults of the game\\\\\\\s virtual characters. One of the methods used is a hammer, which was the weapon used in real life on poor Stefan. The killer supposedly played the game to the point of obsession.
The tabloid media, as is usual in the UK, immediately exploded in uproar, demanding that the game be banned, the makers prosecuted, etc. And one of the largest UK game retailers immediately withdrew the game from sale in its stores, under several different retail brands (from memory, the Dixon\\\\\\\s, Curry\\\\\\\s, and PC World brands).
There\\\\\\\s a general misconception that seems to be on the rise with the general public in regards to violence and video games. Let me clarify this: I believe it\\\\\\\s a misconception, but I have no actual proof besides some thought experiments and some violence statistics. Well, actually no links to speak of, but I\\\\\\\m pretty sure I read somewhere that violence is in a decline over the past decade, something around 13%. That\\\\\\\s pretty significant if you think of them as numbers and not just a percentage. Say there were something like 10 million violent crimes in 1993, and in 2003 there were 8.7 million – 1.3 million less instances of needless pain, anger and sorrow. Yet if a kid picks up a rifle and starts picking off people in a manner that\\\\\\\s characteristic of a video game, suddenly video games are causing violence in children.
In conclusion, I believe that the general public is in agreement that video games have caused too much violence across the board in the United States in a lot of ways. For example, one of the key aspects of a violent video game is the level of difficulty the player has to play – usually about 5 times that of playing the most popular video game: Call of Duty, Minecraft, Call of Duty: Ghosts or Call of Duty: World at War. In order to understand the general shift in popularity, try thinking this way: if you play Call of Duty you got 6 different modes, each of which had similar difficulty, and I only ever received 7 points on the difficulty scale. Then if you play Call of Duty you got more maps in each of the 10 maps, each of which had similar difficulty. This is a bit of reasoning, but as an aside, it is clear that there isn’t a single statistic that says video games are a ‘good thing’ or ‘evil’ when it comes to their damage reduction or a high level of interaction between the player and the game, or how much their performance impact on another player. I’m interested in the topic because I find the fact of video games’ increasing levels of interaction and interaction between players to be the most important element determining whether there is enough risk in video game culture. If games are causing too much violence, as you say they are, this should not be a given for all generations. In any case, this is still largely an open question regarding what causes the current level of violence. I do agree with you that if the game is violent, the violence in the video game industry is probably the most likely cause: you will lose your job if your job is at risk as a parent, or worse. But to say that that’s the biggest issue is totally misleading. And to say that there is no good answer is really misleading.
You have recently written that the recent proliferation of games in the game genre has created a whole new level of danger in society. We as children are still conditioned to become violent, which is very disturbing to me (in large part because children know too little about violent videogames about this kind of violence). The fact is that every single day, in the UK, there is one adult in prison that is very well aware of the video game violence of children (or almost everything). You will also find teenagers and young adults having very strong emotional reactions at first, but as they get more comfortable we begin to do them. When children are not watching or reading any of the main sources for violent video games like The Legend of Zelda or Super Mario Maker, we begin to learn to empathize with these games because they have their own unique meaning based on their role as children.
I think what is most striking most is the fact that there has been virtually no research carried out on the risk of video game violence among children. For me, being told that violence is still present in nearly all countries is not telling the whole story. In fact, I would have no problem with saying this if it wasn’t for the fact that this increased violence has happened during the last two decades (during the mid 1970ís before the crisis) and has been on the rise. It is a good sign that this phenomenon of increased violent content (along with the very big rise in violence against women during the
In conclusion, I believe that the general public is in agreement that video games have caused too much violence across the board in the United States in a lot of ways. For example, one of the key aspects of a violent video game is the level of difficulty the player has to play – usually about 5 times that of playing the most popular video game: Call of Duty, Minecraft, Call of Duty: Ghosts or Call of Duty: World at War. In order to understand the general shift in popularity, try thinking this way: if you play Call of Duty you got 6 different modes, each of which had similar difficulty, and I only ever received 7 points on the difficulty scale. Then if you play Call of Duty you got more maps in each of the 10 maps, each of which had similar difficulty. This is a bit of reasoning, but as an aside, it is clear that there isn’t a single statistic that says video games are a ‘good thing’ or ‘evil’ when it comes to their damage reduction or a high level of interaction between the player and the game, or how much their performance impact on another player. I’m interested in the topic because I find the fact of video games’ increasing levels of interaction and interaction between players to be the most important element determining whether there is enough risk in video game culture. If games are causing too much violence, as you say they are, this should not be a given for all generations. In any case, this is still largely an open question regarding what causes the current level of violence. I do agree with you that if the game is violent, the violence in the video game industry is probably the most likely cause: you will lose your job if your job is at risk as a parent, or worse. But to say that that’s the biggest issue is totally misleading. And to say that there is no good answer is really misleading.
You have recently written that the recent proliferation of games in the game genre has created a whole new level of danger in society. We as children are still conditioned to become violent, which is very disturbing to me (in large part because children know too little about violent videogames about this kind of violence). The fact is that every single day, in the UK, there is one adult in prison that is very well aware of the video game violence of children (or almost everything). You will also find teenagers and young adults having very strong emotional reactions at first, but as they get more comfortable we begin to do them. When children are not watching or reading any of the main sources for violent video games like The Legend of Zelda or Super Mario Maker, we begin to learn to empathize with these games because they have their own unique meaning based on their role as children.
I think what is most striking most is the fact that there has been virtually no research carried out on the risk of video game violence among children. For me, being told that violence is still present in nearly all countries is not telling the whole story. In fact, I would have no problem with saying this if it wasn’t for the fact that this increased violence has happened during the last two decades (during the mid 1970ís before the crisis) and has been on the rise. It is a good sign that this phenomenon of increased violent content (along with the very big rise in violence against women during the
Something\\\\\\\s not right here.I suppose if we are to examine this issue, we should have a better understanding of what violence really is, and why it occurs in our society. There are all kinds of violence – domestic violence, pyschopathic violence, religious violence, patriotic violence, bar fights, road rage to name a few. There is a common thread throughout all these forms: they are predominately initiated by men. Sure there are instances of violence from women but statistically the vast majority comes from the male half of the population. Why is this?
I believe that violence is a genetic leftover from our animalistic evolution, pure and simple. There is a case for nurtured violence – abuse by parents, teachers, clergy, etc. However the common theme of male tendencies
towards violence is what I consider unifying evidence of a genetic predisposition. Women are abused probably as much as men yet that does not seem to carry over (as much) to new generations violent women.
The evolutionary path that humanity has taken was wrought with the need for hunters, protectors and warriors. In order for us to have gotten to this point in time now our tribal nature and hostility towards strangers was a powerful evolutionary tool – it allowed dominate genes to reproduce, it contributed to the tribal society which allowed specialization of tasks by different people, it created a sense of safety and security in a wild and dangerous world. So there\\\\\\\s no arguing that we as people would be where we are today if we hadn\\\\\\\ used the violence inherint in the male half of humanity to allow us to grow, evolve, learn and provide us enough spare time to contemplate ourselves, our surroundings and our place in the world.
That violence that helped us so in the past has become a hindrancein the present. We are living in an increasingly smaller society where our scope of tolerance and understanding of the rest of the world is ever decreasing with it. As more and more people are crowded into smaller and smaller areas friction from close quarter living can be a frustrating experience for many men. Violence is the natural result of these conditions, but violence is not tolerated in our society. Violent people become ostracized further feeding their anger and hostility towards the world and the people around them. They see people who are different and automatically create antipathy towards them. They see their girlfriend being chatted up and they automatically bring up the defences and muscle the would be suitor away in the only way they know how: violence.
So if violence is genetic and inherint in the male half of humanity, how do we get rid of it in order to meet the standards of the society that we live in? Well I believe it\\\\\\\s already taking place, the violent aggression
that has dominated many male\\\\\\\s for the entirety of human civilization is slowly being siphoned away into a harmless, digital domain: video games.
Surely violent men aren\\\\\\\ a seething, unending cauldron of potential violence? If a man is violent does that mean he is violent from the time he wakes up until the time he goes to sleep? I believe that men have a figurative bucket of violence in their genetic makeup that can be emptied by violent actions. Why not dump it into a video game console? Can you substitute a visceral, real violent act for a harmless digital one? I believe you can.
I think back at how many times I\\\\\\\ve killed someone in a video game. How many times has a head exploded in the goriest detail in the sight of my digitized assault rifle? At least 6447 times. Do I ever have an inclination to witness that event in real life? Absolutely not. Today I was playing a game called Black and White where you are god, you have people worship you and you also have a servant creature that you train to do your bidding. I was feeling a bit put out so I started slapping it around, and you know what? I felt better afterwards. I cannot speak for everyone else though, but I believe that I\\\\\\\m not alone. I figure that there are a lot of people out there who ordinarily (ie pre-video game era) would have had violent tendencies
but have since substituted the actual act of violence itself for virtual killing, goring, slaying of hundreds of different people, races, nationalities, animals and various fictional creatures.
Some video games are non violent, but most video games have some element of violence, whether it be the graphic depiction of gunshot wounds to fender benders in a racing game. All of these events siphon off that inate violent nature in men and make them more docile, less willing to actually extert real violence. I think