NationStates Jolt Archive

I never thought of myself as a conservative person (in fact, I'm rabidly Left), and I have always been against censorship in terms of GOVERNMENT censorship. I certainly feel that as a parent, there are things that are inappropriate for the age level of my children, and I have the responsibility to censor them in my home. Of course, once they become school age, I will have a lot less power over what they are exposed to. Peers will become a larger influence, and I can only hope that I will still be able to help my kids make good choices.

However, I also feel that a lot of parents are dropping the ball. Either because of a lack of time or interest, many parents are not paying attention to what their children are exposed to in their own homes. For example, assuming that all cartoons are age-appropriate is extremely naive. Letting your kids camp out in front of the television and thinking, "at least they're watching cartoons" is pretty out to lunch, considering the types of VERY adult cartoons they start showing around 4:30pm. Then there is the issue of video games, another favourite babysitter. This, of course, leads me to the main topic of this post.

Video games, in their early inception, were used not only as a leisure time activity, but also as a tool by armed forces to help 'simulate' battle situations. Research had shown that without significant desensitization, troops were unable to maintain an effective fire ratio (bullets fired vs. targets hit). Desensitization quite effectively increased that ratio. Troops would play 'war games' using the new technology, and become more used to firing at human targets. The program was a stunning success.

Nowadays, the video games being created are richly detailed, and getting more and more lifelike. Targets don't just fall...they bleed, or clutch at severed limbs, or scream. As an adult, I think I understand very well that this is not real...but it still sets my stomach to roiling, either with excitement or disgust, I'm not always sure. However, children are capable of an amazing amount of what is called 'suspension of disbelief'. A young child, seeing a parent dressed up in a Halloween costume KNOWS that it is their parent...but they are able to suspend their disbelief in order to be genuinely excited or terrified (depending on the costume). This ability fades as they grow older, but is still present up until the teen years. At that age, suspension of disbelief is not longer a strong factor, but the search for identity is. Kids at this age can really through themselves into role playing, because their identities are more flexible. They are 'impressionable' not in the sense of being weak-minded, but in the sense of being more exploratory than adults are capable of being.

Point?

When military research has shown that video games can be used successfully to desensitize adults to killing other human beings, an act that we are taught all our lives is reprehensible, what is it doing to our children? They may know intellectually, as I do, that it isn't real, but that doesn't mean it isn't affecting their perceptions about violence and the sanctity of human life. I remember being a kid and seeing a picture of a dead family in Ethiopia and being absolutely horrified for days about it. Now, it doesn't even faze me. I've seen it enough, that it no longer strikes me as unusual. The same thing happens to kids who, day after day, play at killing. When they see the real thing on the news, does it touch them any more than the game does?

Why are we waiting until these kids grow up to see if this is doing damage? Do we really want a generation of adults who are immune to the horror of violence and death? Do we ignore that these games are NOT age appropriate (do half the parents out there even pay attention??) because it's just play?

Recently I saw three six year olds scuffling on the street. I pulled over, concerned, because two of the children looked to be kicking and punching the other child who was laying on the ground. They stopped when I got out of my car, and I realised that all three were unhurt. They were just playing around. I asked them why they were playing like that, and they said, "because it's fun." Fair enough. I asked them where they learned to play like that, "we do this all the time, I don't know." Was it learned from t.v? Video games? Peers? Who knows? I'm not putting the blame on any one factor, because I think most of the blame rests on us. I gave them a lecture about how that play was inappropriate, because it looked serious, and had scared me because I had been worried about their safety. They understood that much, but I doubt it sunk all the way in. If I had been able to contact the parents, my hope would be that the parents would not react angrily, but in a way that tried to show them what was wrong with that kind of horsing around.

In any case, I wanted opinions specifically on video game violence, so I guess I should stick to that. I know there are a lot of opinions out there...from players or parents, and I know that my attitudes are different now because of my age. I probably would have loved these games as a kid (hey, I used to pretend I was a sniper, but then again, I didn't really understand what death meant until I was much older), but I really don't want my kids to play them. I want my kids to be KIDS...to have a childhood, not be little copies of the adults around them. Sigh.

What do you think?

Sorry for the terrible grammar in the poll...I hit submit too soon.

Does video game violence influence behaviour?

No. *hits Sinuhue with a frying pan for suggesting such a thing*

Blame it all on Pong

I do think that some video games could influence kids into having bad behavior. I have heard before (not sure if this is true) that the kids from Columbine also played a lot of those shooting video games. And on the news last night they were talking about a video game (called the JFK something) where you have to recreate the shooting of JFK (in the point of view as the person that killed him). So I do think that some more gullible kids could be influenced by video games and start to act differently.

I think people with bad behaviour problems beforehand will be attracted to violent games. Most people will too though if they're brought up in my video gaming generation, lol... That does not influence bad behaviour though. I love to play violent things, because it's a way to vent in a way I wouldn't in reality. Not because I'm scared, but because I know better.

Things happen anyway, not because of video games, but because they exist. Kids fighting because it's fun? You can't say it didn't happen before video games, LoL, it DOES happen because it's fun. I'm not sure of the statistics... but I wouldn't even say video games glamourise any of this. Not for me anyway, and not for any of my friends. On a side note, I wouldn't say TV, films or anything else would either.

Basically, people with behaviour problems just go and do what they see. Good kids aren't corrupted by what they see.

No. *hits Sinuhue with a frying pan for suggesting such a thing*
Ouch! Did you learn to hit people with frying pans in a video game? Hehehe, just kidding...sort of..

Just to be clear. I don't think it is about gullibility, or stupidity, or weak minds. ANYONE, given the proper stimuli can be trained to act in ways that go against their ingrained beliefs or patterns of behaviours. Soldiers are TRAINED to kill...they are not just capable of it automatically. Torturers are TRAINED to use these methods, they are not all raving psychopaths that were born that way. What I want to know is if you think the kind of 'training' presented in video games is ENOUGH to desensitize people to violence?

It depends on the individual. I have played meny violant games, and I have never thought of commiting a violent crime such as murder, but someone who can easily be influenced may try to emulate the behavior they see on video games.

Blame it all on Pong
lol

Actually, video games are less desensitizing than half of the stuff on the market. If you want to use the desensitization arguement, I'll just point out the number of movies, books, and television programs far more violent than the average game is. Hell, people get desensitized these days just from watching the evening news.

The problem of desensitization is not unique, or even new, to video games. It is also less desensitizing to see someone who doesn't look real taking a bullet through the head in a video game than it is to watch a person chopped up by an axe murderer in a movie or read about how a person gutted someone with glee in a book. The problem you cite is not one of games, but one of the entire culture as a whole.

I do think that some video games could influence kids into having bad behavior. I have heard before (not sure if this is true) that the kids from Columbine also played a lot of those shooting video games. And on the news last night they were talking about a video game (called the JFK something) where you have to recreate the shooting of JFK (in the point of view as the person that killed him). So I do think that some more gullible kids could be influenced by video games and start to act differently.

Games only influence people into bad behavior when those people are not mentally equipped to deal with what they see on the screen. If the games don't set them off, then books, movies, television shows, the evening news, or even music will. And the Columbine kids went off like they did not because they played those games, but because they were put through so much hell they viewed themselves as having no other choice and nothing to lose. Once again, a societal, not technological, problem. And school slaughters stretch back into the 1800s, so you can't accuse the modern culture of causing it.

Personaly, I think that games can have a bad influence. However, They should not be cencored for many reasons.

1.It would get hyped and dang near everything would be taken off the shelves.
2.The bad influence can be stoped if the parents intervein.(i.e. give the child a counter influence to balance it out)
3.Many of these games, especialy the shooters, builds incredible reflexes.
4.Even if all video games were baned the children would be subjected to just as much violence and such via movies, Tv, news, and real life.

I think people with bad behaviour problems beforehand will be attracted to violent games. Most people will too though if they're brought up in my video gaming generation, lol... That does not influence bad behaviour though. I love to play violent things, because it's a way to vent in a way I wouldn't in reality. Not because I'm scared, but because I know better.

Things happen anyway, not because of video games, but because they exist. Kids fighting because it's fun? You can't say it didn't happen before video games, LoL, it DOES happen because it's fun. I'm not sure of the statistics... but I wouldn't even say video games glamourise any of this. Not for me anyway, and not for any of my friends. On a side note, I wouldn't say TV, films or anything else would either.

Basically, people with behaviour problems just go and do what they see. Good kids aren't corrupted by what they see.

Define 'good' and 'bad'.

So do you think that 'good kids' are born that way, or are they taught to be 'good'? If no one is there to properly 'teach' that kid to be good, will these games skew their vision of the world? We can't force parents to be GOOD parents. There were plenty of fights all through school when I was growing up too, but you never worried about getting knifed or shot...that isn't so anymore. There has to be a reason. Again, I'm not laying this on video games or media alone...I think it has a lot to do with crappy parenting. I'm just trying to understand something that probably isn't linked clearly to any one thing.

Define 'good' and 'bad'.

So do you think that 'good kids' are born that way, or are they taught to be 'good'? If no one is there to properly 'teach' that kid to be good, will these games skew their vision of the world? We can't force parents to be GOOD parents. There were plenty of fights all through school when I was growing up too, but you never worried about getting knifed or shot...that isn't so anymore. There has to be a reason. Again, I'm not laying this on video games or media alone...I think it has a lot to do with crappy parenting. I'm just trying to understand something that probably isn't linked clearly to any one thing.

When did you go to school, out of curiosity? I know that my mother (and aunts and uncles) *did* have to worry about, at the very least, getting knifed at school.

It depends on the individual. I have played meny violant games, and I have never thought of commiting a violent crime such as murder, but someone who can easily be influenced may try to emulate the behavior they see on video games.
Same here - I know a good few kids my age who might seriously be video-game influenced . . .

No. I don't. *throws molotov cocktails at Sinuhue like in GTA*

Actually, video games are less desensitizing than half of the stuff on the market. If you want to use the desensitization arguement, I'll just point out the number of movies, books, and television programs far more violent than the average game is. Hell, people get desensitized these days just from watching the evening news.

The problem of desensitization is not unique, or even new, to video games. It is also less desensitizing to see someone who doesn't look real taking a bullet through the head in a video game than it is to watch a person chopped up by an axe murderer in a movie or read about how a person gutted someone with glee in a book. The problem you cite is not one of games, but one of the entire culture as a whole.



Games only influence people into bad behavior when those people are not mentally equipped to deal with what they see on the screen. If the games don't set them off, then books, movies, television shows, the evening news, or even music will. And the Columbine kids went off like they did not because they played those games, but because they were put through so much hell they viewed themselves as having no other choice and nothing to lose. Once again, a societal, not technological, problem. And school slaughters stretch back into the 1800s, so you can't accuse the modern culture of causing it.

You're right. I bet video games would only influence the more mentally unstable people that played them. My brother has a Vice City PS2 game and I don't see him running around in the streets beating up hookers and stealing cars. But I do think that the whole game about the assassination of JFK is kind of wrong, just in general.

And on the news last night they were talking about a video game (called the JFK something) where you have to recreate the shooting of JFK (in the point of view as the person that killed him).
COOL!!!!!!! :eek:

I do think that some video games could influence kids into having bad behavior. I have heard before (not sure if this is true) that the kids from Columbine also played a lot of those shooting video games. And on the news last night they were talking about a video game (called the JFK something) where you have to recreate the shooting of JFK (in the point of view as the person that killed him). So I do think that some more gullible kids could be influenced by video games and start to act differently.

Yeah, well look at the kids in columbine they played shooters anc killed people so therfore all the other like 80 percent of kids who play shooters are going to kill each other.

If pacman influenced that generation, everyone would be sitting in dark rooms munching on strange pills and listening to repetitive techno music.

Video game violence does not effect kids that much, its parenting.

To all parents who blame their childrens bad behavior on video game violence,

ITS NOT THEM ITS YOU SMACK THEM IN THE FACE AND TELL THEM TO ACT GOOD OR START DOING SOME REAL PARENTING

Little timmy goes walking down the street when he hears a strange voice, <kill everyone> "Is that you james bond?" inquires little timmy to his own silent wolrd.
<No itsa me! mario jump ona peoples heads and coins will a come outa!>

This doesnt affect your kids
>
:mp5:
> :sniper:

This does
:headbang:

Well thats the two cents of me. (or is it 4?)

In this particular matter, concerning the desensitizing nature of video games, I completely agree with DemonLordEnigma. Slaughtering a thousand polygon-piles on SoF-II and watching their virtual arms fly off and heads get reduced to stumps is nothing compared to watching an actual human being killed on TV. Public medias broadcast new "snuff" films almost weekly now, what with the coverage of Iraq.

I'm not saying some of those films should be censored either, but people who do not understand what's happening in them probably shouldn't allow to view them. I like placing the burden on the parents, because I don't consider myself particularly stable mentally and started violent games with Wolfenstein 3D at the age of 9. My parents are of the thinking kind, understanding and tolerant, and I remember talking with them about things like that a lot as a little kid.

When did you go to school, out of curiosity? I know that my mother (and aunts and uncles) *did* have to worry about, at the very least, getting knifed at school.

Seriously? Maybe it was just where I grew up. I graduated from high school in '95. Did you really mean 'at the very least'? That suggests that getting knifed would have been the least harmful thing that was likely to happen to them. As far as I know, no one in my province during the time I attended school, was ever knifed in a fight (teens, not adults).

I'm 16 and I been playing video games since I was born, mostly violent games. I'm not a violent person at all. It's the crazy kids who think video games are real, plus bad parenting, will lead to violence.

Actually, video games are less desensitizing than half of the stuff on the market. If you want to use the desensitization argument, I'll just point out the number of movies, books, and television programs far more violent than the average game is. Hell, people get desensitized these days just from watching the evening news.

I completely agree with everything but the statement I put into bold. I think video games are unique because you are involved in them. You are put into the role of the killer, and become an active player, not a passive watcher. I think all of the above are capable of desensitization.

The problem of desensitization is not unique, or even new, to video games.
Granted, but I do think the access to these things is a newer phenomenon. Video games have only been in wide circulation for the last 10-50 years as something you could spend hours on in your home. (Sure, they were arcade addicts before, but most of us couldn't afford to be there for hours). As well, what we show on tv has changed drastically. You can watch the secrets of the human body being exposed in medical programs, see mass graves exposed in documentaries and on the news, rent videos of executions (faces of death) and take out graphic novels from your local library. In the past, these things were not as widely available, and if you really wanted this stuff, you would have to do a bit of work to get it. Don't get me wrong...I much prefer to have information shared freely as is becoming more common now, I am just saying that especially for those kids without adequate supervision, these kinds of age-inappropriate media are very easy to access.



Games only influence people into bad behavior when those people are not mentally equipped to deal with what they see on the screen. If the games don't set them off, then books, movies, television shows, the evening news, or even music will. And the Columbine kids went off like they did not because they played those games, but because they were put through so much hell they viewed themselves as having no other choice and nothing to lose. Once again, a societal, not technological, problem. And school slaughters stretch back into the 1800s, so you can't accuse the modern culture of causing it.

What would make a person mentally equipped to participate in a simulated murder or simulated acts of violence? How do we try to 'protect' those that are NOT mentally equipped to do so? Children are certainly not equipped to watch pornography, and yet we don't consider watching violence to be as damaging. Why is that? It's definitely a societal issue, but the technology is a part of that. Do you have some stats or information on school slaughters dating back to the 1800s? I'm curious.

If pacman influenced that generation, everyone would be sitting in dark rooms munching on strange pills and listening to repetitive techno music.


Ahhh... So thats where Raves came from =P

Ahhh... So thats where Raves came from =P

ROFL

I completely agree with everything but the statement I put into bold. I think video games are unique because you are involved in them. You are put into the role of the killer, and become an active player, not a passive watcher. I think all of the above are capable of desensitization.

Actually, videogames are not unique in that regard. Ever play pen and paper RPGs? If not, you do not know the joy of describing a character you are pretending to be stabbing someone in the chest with a knife while cutting off their head with a sword. Or sniping someone from 300 meters away with a high-powered sniper rifle. Or blowing up a small building as a distraction.

Granted, but I do think the access to these things is a newer phenomenon. Video games have only been in wide circulation for the last 10-50 years as something you could spend hours on in your home. (Sure, they were arcade addicts before, but most of us couldn't afford to be there for hours). As well, what we show on tv has changed drastically. You can watch the secrets of the human body being exposed in medical programs, see mass graves exposed in documentaries and on the news, rent videos of executions (faces of death) and take out graphic novels from your local library. In the past, these things were not as widely available, and if you really wanted this stuff, you would have to do a bit of work to get it. Don't get me wrong...I much prefer to have information shared freely as is becoming more common now, I am just saying that especially for those kids without adequate supervision, these kinds of age-inappropriate media are very easy to access.

Actually, I think video games are, at most, 40 years old. Most of the ones we have today are based off of stuff from 20-30 years ago.

There is also a question of it being inappropriate. Keep in mind Roman kids used to watch people slaughtered in the gladiator bouts. Violence being exposed to kids at even these levels isn't new, just fading back in.

What would make a person mentally equipped to participate in a simulated murder or simulated acts of violence? How do we try to 'protect' those that are NOT mentally equipped to do so? Children are certainly not equipped to watch pornography, and yet we don't consider watching violence to be as damaging. Why is that? It's definitely a societal issue, but the technology is a part of that. Do you have some stats or information on school slaughters dating back to the 1800s? I'm curious.

1) When they can tell the difference between it being and the outside world and understand it is not real and probably a bad idea.

2) We can't, really. Unless you want to isolate them in a house with no modern forms of entertainment.

3) Actually, there is no evidence porn actually is damaging to young kids. Before the idiots tried to get rid of it on the internet by pointing to it as a problem (they were really out to stop teenagers from viewing it), most kids below a certain age would look at it in disgust and move on. Those that didn't would ask questions, get answers that satisfied them, and moved on. Part of the US problem is it is socially backwards in the area of sex ed to children and should realize that children do have the capacity for a limited understanding of human reproduction at a young age.

4) Stats? I barely have reports it happened, and those are extremely difficult to find. Keep in mind the social views of the times.

Actually, videogames are not unique in that regard. Ever play pen and paper RPGs? If not, you do not know the joy of describing a character you are pretending to be stabbing someone in the chest with a knife while cutting off their head with a sword. Or sniping someone from 300 meters away with a high-powered sniper rifle. Or blowing up a small building as a distraction.



Actually, I think video games are, at most, 40 years old. Most of the ones we have today are based off of stuff from 20-30 years ago.

There is also a question of it being inappropriate. Keep in mind Roman kids used to watch people slaughtered in the gladiator bouts. Violence being exposed to kids at even these levels isn't new, just fading back in.



1) When they can tell the difference between it being and the outside world and understand it is not real and probably a bad idea.

2) We can't, really. Unless you want to isolate them in a house with no modern forms of entertainment.

3) Actually, there is no evidence porn actually is damaging to young kids. Before the idiots tried to get rid of it on the internet by pointing to it as a problem (they were really out to stop teenagers from viewing it), most kids below a certain age would look at it in disgust and move on. Those that didn't would ask questions, get answers that satisfied them, and moved on. Part of the US problem is it is socially backwards in the area of sex ed to children and should realize that children do have the capacity for a limited understanding of human reproduction at a young age.

4) Stats? I barely have reports it happened, and those are extremely difficult to find. Keep in mind the social views of the times.

I think the most interesting point you brought up was of Roman children watching gladiator bouts. (I never thought of kids being there...I wonder if it was a popular thing to take the kids to, or did they stay home? Weird.) No, violence is not new, nor are we a particularly MORE violent society than past ones. When we talk about the past, we often sanitize that past, and think of it as being part of a 'simpler, kinder' time. In fact, many brutalities have been committed by humans since the beginning of human history. The whole issue of media violence and its effect on children is one I am not really decided on, and I'm glad I'm able to discuss here to flesh out my ideas. I personally don't want my kids to watch violent t.v. or play violent video games, so I need to take an active part in their lives to make sure that they aren't being exposed to that at home. I also need to make sure that if they ARE exposed to it at some point (at their friend's houses or elsewhere) that they are not so sheltered they don't know how to deal with it. It's a fine balance. I read pretty gory books as a kid, with some pretty sexually explicit stuff too, but I didn't understand it all at the time, and I don't think it's warped me. I voted that I believe video game violence has an effect on people, but I take that back. I think the effect it has is to make people like me more concerned about what is influencing their kids, and that is probably a good thing. You made a good point about porn too...I think most kids would just say, 'yuck' and turn away. Not that I think people should be watching porn with kids around anyway. If I saw gross things on tv as a kid (like kissing...ewwww!:)) I DID turn away, and I never WANTED to watch horror movies. I censored myself, and still do, because I have a very active imagination and don't want to obsess about things for hours. Sigh. I'm not sure...I'll have to keep thinking about it all.

Seriously? Maybe it was just where I grew up. I graduated from high school in '95. Did you really mean 'at the very least'? That suggests that getting knifed would have been the least harmful thing that was likely to happen to them. As far as I know, no one in my province during the time I attended school, was ever knifed in a fight (teens, not adults).

Well, what I meant is that they were pretty often threatened with it. Of course, they were in school during integration in the '70s.

It does affect my behaviour. Letting rip on squadrons of Nazi soldiers on Call of Duty allows to to release tension I build up in the day. If I'm really busy and stressed, I build up tension, and am also unable to release tension in games. My irritability level rapidly rises, and I snap at people to release tension. I'd rather harm non-existant people than existant people.

Mikorlias of Imardeavia

well, of course, everything we do and occurs around us influences our behavior.

Of course it affects behaviour - it makes ordinary people talk in l33tspeak!

think about, it's a yellow guy eating coloured dudes, and at the same time eating as many pills as he can.

at least it GTA your killing people of all races.

Of course it affects behaviour - it makes ordinary people talk in l33tspeak!


LOLMAN

It does affect my behaviour. Letting rip on squadrons of Nazi soldiers on Call of Duty allows to to release tension I build up in the day. If I'm really busy and stressed, I build up tension, and am also unable to release tension in games. My irritability level rapidly rises, and I snap at people to release tension. I'd rather harm non-existant people than existant people.

Mikorlias of Imardeavia

What happens if you can't release your tension by playing video games? Let's say the power goes out...or your platform crashes...I think you may want to consider developing some OTHER ways of dealing with your tension...just in case :eek:

undefinedundefinedI believe, generally, that, yes, videos games can have an effect on whom ever plays them, but it's not the images on the screen that have the significant effect. It's message a person concludes from those images. If people were raised or came to believe that what's in a violent video game is okay, then they should be dealt with if they change their thoughts into action. For the majority of people, however, they know what is fine and what is considered an absolute crime. :headbang:

think about, it's a yellow guy eating coloured dudes, and at the same time eating as many pills as he can.

at least it GTA your killing people of all races.

And Mario is about an Italian guy jumping on turtles - you wouldn't make a movie about that, would you? Well, I tried but the film studio just weren't going to accept it. Damn executives.

I have played a great many FPS and RTS, also an MMORPG, and I have to say, none of the huge amount of killing I have done on my PC has made me a violent person. Not even close. So, from personal experience, I would say that the connection is tennuous at best.

Well, people always blame Columbine and other such tragedies on the video games they played, the music they listened to, and never think to consider it may be the fault of the people who SOLD them the guns and ammo, and the parents whose job it is to make sure the children are of sound mind

LOLMAN

Do you mean Laughing Out Loud, man or... LOLMAN?

I play violent video games a lot and I'm a staunch pacifist, so there isn't necessarily a connection.

Well, people always blame Columbine and other such tragedies on the video games they played, the music they listened to, and never think to consider it may be the fault of the people who SOLD them the guns and ammo, and the parents whose job it is to make sure the children are of sound mind
Of course not. It's not the guns. You just take the kiddies to the shooting range and teach them how to use them properly. It's the unions fault.

I think people are independent and capable of being violent of their own accord; video games, television, movies, etc. are fictional extremities, and I think when it comes down to it, each person is capable - regardless of age, maturity, or mental condition - of realizing that in some corner of their subconscious.

New Article About 8-Year-Old Who Set Gay Bar On Fire, Twelve Were Killed (http://www.mysundayschoolteachermademedoit.com)

(to balance out all the anti-videogame articles)

New Article About 8-Year-Old Who Set Gay Bar On Fire, Twelve Were Killed (http://www.mysundayschoolteachermademedoit.com)

(to balance out all the anti-videogame articles)

The link doesn't work. I'm sure he watches Tom and Jerry cartoons, though. :rolleyes:

No. They don't. Now if you don't mind, I have a mob of people to roast with my flamethrower.

Was a (not funny?) parody, sorry I guess...

Was a (not funny?) parody, sorry I guess...

I didn't mean that the parody was bad, I just meant that the link wasn't working. The web-site might be down or something.

violence influence behaviour? from games u must be joking people who do it is brain sick i got some 18 rated games but i dont go killing people

violence influence behaviour? from games u must be joking people who do it is brain sick i got some 18 rated games but i dont go killing people

violence influence behaviour? from games u must be joking people who do it is brain sick i got some 18 rated games but i dont go killing people

But you do go around double posting. :D

i am getting used to it

Ok. Well, I'm 15 and I play shooting games such as Counter Strike... the type of games the fundamental Christians want banned, but not the really sick games. And some games are sick, but the majority of people who play "violent" games aren't playing the sick ones (Postal 2). Anyway, I just have to disagree with the first post right at the top -- you said that the "video game training" produced a higher hit ratio among soldiers. Ok, well these games involve hand eye coordination, so practice on them is going to induce a higher hit ratio whatever the target. These soldiers weren't getting desensitised to killing, they were just becoming better marksmen. Anyway, it IS their job. When I play Counter Strike, I enjoy it not because I'm shooting people, but because when I win, I know I had a better stategy and better reflexes than my opponent. I'm shooting a bunch of pixels, with a bunch of pixels. Now, I do agree that a minority of the population could be influenced by the violence, but as for censorship NO WAY. Maybe not so many people would get shot in America if people didn't insist on their right to own a gun. It's just really stupid. And it's not the fault of the kids -- look at all the violence that adults create in the world today, and who makes these games? -- adults.

:sniper: Now.... back to CS (maybe I'm only kidding)

Ok. Well, I'm 15 and I play shooting games such as Counter Strike... the type of games the fundamental Christians want banned, but not the really sick games. And some games are sick, but the majority of people who play "violent" games aren't playing the sick ones (Postal 2). Anyway, I just have to disagree with the first post right at the top -- you said that the "video game training" produced a higher hit ratio among soldiers. Ok, well these games involve hand eye coordination, so practice on them is going to induce a higher hit ratio whatever the target. These soldiers weren't getting desensitised to killing, they were just becoming better marksmen. Anyway, it IS their job. When I play Counter Strike, I enjoy it not because I'm shooting people, but because when I win, I know I had a better stategy and better reflexes than my opponent. I'm shooting a bunch of pixels, with a bunch of pixels. Now, I do agree that a minority of the population could be influenced by the violence, but as for censorship NO WAY. Maybe not so many people would get shot in America if people didn't insist on their right to own a gun. It's just really stupid. And it's not the fault of the kids -- look at all the violence that adults create in the world today, and who makes these games? -- adults.

:sniper: Now.... back to CS (maybe I'm only kidding)

Right...adults make these games, generally for adults. So should kids be playing them?

As for video game training only improving hand to eye coordination...that was not the issue. These soldiers had already been trained to shoot, and did so quite well. What the army was finding however was that when it came down to real battle, the soldiers weren't prepared to fire at another human being. All of their programming up to that point had been from society telling them NOT to kill. They hadn't been desensitized enough to break free of that societal training. The video games helped them objectify human shapes, and increase their ability to go against a lifetime of conditioning in order to kill a fellow human being. If you can train adults, with a lifetime of social conditioning to kill, using video games, what prevents that from working the same way on children and teens? Sure, it's a soldier's job to kill, but when they come back from battle, they have to be reprogrammed to reenter society and NOT kill again. (usually by getting some down time before going home) It isn't the job of children or teens to kill, so why are we providing desentization training to them?

Just saying...

I used to play the Tenchu and Bushido Blade games quite a bit when i was younger.

I killed fourteen security guards and twenty two mall patrons with a samurai sword and a knife before massacring the staff of the knife store in a series of personal duels.

Right...adults make these games, generally for adults. So should kids be playing them?

As for video game training only improving hand to eye coordination...that was not the issue. These soldiers had already been trained to shoot, and did so quite well. What the army was finding however was that when it came down to real battle, the soldiers weren't prepared to fire at another human being. All of their programming up to that point had been from society telling them NOT to kill. They hadn't been desensitized enough to break free of that societal training. The video games helped them objectify human shapes, and increase their ability to go against a lifetime of conditioning in order to kill a fellow human being. If you can train adults, with a lifetime of social conditioning to kill, using video games, what prevents that from working the same way on children and teens? Sure, it's a soldier's job to kill, but when they come back from battle, they have to be reprogrammed to reenter society and NOT kill again. (usually by getting some down time before going home) It isn't the job of children or teens to kill, so why are we providing desentization training to them?

Just saying...

I (15) am sort of naturally tending towards viciousness. I play violent games like Aliens vs Predator and Rune, but I can tell you that these are merely an outlet. Come on - most people have a dark desire to see what it is like to cut a head off - but most people are intelligent enough to realise it's morally reprehensible, whereas killing characters isn't.

Basically, it can only set off violence if you are already violent. Anybody ever heard of a normal kid, with NO problems, playing Unreal and then psychopathically chain-gunning 300 people to death?

Right...adults make these games, generally for adults. So should kids be playing them?

As for video game training only improving hand to eye coordination...that was not the issue. These soldiers had already been trained to shoot, and did so quite well. What the army was finding however was that when it came down to real battle, the soldiers weren't prepared to fire at another human being. All of their programming up to that point had been from society telling them NOT to kill. They hadn't been desensitized enough to break free of that societal training. The video games helped them objectify human shapes, and increase their ability to go against a lifetime of conditioning in order to kill a fellow human being. If you can train adults, with a lifetime of social conditioning to kill, using video games, what prevents that from working the same way on children and teens? Sure, it's a soldier's job to kill, but when they come back from battle, they have to be reprogrammed to reenter society and NOT kill again. (usually by getting some down time before going home) It isn't the job of children or teens to kill, so why are we providing desentization training to them?

Just saying...
Please note you own key phrase "helped to objectify". The problem is parents not taking care of their kids, not the games themselves. In fact it has been proven that many video games, violent ones included, are a great stress reducer. If the soldiers had not had any of their other training then the games wouldn't have had an adverse effect.

Define 'good' and 'bad'.

So do you think that 'good kids' are born that way, or are they taught to be 'good'? If no one is there to properly 'teach' that kid to be good, will these games skew their vision of the world? We can't force parents to be GOOD parents. There were plenty of fights all through school when I was growing up too, but you never worried about getting knifed or shot...that isn't so anymore. There has to be a reason. Again, I'm not laying this on video games or media alone...I think it has a lot to do with crappy parenting. I'm just trying to understand something that probably isn't linked clearly to any one thing.

I don't know any parent who has ever let their kids play the games before they think they are mature enough to play them. Maybe in the few cases where this is the case and young kids get a hold of these games, they might go bad. My parents let me play any game I want and have done for many years now. I don't really have the urge to set a gay bar on fire right now. I'm not sure where you are, but I'm still not scared of being shot or knived. And if a kid does go mad and starts shooting, I doubt it's because of video games. Video games are simply a part of our culture. You'll find most kids play them and kids who are not athletic might play them more.

To bring in Columbine and for the media to mention they played video games... Was something stupid. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well have gone on and mentioned they liked wearing jeans, and jeans possess people to do nasty things to classmates.

If anything, kids do things because they had a crappy upbringing (in this, I do not include allowing children to play games too 'mature' for them, because if this was so, I would have had a crappy upbringing). They also blamed Marilyn Manson for Columbine. Blaming stuff on people doesn't work well, because they tend to strike out and defend themselves. If kids survive something, they'll delibrately blame something to maybe level down the trouble they are in. 'Gullible', everyone will say. So they blame it on computer games, a faceless aspect of culture that can't strike back and defend itself.

And the media do the same. They blame the games because they can get away with it without having to mention names of individual games. It's very rare that people mention video games may benefit children, developing skills from an early age... Because people want to hear games corrupt kids.

Sorry for not answering your question :P

I somehow managed to miss this the first time around.Video games, in their early inception, were used not only as a leisure time activity, but also as a tool by armed forces to help 'simulate' battle situations. Research had shown that without significant desensitization, troops were unable to maintain an effective fire ratio (bullets fired vs. targets hit). Desensitization quite effectively increased that ratio. Troops would play 'war games' using the new technology, and become more used to firing at human targets. The program was a stunning success.Linkity link-link?
I am aware of several developments in armed forces post-WW2 which have been aimed specifically at de-sensitizing soldiers. The absolutely, positively most effective of these is "interactive target practice", shooting at pop-up, human-looking targets that go down when you hit them at a pre-arranged "scenario" with live ammo.

The second most important, although a very new technology and thus unlikely to have affected any but the most recent conflicts, is what is known as the MILES system -- using blank ammunition with laser-gear to simulate kills at virtual CQB against your mates.

The former method is generally accepted as the reason for why soldiers in modern armies have become less and less likely not to be able to shoot at enemy combatants in wars since WW2. I have read a few articles on the percentage of US soldiers that effectively engaged enemy soldiers in WW2 through to Desert Storm. The massive change between, for example, WW2, Korea and Vietnam certainly cannot be explained with video games. [Links coming soon if Google approves.]

The only people I feel like being violent to, after playing a good game, is the people that say "violent games influence behaviour"... :sniper: :D

The use of paintball-type ammunition in scenarios similar to the use of MILES and similar laser gear should probably have been mentioned. This is even more recent, though.

http://www.killology.com/art_beh_solution.htm
Junk science which claims to prove that video games, along with human-looking pop-up targets and other new training methods, produce killers

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/05/06/game_violence/index.html
Salon Technology's rebuttalPutting aside the argument that computer games transform their players into soldiers, one is left with the somewhat more plausible theory that games bring out aggression among adolescents and adults. While it's been shown that 5-year-olds, after playing a karate video game, will go around chopping at each other, young children are highly impressionable by just about any stimulus. Therefore, older kids are more interesting from a scientific perspective; but they are also more problematic to study -- observing them at unguarded play is nearly impossible. So most studies of adolescents and adults have them hammer on the fire button and then answer a battery of questions.

Funk's most recent work in this vein will be presented in public in August at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association. Her study hypothesized that adolescents "with a preference for violent games would be associated with more behavioral problems, particularly externalizing problems such as aggressive behavior." But the facts proved otherwise.

As it turns out, 10-year-old gamers who preferred a lot of violence scored higher on internalizing and anxious-depressed behaviors scales -- meaning they were withdrawn, not aggressive. On the other hand, those with a preference for less violent games scored highest on the delinquent behavior scale. Shifting away from the aggression thesis, Funk concluded that future studies should focus on correlations between time spent playing computer games and subsequent depression.

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/06/21/game_violence/index.html
More by Salon Technology on about the same issues

Some rather more suspicious looking rebuttals of Grossman's ideas on behavioral psychology:
http://www.theppsc.org/Grossman/Main-R.htm
An exchange with Grossman and Tom Aveni (http://www.theppsc.org/Staff/Aveni/Tom.htm), looks like it's been "retouched" a bit

http://www.theppsc.org/Grossman/SLA_Marshall/Main.htm
Comments on Grossman's use of a particular book to back up his claims

Following links from these articles you can find a lot more stuff on the matter.

Thank you for those links! It's hard being a fairly new parent, because all sorts of beliefs you had before having children are called into question...everyone has an opinion or a suggestion for you, and you're not really sure what advice to take. I try to raise my kids the way I was raised, but so many things have changed, and I can't expect to keep them in a time bubble just so they'll be 'safe' (and imagining that there were no external dangers during my own childhood is pure fantasy anyway). I have very mixed feelings about media in general, based on strong political beliefs. Well. In any case, these links have helped and I will give them some good thought. Everyone's comments have been great, so thank you!

Although you can find these linked at the bottom of the Salon articles I linked to earlier, here are two more articles about the general matter of Video Game Violence:
Doom, Quake and mass murder (http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/04/23/gamers/)
Quake, Doom and bloodlust (http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/05/12/game_violence/)
Slightly different PoVs, written in the post-columbine media athmosphere.

[This Is Not A Bump]

I do think that some video games could influence kids into having bad behavior. I have heard before (not sure if this is true) that the kids from Columbine also played a lot of those shooting video games. And on the news last night they were talking about a video game (called the JFK something) where you have to recreate the shooting of JFK (in the point of view as the person that killed him). So I do think that some more gullible kids could be influenced by video games and start to act differently.

People use lots of excuses for inexcusable behaviour.

"I was drunk at the time"
"He had it coming"
oh and "this person was clearly affected by violent video games"

Whatever. If someone can't tell the difference between real life and pixels, they don't belong outside of a cell anyway. No video game can give you a gun, load it for you, cock it for you and pull the trigger for you. You do that all yourself, and you take the consequences for those actions.

Incidentally, the game you're on about is JFK:Reloaded - and yeah, after downloading the demo and giving it a go I really want to go out and kill heads of state!

Honest.

www.jfkreloaded.com - see for yourself.

The game promises ultra-realistic bullet physics, yet says you have to aim high to account for bullet drop. Firing 160gr bullets from a 6.5x52mm Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, the muzzle velocity would probably have been somewhere slightly below 2000fps. I would expect Mr Oswald zeroed his sights to the expected range -- somewhere between 30 and 100 meters. This way the greatest difference between the trajectory and the sight picture at the actual firing distances would be very small -- somewhere around 2", tops.

NO THEY DONT!!! Just cause an idiot takes a knife to school, they blame it on HITMAN 2!!! NO! LEAVE THE GAMES ALONE!!! :sniper: :sniper: :sniper:

The problem of make believe violence affecting life is as old as the hills, The Greeks decided first and probably for the best that Watching violence in the theatre would infact sate their appitite for it, through Catharsis, and infact purge nasty thoughts from their persons, Society can't be held at randsome because Parents refuse to teach their children anything, they call it freedom. So if you don't like videogames where you kill your father and marry your mother, don't watch them, but don't be sad when everybody around the water cooler talks about how kickass the Xbox is

the Prime Minister of Catharsiadum

I used to play the Tenchu and Bushido Blade games quite a bit when i was younger.

I killed fourteen security guards and twenty two mall patrons with a samurai sword and a knife before massacring the staff of the knife store in a series of personal duels.

That happens to me all the time.

That happens to me all the time....which is bragable.