Former FBI Profiler Says Games Don't Cause Violence

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Sergey Sund:

hentropy:

It's not so much a matter of "kids" so much as "teens". Imagine you're a 13 year old or so, what options for video games do you really have? Take the top games of 2012: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/184637/The_10_bestselling_games_of_2012.php
[...]
It's easy to say it's the parent's responsibility ....

Thank you.
I never thought about it this way.
I was always on the "parent's responsibility"-side of the argument, but that is partialy because I have worked retail now for a while and I see shitty parents all the time.
Seriously, the amount of people who decide on behalf of their children what DVDs and video games they can have and get it wrong is horrible.
However, I see now that they have a choice:
Give your kid some kid's-age game, which will not engage them and bore them to tears while possibly hindering their development in terms of "not being able to handle X situation".
OR
Give your kid an adult game. Here you have the risk that your kid can't handle the adult themes, but then again, you can always take that game away if your kid is suddenly having nightmares. And your kid can always talk to you, right?

What games would be good for teens? Point-and-click adventure games with more mature themes? Something like the first Tomb Raider games (platforming and shooting animals, with graphics that render it almost harmless)?

The 90s had it pretty well covered. That was a whole generation of people really starting to game for the first time, so the main audience were teenagers who were getting too old for cutesy Mario and Pokemon games but still not quite old enough for really mature stuff, so the bulk of it was pretty good in that sense. There were adult-oriented games, of course, mainly in more complicated old-school RPGs and such, but it really started with shooters like GoldenEye and Half-Life/Counter-Strike, all of a sudden you weren't just killing imaginary beasts or beating insanely evil and fantastical bad guys, you were killing Russians and marines. The old RPGs didn't have a whole lot of graphics to them, so the violence wasn't quite as realistic or graphic. Of course there was Mortal Kombat and similar fighting games, but that was the worst it got. Even when you think of Doom or Duke Nukem, the majority of things you were blowing up and killing and vaporizing weren't fellow human beings.

This generation grew up, of course, and now make up the majority of mainstream gamers. But it also means the current generation of teens is growing up with this material, not going through the same phases as 80s or 90s kids went through with gaming.

To be clear, I'm not saying these violent games are really all that bad, but you can't really blame non-gamers for looking at the current state of gaming and thinking it's a tad bit violent, especially when it comes to violence against other people. Even a fantasy game like Skyrim, which would be a perfect game to include a lot of beasts and non-human baddies you can kill, still has a zillion generic bandits you have to cut through around every corner. Most people know this is just a basic way to run a game like that, and that the bandits are just groups of pixels moved by programming behavior, but some people might conflate that with actual people, when actual people aren't generic randomly-generated groups of pixels, they're humans with actual friends and families and hobbies and hopes and fears.

This example does not apply to me because i have stopped getting angry over games lnog time ago, but lets say whats the difference between:

i get angry that a guy online made fun of me ingame so i punched a pillow
vs
i get angry that a boss at work made fun of me so i punched a pillow

anyone?
Maybe we should look at much more prominent causes of anger, such as bullying and toxic work enviroments (aka as the american business model)

Capcha: school is cool
ok, this made me more angry than any game in thel ast 3 years. capcha correlates with agression, we must ban it.

Skimmed that report over a bit and can't really say it makes any sense. At all.

From what i can tell by just looking over it, it is just a quotation of sources that agree with them spinned into a nice propaganda piece of violent video games cause violence.

Weather you like TB or not, this video about videogame violence is probably the best thing he ever made

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uwAo8lcAC4

wombat_of_war:

cursedseishi:
Sadly this pointless, moronic, debate will never end.

The idea of scapegoating new sources of entertainment as a way of saying "This is the root of our ills!" has been going on for... well as long as we've been developing major and widely available forms of entertainment.

Books dealt with this once we were able to cheaply mass produce them.
Radio dealt with this once people could own them more easily.
Music dealt with this likely well before Elvis Presley.
Movies dealt with this since the moment someone flashed their ankle.
Television dealt with this the moment, well, Television came out I bet.
And now games are dealing with this. As soon as the next form of entertainment arrives, all of these brainless shills will completely forget about video games and start pointing their fingers at it instead.

All the while completely ignoring the difference between "correlation" and "causation", or how much something as simple as a little parental involvement might help, not to mention schools and other places we trust to take care of our kids actually stepping up to, you know, help keep our kids in a better environment like every public school swears they already do.

you forgot the whole dungeons and dragons cause kids to engage in satanic human sacrifice that was a big thing in the 1980's crap that was a pain in the ass movement.

Also the interwebz will make us all into monkeys that just sit around and jack off because AOL is owned by satan.

Real problem is the same that it always has been the trolls that are atrachted to being news people. The only difference is that now in the digital age EVERY SINGLE TIME something happens that they can blow out of proportion, they do. It looks like we are having more problems, because the single incidents are able to be reported quickly and to everyone. Unlike say

If you take the word of these idiots then 40%-50% of all gamers would have started running down the streets killing every living thing they saw people, kids, cats, dogs, squirrels, bugs, birds, plants. They would all be shot, cut, and burned just to satisfy our need to kill things.

Competitiveness can cause violence more so than watching fake violence. Unfortunately they go hand in hand with the most popular games these days seeing as they all have multiplayer.

Anyone get angry watching an animal get skinned in Far Cry 3?

Anyone get angry when playing a mutliplayer shooter?

I really hope that people start to actually listen to a fucking threat assessment specialist from the FBI.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here