Should video game violence be blamed

[effilctar]

OK, I'm 17 now, and still when I buy a violent game, my mum tells me about some idiot who was influenced by the game to commit crime: "some young boy killed his friend because of what he saw on Manhunt" or "some asian bloke killed a taxi driver to see if it was as easy as GTA4". There are two things I want to know really:

1) Are the video games really to blame or are the retards saying it was because of the game in hope that the media will focus on the game rather than them.

2) Should the age rating on a game be replaced with a common sense rating instead?
"What would you do with a car?"
"drive it down the wrong side of the road to see if it's as easy as GTA"
"Okey Dokey, you failed the common sense test, you cannot have this game"

 

[Cpt_Oblivious]

I think it's the fault of the idiots who can't tell the difference between games and reality then go out and do crazy shit like that. The games are a form of entertainment and millions of people enjoy then without going out and killing people, so it can't be the games fault.

 

[GodsOneMistake]

There has been absolutely NO proof that violent video games cause violence, and most people don't even need a study to see that, but people are morons...

For 2) I actually like that idea, but I wish it was that simple....

 

[effilctar]

I think it's the fault of the idiots who can't tell the difference between games and reality then go out and do crazy shit like that. The games are a form of entertainment and millions of people enjoy then without going out and killing people, so it can't be the games fault.

This. I play GTA 4 and if anything, it stops me from being violent in real life. I'm sure without venting my anger out in violent games, I'd have killed that guy in my maths class by now

 

[crooked_ferret]

Sure blame the video games, anything to take away from personal responsibility , because personal responsibility really sucks.
People shouldn't be held accountable for their actions /sarcasm.

 

[IglooKid]

If you are the sort of person who would kill your friend with a bat/stomp on a baby kitten etc then you already must have a catalouge of problems, sure maybe playing a violent videogame might have inspired these people, but IF it had then they were definately not mentally sound in the first place.

 

[MassiveGeek]

1. If you ask me, blaming the games is just stupid. I mean, I've played alot of games, but the only influence they ever had on me is increasing of my creativity and more ideas for my drawings. As they say here in sweden atleast; "there is no bad weather, only bad clothes", I can say "there is no bad games, only bad people". I mean, seriously, its just human stupidity if people do things they saw in games in real life. They obviously have some kind of non-game related issues.

2. Doesnt sound to bad, but kinda hard to achieve. Take some sorta test every time before you buy a game? In that case it would be smarter with some kind of "I can handle violent games without acting like a braindead idiot"-liscense. Even though I do agree with what they're trying to do by putting age rating on games, but they serve more as a warning than anything else. They're kind of unecessary. You can just get your parents to buy the games for you if they wont sell them directly to you.

 

[pantsoffdanceoff]

"there is no bad weather, only bad clothes"

That's a pretty neat quote. Definitely saving that one.

 

[HentMas]

bad audience to ask, but yeah, everyone here will say video games cant influense people, perhaps a biased oppinion seeing that everyone here play video games

and no, video games cant make people do anything or influence their actions.

 

[effilctar]

You can just get your parents to buy the games for you if they wont sell them directly to you.

This is also an issue I forgot to mention. A lot of it is down to bad parenting. The age rating is there for a reason and if a child has got their hands on this game and it has influenced real life action, it is the parent to blame, rather than the game

 

[Valiance]

This is a gaming forum, and we're all intelligent people.

So yeah, obviously we don't think so.

 

[antipunt]

I think it's the fault of the idiots who can't tell the difference between games and reality then go out and do crazy shit like that. The games are a form of entertainment and millions of people enjoy then without going out and killing people, so it can't be the games fault.

^This. It's called catharsis. I wouldn't be surprised if violent video games actually contributed towards -less- violence in society.

 

[RollForInitiative]

Maybe it's just me, but I enjoy playing violent games because I'm not doing violent things in real life.

 

[koichan]

There has been absolutely NO proof that violent video games cause violence, and most people don't even need a study to see that, but people are morons...

This mainly, and the fact that practically ANY crime committed by anyone under 30 is automatically blamed on games by certain people (J Thompson + many other politicians looking for handy scapegoats)

Also for certain criminals, it's the new insanity plea to deflect blame
"It wasn't my fault, the games made me do it!"

 

[Outamyhead]

OK, I'm 17 now, and still when I buy a violent game, my mum tells me about some idiot who was influenced by the game to commit crime: "some young boy killed his friend because of what he saw on Manhunt" or "some asian bloke killed a taxi driver to see if it was as easy as GTA4". There are two things I want to know really:

1) Are the video games really to blame or are the retards saying it was because of the game in hope that the media will focus on the game rather than them.

2) Should the age rating on a game be replaced with a common sense rating instead?
"What would you do with a car?"
"drive it down the wrong side of the road to see if it's as easy as GTA"
"Okey Dokey, you failed the common sense test, you cannot have this game"

You can tell your mum that the manhunt incident was a 14 year old kid who wasn't allowed the game, killed a 13 year old boy who did own Manhunt with a hammer, but they blamed the game anyway.

And the Taxi driver being killed, well that was a nut job who read one too many Special Forces books and wanted to re-enact a throat cutting section of the book.

1. Video games are always a scape goat for someone being a little out of touch with reality, or a teenager/child that has not been disciplined properly, they blamed columbine on the Matrix at first, the movie wasn't even out yet, later on they found out the kids were bat shit crazy from camcorder footage of them both.

2. The labeling is quite clear on the age range that are and are not allowed to purchase it, it's (for the millionth time) down to the parents responsibility to observe and correct their children on what they are doing, if the children are nut jobs in general, then get the kid some sessions with a psychotherapist to try and straighten them out.

 

[Swat_Kat]

I've been a gamer ever since I was 6 and that's really weird. I was watching my dad blast away at pixelized mosnters in Doom and blowing up Hitler in a combat suit in the first Wolfenstein 3D game then he turned to a pile of bloody chunks while swearing in german. And yet I have never killed anyone or remotely smahed some guy's face in a wall because of my preteen violent educations.

It's all down to how down to earth someone is, if he has a problem connecting to reality, then yeah he's gonna go on a killing spree because what ever his name is in GTA does it.

 

[Shycte]

Games are for the media what the Jews were for Hitler.

Something to point at and say 'it is their fault.

Everything is easier of you have someone to blame.

Especially if we're talking about things like Columbine High.

 

[esperandote]

risking having stones thrown at me, maybe, well... not only games (wich is the newer media to bring violence to people) but all media.

Do you imagine that if violence never got into movies and tv? if we didn't allow our kids to play thives and cops? would there be less violence, i think its possible.

But it is as it is, there's violence and sex everywhere and most people live surronded by it and doesn't affects them.

 

[Cuniculus]

Heh. Common sense rating.

These people are idiots, plain and simple. At what point is it the responsibility of parents, and not society to take care of kids? They want everything bad off of the internet. They want games to have age restrictions. They want so much from us, just because THEY have kids that they don't feel like looking after. Screw them. If they can't parent properly, it isn't our problem.

 

[Estelindis]

Those who haven't studied the history of literature may be unaware of this - but, during the rise of the novel, many people blamed the escapism that a person could enjoy through reading a novel for their societies various woes. Yet, today, quite a few books from that then-new format are regarded as classics and students are forced to read them for self-betterment.

I wonder how history will judge computer games? Will people be studying classic games like Planescape: Torment 200 years from now? (Hey, I think people should be studying it now. ;-) ) It's worth thinking about.

Anyway, my lecturer in the Rise of the Novel course once pointed out something very disquieting about the tendency to lay the blame for modern violence on movies, games, comics, etc. He said that people who worry that such things might be a bad influence always worry about them leading *others* to violence. They never worry about how the various media might influence *them* - they esteem themselves highly enough to regard themselves as resistent. Food for thought, eh?