Violence in Society

[NeedAUserName]

I was thinking, the media hates Video Games that are violent, but doesn't give a toss about violent sports, i.e. Rugby, American Football and Ice Hockey. Just wonder why that was, I mean admittedly Video Game violence is a lot gorier (for lack of a better word) but still with games at least your only using a couple of fingers to do it. Where as in sports you can physically punish/ be punished by someone and it can get very nasty, but no one really cares that much.

 

[Johnn Johnston]

Ah, but the sports make a lot of lucrative advertising deals for the TV companies. The media aren't going to lash out at them, or else their bosses would be ever-so-slightly annoyed at them.

 

[John Galt]

That and the fact that the end goal in sports isn't to steal cars and get multi-kills, but rather to score points and such.

 

[NeedAUserName]

Yeah I suppose, still people should lay off violent games a bit if they are willing to let other kinds of violence go unscathed.

 

[NeedAUserName]

That and the fact that the end goal in sports isn't to steal cars and get multi-kills, but rather to score points and such.

Ah but what about The Club? That was all about getting points

 

[Limasol]

Fact is we are a medium of entertainment that's new to the mainstream, we are distrusted and not understood. I saw a BBC report on E3 that said the console industry would sink if E3 flopped, wishful thinking sir!! i shouted at my computer....at work...anyways, once we are as established as film and music and sports and TV serials everything will be fine, just look at south Korea.

 

[NeedAUserName]

Wow just thought of a comment that would get me banned.

Anyway,Yeah I suppose but still, people should lay off the games, I mean fair do's some of the games deserve it, i.e. Manhunt, but most don't and anyone that can't tell the difference between entertainment and real life doesn't deserve to be entertained

 

[TheBadass]

It's no really a fair comparison. I mean, how many hookers have you killed playing Rugby? It's got to be at most three.

 

[Iron Mal]

Video games are also a very good scapegoat, if a teenager was to waltz into their local school with a .50 cal machine gun and reduce 12 students, 3 teachers and themselves to a fine paste..games would probably be seen as a potential motivation or influence due to association (you shoot people in games so...).

It's a lot easier to blame video games than it is to admit personal fault.

Also, violent sports are more socially acceptible since they're typically played by more sociable and 'jockish' people rather than those edgy, weird pariahs who sit in front of a computer all day.

 

[Johnn Johnston]

It's no really a fair comparison. I mean, how many hookers have you killed playing Rugby? It's got to be at most three.

You have clearly never seen a Scotsman play rugby. Three per game is considered a low score a horrible, horrible tragedy.

 

[jdog345]

Video games cut into TV's business.

 

[TheBadass]

It's no really a fair comparison. I mean, how many hookers have you killed playing Rugby? It's got to be at most three.

You have clearly never seen a Scotsman play rugby. Three per game is considered a low score a horrible, horrible tragedy.

Damn, I've never got over two points understood how that could happen.

 

[NeedAUserName]

It's no really a fair comparison. I mean, how many hookers have you killed playing Rugby? It's got to be at most three.

You have clearly never seen a Scotsman play rugby. Three per game is considered a low score a horrible, horrible tragedy.

Ahh Scottish Rugby, my favorite pass time. I play under 16s. We like to hurt and win.

 

[Copter400]

That and the fact that the end goal in sports isn't to steal cars and get multi-kills, but rather to score points and such.

Ah but what about The Club? That was all about getting points

Isn't that the game where you participate in an undeground blood-sport and kill hundreds of people?

 

[Johnn Johnston]

It's no really a fair comparison. I mean, how many hookers have you killed playing Rugby? It's got to be at most three.

You have clearly never seen a Scotsman play rugby. Three per game is considered a low score a horrible, horrible tragedy.

Ahh Scottish Rugby, my favorite pass time. I play under 16s. We like to hurt and win.

Winning isn't so much an issue for some people I've played alongside. One team we played against, I recall, tackled their own team five times in one game.

 

[Birras]

If anything drives people to kill, it's things we consider wholesome. Anything from religion to standing next to a microwave for too long can drive people to violence, I hardly think a shiny plastic disc is among them.

 

[fulano]

I think this particular topic of videogames is not considered fairly. Videogames get a lot of shit because of two reasons:

1.- Interactivity.
2.- Constant striving for realism.

People role play, and immerse themselves in a series of rules where they can go around committing fictional crimes or acts of violence. Again, the problem is more akin to the idea of violence and its perceived acceptance by specific sectors of society according to a big portion of traditionally inclined people.

Time will come when the actual censorship will have to be done "in house" rather than from the outside. Developers won't want to be associated with a product that could be argued to promote actual violent tendencies or delve into distasteful territory when dealing with the realism of the works they will be producing.

The fact is, that within fifteen years, technology will have gone so far as to render a person's innards coming out after a particularly powerful blow in extremely realistic fashion and by then it will be considered normal in games of that ilk. Also, videogames are far, far from neutral when it comes to violence. The idea of violent confrontation is very much part of us, but used "as is" as direct means of addressing conflict is very seldom used in entertainment. People proceeded to shit tons of bricks over manhunt 2 no matter the game looked silly and didn't have the best graphics, what bothered people and the conservative pundits was the idea of murder simulating for the fun of it because, make no mistake, many videogames are indeed murder simulators when looked at from a pragmatic lens albeit bad ones for now, though one could argue that that's the case for consumer avalable goods; the U.S military is already using VR simulations for actual soldier training so there you have it, maybe it doesn't look pretty but someone up there in the army thinks it's useful.

The sole act of saying "lay off my games!" doesn't solve the issue in my oppinion. Games have to be scrutinized a lot, and even more now, with the coming technology being projected as far, far supperior than our current one. Just shoving the issue aside doesn't do anything in favor of the gaming community.

I was going to delve into matters about sensitivity to violence and whatnot but decided to stop at that.

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

I believe that the most disturbing aspect of formalized athletics is that the practictioners will typically apply the sport's assessment traits and apply them to other individuals outside of the sport.

For example, wrestlers who devalue less muscular people since from their perspective they are worse wrestlers, hence less threatening, hence not worth caring about.

This extends further to where male peer to peer evaluation ends up being based on a person's athletic value despite the relevance of the athletics. I can only imagine how this extends into personal relationships where an American Football player, who's been yelled at like an animal to "tear apart his opponent" and to "get angry", becomes angry at his girlfriend or parents.