Erik Kühlkamp GuestSpotter

Now Playing: Call of Duty (PC), Homeworld 2 (PC), Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield (PC), Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne (PC)

Video Games Just Aren't Real

Over the course of video game history, issues concerning video game violence have become more and more common. Why should this even be an issue? This is simple entertainment we're talking about here, which is something that's not too far from watching a movie or a football game. But does anyone go out and tackle the closest person holding an oval-shaped object after watching a football game? Does anyone go out and start a Fight Club-like organization after seeing the movie? Has anyone had the overwhelming urge to jump over someone's head after playing checkers for too long? Video game violence is blamed these days because it's the easiest thing to blame. It's blamed because an easy and obvious correlation can be drawn between the abstract violence presented in many video games and real-world acts of violence. But the fact is, video games just aren't real.

How can you blame him?

While I was playing Counter-Strike, about a half a year ago, my father walked into my room and happened to see me score a kill--in the game, of course. He was shocked at the violence re-created in the game and forbid me from playing it. Granted, I've been playing violent video games for years, but I abided by my father's wishes. For the next few weeks, my parents were keenly attentive to any of my comments or actions that carried even a tinge of violence and then accused me of being violent and cold-hearted. A parent's concern about his or her child's mental health is understandable, but automatically placing the blame on video games is just ignorant.

A recent Gallup poll showed that roughly 71 percent of teenage boys in North America have played one of the Grand Theft Auto games, so why haven't they all gone out and killed someone? Or even half? Or a quarter? The answer, which is maybe too obvious, is that most people are sane. Individuals who can't discern the difference between real life and a video game are likely struggling with other, serious psychological issues. Take into account 16-year-old William and 14-year-old Joshua Buckner, who told police they were emulating Grand Theft Auto on the night of June 25, 2003, when they took shotguns to Interstate 40, near their Newport, Tennessee, home, and opened fire on vehicles. Their emulation resulted in the death of one motorist and the infliction of serious injury to another. In written statements, both teenagers expressed remorse for their actions. "I will always hate myself for what I did. I am so sorry," wrote William Buckner. "I didn't want to hurt anyone," wrote Joshua Buckner. This is a perfect example of two people whose lines between real life and simulation were blurred. They apparently realized that there are consequences to violence, albeit a little too late. Yes, they were emulating the video game, but isn't it a bit more disconcerting that they had easy, unsupervised access to 12-gauge shotguns? Where were the parents?

So why not blame anything else? Why not blame the Die Hard series for its violence? People who kill others do this because they are mentally unstable, not because they play GTA III in their spare time. People are born with natural instincts, hardwired aggressiveness, the need to socialize, and their fundamental personalities. These things can, of course, be suppressed or amplified during their development by a variety of factors. But think for a minute. Who has more impact on a child's perspective? Their parents and other adult role models? Or Gordon Freeman? If the answer is Gordon Freeman, then there is something fundamentally wrong with that person's upbringing. If video games didn't fill the void, something else would--and not necessarily something better.

Is this real or fake?

The fact is, video games just aren't real, no matter how hard they try. Some video games attempt to be as realistic as possible. But let's face it. What of it is so realistic that would actually make you believe that you are a Rainbow Six operative in real life? You need to eat, to sleep, to use the washroom, and to feel separate real life from video games. What does a video game re-create? The sound and the fury of combat--distilled into tiny little squares that are projected on to a flat screen by electronic signals sent through an artificial diaphragm. No "smell of napalm in the morning," no feeling of hot lead ripping through your body, no taste of MREs, not even the motion sickness that comes after riding in a helicopter for two and a half hours. To make the leap between an extremely abstract piece of entertainment and tangible brutality is absurd. Video games don't re-create the remorse after killing or murder because the sane player knows that a simple NPC dressed in a security guard outfit isn't a real person. Likewise, the ability to conceal a chain saw in a tracksuit isn't possible. What's in video games is fun.

A video game is created to simulate the verboten--or the impossible--to crudely act out primal fantasies. People who make the reality leap necessary to carry these acts out in real life are already on the brink; they just need a little push. Video games are blamed because authorities don't want to blame themselves for their own neglect. Video games are meant to be fun--no more, no less.