Article: Video Games Normalize Killing, Doctors Say

Check this out: http://www.ketv.com/news/15249738/detail.html

Yet another article trying to make games look bad. At least they give both points of view on the issue, and state that parents are the ultimate control on what their kids should play.

This is not slander, like that Fox News article. These are genuine concerns. However, it's all theory at this point and movies and news on TV have been doing the same things for years. Yet, somehow, they remain safe from flak.

The video game industry notes that the research also finds that teenagers have similar responses to violence in movies or TV. The industry said no one can prove a definitive link between virtual violence and the real thing.

I'm glad they brought this up. A hate it when articles simply say that video-games make you violent, because they can activate violent centers of your brain while playing them. They never bring up the fact that something as simple as playing chess or listening to someone snoring can do the same thing.

Im glad you mentioned that it is down to parents to govern their children, lately alot of adults have gone down the path of abdicating all responsibility for their children to others.

From blaming the police for paedophiles, to blaming games companies for violent games.

In the end the only one responsible for their actions are themselves, and if they are naive/easily influenced the parents.

You know what really normalizes killing? War. How about we work on stopping that first, eh?

Anyone find it hilarious that the family they quote is named "Payne"? :lol:

Anyways, the headline was a tad sensationalistic for my tastes, but the article wasn't too bad. They pointed out similar effects in movies and such which is good, because my opinion has been that it's probably not a great thing to play endless hours of bloodly, violent videogames, but the same principle applies to any other work that glorifies violence. It's a matter of moderation, of playing videogames that aren't purely about that, and that applies to all mediums. The article did an adequate job of pointing that out by directly comparing a violent game to a non-violent one.

I think we're all collectively too defensive. This wasn't an attack article, nor something that claimed anything particularly outrageous. Violent experiences will cause a propensity towards violence, sure. But a balanced person living a balanced life won't be affected to any significant degree.

I'm someone who wants to have kids, and I think what I'll do is let them play videogames for as long as they want (as long as it's not to the point where their health, mental or physical, is affected), but limit the exposure they have to violent content. There are violent videogames worth playing, but I'd rather my kids learn the value of challenging gameplay rather than spectacular gore.

The whole thing is complete bullcrap. Probably just another game-hating lawyer *Jack Thompson, cough cough.*mcfuzzy20

Have you bothered to actually read the whole article?

[QUOTE="mcfuzzy20"]The whole thing is complete bullcrap. Probably just another game-hating lawyer *Jack Thompson, cough cough.*lordlors

Have you bothered to actually read the whole article?

Do you even need to ask that question? :P

If videogames normalize killing, then tv, internet, and movies normalize it too. Thiago26792

Also something the article points out.

You know what really normalizes killing? War. How about we work on stopping that first, eh?

AtomicTangerine

Yep, and butcher shops, hunter's clubs, and gun shops. Violence is violence, no matter the reason or victims.

... I think we're all collectively too defensive. This wasn't an attack article, nor something that claimed anything particularly outrageous. Violent experiences will cause a propensity towards violence, sure. But a balanced person living a balanced life won't be affected to any significant degree. ...

I'Oilers99

It wasn't a blatant attack article, but it was an attack article.

My favorite quote from the article was "Then, when they're done playing, that's all that's on their mind, kill, kill, kill." I love sensationalism.

In a nutshell, the article states that research has shown that violent video games increases violent thoughts and behaviors "when provoked or even unprovoked."

The supposed balance in this article is as follows: (1) a statement that the video game industry points out that other forms of media cause violence too (which is not actually balance since it is agreeing that video games cause violence too)

(2) a notation that "the industry said" no one could prove a definitive link (we all know how shady those "industry" types are in the general public's mind).,

(3) and a statement that the antisocial behavior doesn't come from the content of the games but from the act of playing the games because it isolates kids, turning them violent (once again, not actually a balancing statement since it is connecting playing video games and violence. )

Yes this is an attack article. I especially love how it fails to give any specific details about the studies that "some" researchers have made other than to vaguely state that people were tested by playing unspecified "non-violent" video games versus unspecified "violent" video games. There is no real way to tell how scientific this research actually was. But most people won't realize that. They'll just read the sensalized headline and move on.

More people have killed because of the bible, should we ban it?

[QUOTE="AtomicTangerine"]

You know what really normalizes killing? War. How about we work on stopping that first, eh?

JerseyJ2007

Yep, and butcher shops, hunter's clubs, and gun shops. Violence is violence, no matter the reason or victims.

But... those reasons taste good!

Really though, if you want to be real anal, I could say closing a door too hard is violence, or that scratching an itch is a violent act. There is a big gap between killing a fly and murder.

[QUOTE="JerseyJ2007"]

Yep, and butcher shops, hunter's clubs, and gun shops. Violence is violence, no matter the reason or victims.

AtomicTangerine

But... those reasons taste good!

Really though, if you want to be real anal, I could say closing a door too hard is violence, or that scratching an itch is a violent act. There is a big gap between killing a fly and murder.

Sorry, I meant to say 'killing is killing' in that second sentence. I eat meat, but still, I wouldn't want to be a cow in a butcher shop.:shock:

More people have killed because of the bible, should we ban it?

JLF1

thank you.

I think we're all collectively too defensive. This wasn't an attack article, nor something that claimed anything particularly outrageous.

Oilers99

I disagree. I think people feel a need to go on the defensive because countless politicians and self-serving scumbag lawyers have tried to use articles like this to launch more aggressive attacks against the medium.

Research suggests that violent video games can make children feel different. A brain scan of a teenager who has just played what was deemed a nonviolent video game was compared to the scan of a teen who had just spent 30 minutes playing a violent game. Indiana School of Medicine researchers said highlighted areas in the brains showed increased activity in the areas involved in emotional arousal.

:roll: Emotion arousal sounds like a fancy term for excitement.

MGS2:

Raiden     : I was a part of the Army's  Force XXI trials...

Pliskin    : Force XXI? That's about tactical IT deployment, right? Any field
             experience?

Raiden     : No -- not really.

Pliskin    : So this is your first.

Raiden     : I've had extensive training -- the kind that's indistinguishable
             from the real thing.

Pliskin    : Like what?

Raiden     : Sneaking mission 60, Weapons 80,

Pliskin    : VR, huh.

Raiden     : But realistic in every way.

Pliskin    : A virtual grunt of the digital age.  That's just great.

Raiden     : That's far more effective  than live exercises.

Pliskin    : You don't get injured in VR, do you? Every year, a few soldiers
             die in field exercises.

Raiden     : There's pain sensation in VR, and  even a sense of reality and
             urgency. The only difference is that it isn't actually happening.

Pliskin    : That's the way they want you to think, to remove you from the
             fear that goes with battle situations. War as a video game --
             what better way to raise the ultimate soldier?

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]

... I think we're all collectively too defensive. This wasn't an attack article, nor something that claimed anything particularly outrageous. Violent experiences will cause a propensity towards violence, sure. But a balanced person living a balanced life won't be affected to any significant degree. ...

I'Solori

It wasn't a blatant attack article, but it was an attack article.

My favorite quote from the article was "Then, when they're done playing, that's all that's on their mind, kill, kill, kill." I love sensationalism.

In a nutshell, the article states that research has shown that violent video games increases violent thoughts and behaviors "when provoked or even unprovoked."

The supposed balance in this article is as follows: (1) a statement that the video game industry points out that other forms of media cause violence too (which is not actually balance since it is agreeing that video games cause violence too)

(2) a notation that "the industry said" no one could prove a definitive link (we all know how shady those "industry" types are in the general public's mind).,

(3) and a statement that the antisocial behavior doesn't come from the content of the games but from the act of playing the games because it isolates kids, turning them violent (once again, not actually a balancing statement since it is connecting playing video games and violence. )

Yes this is an attack article. I especially love how it fails to give any specific details about the studies that "some" researchers have made other than to vaguely state that people were tested by playing unspecified "non-violent" video games versus unspecified "violent" video games. There is no real way to tell how scientific this research actually was. But most people won't realize that. They'll just read the sensalized headline and move on.

I don't know about you, but I define an attack article as something that tries to discredit something with no basis. Is it an attack article to, say, report that so and so has been found guilty of murder? No, because there's a solid enough basis for it. I'm not agreeing wholeheartedly with how this piece was written, particularly the headline, but it's fair enough for the most part. Keep in mind the meat of this article was based on studies specifically looking at the effects of gaming. If I have anything to criticize, it's that all of these studies don't look at the larger picture, comparing the effects of gaming to other violent media. Is it conceivable that violent games are worse than violent movies? Yes, but I can think of a few reasons why the opposite might be true.

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]

I think we're all collectively too defensive. This wasn't an attack article, nor something that claimed anything particularly outrageous.

Grammaton-Cleric

I disagree. I think people feel a need to go on the defensive because countless politicians and self-serving scumbag lawyers have tried to use articles like this to launch more aggressive attacks against the medium.

Not when it gets to the point that anything from a mainstream outlet with even a hint of criticism is immediately tossed aside as junk. They might have a valid point; does anyone really think that playing a lot of violent videogames has no effect on perception and tendencies towards violence? The theory that it is a way to express violent tendencies in a non-harmful way is interesting, but there's reasons to believe it may increase violent tendencies too. Shouldn't we be collectively interested in which one is true? And prepared for the possibility that it may be the more negative of the two?

Regardless, though, videogames obviously are not the primary factor in violent activity. If someone suggests that... then it's time to get defensive and vocal.

I don't know about you, but I define an attack article as something that tries to discredit something with no basis. Is it an attack article to, say, report that so and so has been found guilty of murder? No, because there's a solid enough basis for it. I'm not agreeing wholeheartedly with how this piece was written, particularly the headline, but it's fair enough for the most part. Keep in mind the meat of this article was based on studies specifically looking at the effects of gaming. If I have anything to criticize, it's that all of these studies don't look at the larger picture, comparing the effects of gaming to other violent media. Is it conceivable that violent games are worse than violent movies? Yes, but I can think of a few reasons why the opposite might be true.

Oilers99

This article was definitely one-sided = an attack article.

It is an article about research that was done. To be balanced, it needed to discuss the reliability of the research itself. It does not.

From this article, all we know is that tests were done. We don't have much info about the tests (who was tested, how many, what exactly were the games they played in their test, who financed this research, etc). We have no way of knowing how reliable the tests were - we are simply told that according to research video games are bad. It might be important to find out, for instance, if Families against Video Game Violence funded the research, don't you agree?

In other words, this was not the same as someone reporting that a murder happened. A dead body is a fact. Research of unknown reliability is not. Such research is speculation. This article presents speculation as fact.

... They might have a valid point; does anyone really think that playing a lot of violent videogames has no effect on perception and tendencies towards violence? ...

Oilers99

Your argument boils down to the fact that you believe that there is a "common sense" connection between video games and violence that you think should be obvious to all people. I disagee.

Let me just put this out there. Say I fund some research on violent prisoners. I make them play "non-violent" games like Barbie Adventure 5 hours a day. Since this bores them to tears, I am able to note that the aggression centers in their brain show less activity after playing the games, then it did before. Have I just proven that non-violent games cause people to be less violent? Would you feel safe being locked in a room with a violent prisoner who played non-violent games all day?

If it seems ridiculous for me to say that playing non-violent games will turn a violent person into a non-violent person, why doesn't it seem ridiculous for others to say that playing violent games will turn a non-violent person into a violent person?

I think anything that stimulates someone, makes them smarter. It's the lack of stimulation in mass media and from parents and schools that causes desensitivity.

So generally, games, movies, tv that have a point aka ultimately positive story to them are helping people. Imo.

;)

Although I don't agree with the generic 'increases aggression' arguement I find the normalizing killing thing a little interesting, in a way video gaming (along with all forms of media) do desensitize us to forms of violence, when my teacher was showing us Saving Private Ryan he was sitting in the back with a serious face during the infamous beach battle when a soldier was looking for his arm, me and the entire class were laughing because he was looking for his arm (you have to admit, some guy calmly looking for his arm with a face that says 'where did I lose that thing?' is pretty funny). This isn't to say that this generation has lowered its morals and standards but it's more used to these kinds of things.greenghost123

Are you positive that you would have the same reaction (laughing) if the soldier was doing that right in front of your class in reality? I'd be shocked, and I'm a Friday the 13th fan.

[QUOTE="greenghost123"]Although I don't agree with the generic 'increases aggression' arguement I find the normalizing killing thing a little interesting, in a way video gaming (along with all forms of media) do desensitize us to forms of violence, when my teacher was showing us Saving Private Ryan he was sitting in the back with a serious face during the infamous beach battle when a soldier was looking for his arm, me and the entire class were laughing because he was looking for his arm (you have to admit, some guy calmly looking for his arm with a face that says 'where did I lose that thing?' is pretty funny). This isn't to say that this generation has lowered its morals and standards but it's more used to these kinds of things.JerseyJ2007

Are you positive that you would have the same reaction (laughing) if the soldier was doing that right in front of your class in reality? I'd be shocked, and I'm a Friday the 13th fan.

Oh nothing as extreme as that, but this genration is a little more used to these kinds of things, in the 50's an adult having sex with a kid was unthinkable, now it's an everyday fact. Plus keep in mind that it was a movie, and no matter how realistic, it will still be a movie thus breaking the illusion of it being real, making it easier to have emotions you wouldn't have if the situation happened to you, like people yelling to the movie screen in a atheatre questioning a person checking out a sound in a horror flick, when in reality (presuming your not paranoid and think any noise produced in the dark is that of a serial killer) you'd check out what caused that noise.

[QUOTE="JerseyJ2007"]

[QUOTE="greenghost123"]Although I don't agree with the generic 'increases aggression' arguement I find the normalizing killing thing a little interesting, in a way video gaming (along with all forms of media) do desensitize us to forms of violence, when my teacher was showing us Saving Private Ryan he was sitting in the back with a serious face during the infamous beach battle when a soldier was looking for his arm, me and the entire class were laughing because he was looking for his arm (you have to admit, some guy calmly looking for his arm with a face that says 'where did I lose that thing?' is pretty funny). This isn't to say that this generation has lowered its morals and standards but it's more used to these kinds of things.greenghost123

Are you positive that you would have the same reaction (laughing) if the soldier was doing that right in front of your class in reality? I'd be shocked, and I'm a Friday the 13th fan.

Oh nothing as extreme as that, but this genration is a little more used to these kinds of things, in the 50's an adult having sex with a kid was unthinkable, now it's an everyday fact. Plus keep in mind that it was a movie, and no matter how realistic, it will still be a movie thus breaking the illusion of it being real, making it easier to have emotions you wouldn't have if the situation happened to you, like people yelling to the movie screen in a atheatre questioning a person checking out a sound in a horror flick, when in reality (presuming your not paranoid and think any noise produced in the dark is that of a serial killer) you'd check out what caused that noise.

Yeah, but thats exactly the point the article is trying to make. Fictional violence desensitizes us to real life violence. In other words, you and all your classmates would laugh just as hard if you were in Iraq right now and saw a soldier stumbling around looking for his arm.

Yeah, but thats exactly the point the article is trying to make. Fictional violence desensitizes us to real life violence. In other words, you and all your classmates would laugh just as hard if you were in Iraq right now and saw a soldier stumbling around looking for his arm.H3LLRaiseR

[QUOTE="H3LLRaiseR"]Yeah, but thats exactly the point the article is trying to make. Fictional violence desensitizes us to real life violence. In other words, you and all your classmates would laugh just as hard if you were in Iraq right now and saw a soldier stumbling around looking for his arm.foxhound_fox

Well those types are the product of the indoctrination techniques used by the Military, not playing GTA or watching Saving Private Ryan. Its highly unlikely that his ****oom would react that way, particularly if it is an american soldier.

Unfortunately it is true. I've seen countless videos of American troops [ edited ]. foxhound_fox

That was a gross generalization. I do not appreciate the fact that you are trying to demonize American soldiers. Making that statement without exploring the context which might have led soldiers to react as you described is wrong. It makes me wonder if you aren't just trolling.

One thing I am sure, is that you didn't watch a video of a soldier playing a violent video game and then laughing at real violence. What a real soldier might do in a real situation has no bearing on what is being discussed in this thread. A real soldier is exposed to real violence. A person playing a video game is not.

Your statement was offensive and it didn't add anything to this discussion.

That was a gross generalization. I do not appreciate the fact that you are trying to demonize American soldiers. Making that statement without exploring the context which might have led soldiers to react as you described is wrong. It makes me wonder if you aren't just trolling.

One thing I am sure, is that you didn't watch a video of a soldier playing a violent video game and then laughing at real violence. What a real soldier might do in a real situation has no bearing on what is being discussed in this thread. A real soldier is exposed to real violence. A person playing a video game is not.

Your statement was offensive and it didn't add anything to this discussion.

Solori

If it seems ridiculous for me to say that playing non-violent games will turn a violent person into a non-violent person, why doesn't it seem ridiculous for others to say that playing violent games will turn a non-violent person into a violent person?Solori

Very good point. I completely agree. 8)

The problem is a lot of parents use video games as a cheap babysitter to avoid actually spending time with their kids. And god forbid you should sign up little johnny to play some t-ball, just let him sit in his dark bedroom by himself all day playing grand theft auto!UT_Wrestler

When/if I ever have kids, I won't regulate what they play because I grew up being able to play and watch what I wanted. I remember my father and I watching Terminator 2 when I was 8 years old: It was a bonding experience. I hope to be able to play my kids in a deathmatch one day.

How is it a gross generalization? I've seen many videos, shown on television and the internet, of soldiers laughing while they shoot and kill people off in the distance. Making a "game" out of it. I've also seen many American soldiers do great things for other people. I was not generalizing or demonizing in any way, I'm just saying the techniques used by the American military training that desensitizes their soldiers to violence in such a way that it makes some of them inhuman is what needs to be fixed. I don't care if you can end up making a mistake on the battlefield, brainwashing people into thinking anything is wrong. They should be encouraged to fight to help people and save them from the actually inhuman enemies, not to play a videogame.foxhound_fox

I think that Solori was just trying to point out that it's not just the American army that reacts this way.

When/if I ever have kids, I won't regulate what they play because I grew up being able to play and watch what I wanted. I remember my father and I watching Terminator 2 when I was 8 years old: It was a bonding experience. I hope to be able to play my kids in a deathmatch one day.

scottyskater77

I grew up the same way. My father and I watched Terminator 1 and 2, Halloween 1 and 2, Predator, Last Action Hero, King Kong and plenty of other violent movies before I was 8 years old, and I never had a negative reaction to any of those.8) I won't regulate what my kids play, either.

You know what really normalizes killing? War. How about we work on stopping that first, eh?

AtomicTangerine

Because it's easier to have scapegoat like video games than face the brutality of the U.S. war machine, especially when huge economic interests are at stake. It's all quite depressing, but more so because suburban parents seem to care more about Halo 3 than Iraq.

I'll preface this by saying that I'm not going to read the article at the moment as I'm too bored (wow, there's a subtle slip for ya, I'd actually 100% intended to type busy there, but I like the "typo" so I'm leaving it with this comment) studying for a medschool test, but I can probably guess what some of the arguments being put forth are since they are usually the same for such "sensical" arguments.

They say that you see activation of the same centers of the brain when playing games and actually engaging in violent activity. That makes complete sense, but that doesn't mean that they are connected. This just means that they are processing similar stimuli or causing similar effects (eg: raising "adrenaline" levels). For instance: when people claim to hear voices you will actually see the regions of the brain that are usually associated with listening to people speak light up. These people are, in every neurological sense, "hearing people talk" and yet it is clearly not real and a good portion of these people recognize that there is no physical person standing in front of them talking to them.

I think anybody would be hard pressed to say that the sensation of pulling a trigger while face to face with someone is anywhere close to pulling a controller trigger while facing some other player's avatar. Perhaps as the personal nature of it gets detracted (eg: long range sniping) you begin to see more of a similarity, but for anyone with any semblance of a proper social upbringing the difference is still blatantly clear.

Instead of blaming media, etc for making these acts seem so normal we should be looking at what differences there are between the majority of people who were socialized properly and understand the clear distinction between media and real life and those who cannot perceive these things. My gut feels says that we will find people who have somehow clearly bypassed systems of consequence while growing up and cannot sufficiently associate certain outcomes with events, there will be a clear detachment between these 2 wholly reliant systems.

**I apologize if this appears kind of scatterbrained. I've been staring at textbooks for 12hrs straight now so my brain is a bit fried... I hope there's some semblance of a logical thought there.