Lately there has been a lot of talk about violent video games, and the impact that they have on our younger population. Many anti-video gamers cite events like the Virginia Tech Shooting, and other shootings that happened where the shooter happened to have played a video game at one point in his life.
What i am here to talk about is whether or not video games have caused our society to spin in a downward spiral of infatuation, and addiction to violence. Over the years, it would seem like our society has gotten much more violent due to our choices in entertainment. This is true, in my opinion, but only to a point. Yes, i believe we have become more... "used" to violence, and therefore more accustomed to it, making it easier for us to "like" it. However, that it not to say that we, as a whole, have never had a violent thought before the 1950's. Cops and Robbers wasn't invented when Counter-Strike was, it just turned into CT and T. However, violent pretend games like cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians, etc. have been around for as long as people have. The only difference between those games and video games is the requirements. Those games require imagination, while video games require hardware. The same message is still there. Shoot the bad guy, whoever he may be, just now we don't have to visualize this in our heads any more because it is shown on the screen before us.
America as a whole can easily be compared to Ancient Rome, at least as far as the whole violence fetish goes. However, what people seem to fail to do is place blame proportionally. Most of the anti-video gamers would like to place all the blame on video games, and honestly, it is starting to become a scapegoat, because people don't want to admit that they themselves are at fault. It seems ridiculous when you take an impartial look at things. Yes video games are violent, but is 90% of media in general. Between Jack Bauer shooting terrorists in the head there are commercials of Rambo putting knives places knives shouldn't be put ( or should be put as they are made to kill people for the most part) Violence, like sex, sells ( i could get into the whole sex in the media thing, but i won't) People aren't going to be interested in what you have to show them if there aren't corresponding explosions to keep them interested. Did video games do this? God no, it has been like this since media was invented.
So why is all this blame being placed on video games. because it is being used as a scapegoat by people who, frankly, can't cope with the fact that society is spinning in a downward spiral, which is of no fault but societies. First off, we need to make people aware that this is happening, and actually talk about ways to fix it, if we want to fix it. Now, I very much understand that video games and other forms of media are different because, in video games, you are actually controlling the action, or rather frankly, your the one pulling the trigger. Does this have an impact on the way you think? Certainly, but pretty much everything that you do and enjoy has an impact on the way you think. Does it have a negative impact is a better question. Frankly (remember this my personal opinion) no not at all. DO video games make me want to go out and shoot everyone on the street. No not at all, because video games are completely rooted in fantasy. They put the player in completely a unreal (unreal relative to them. there are exceptions, like a soldier playing Call of Duty, or something like that) world, and because of this, they can't apply what they do in that world to the real world. And if their mind had to determination to do so, then there are greater problems at hand than just video games.
If we want to stop our society from becoming a place of coliseums and men fighting large felines to gain their freedom, then we are going to have to stop making up scapegoats, and actually address the problem from where it stems... ourselves
I can see how some video games could triggers aggressive tendencies in people. But like you said, they aren't the only thing portraying violence.
Over the years, it would seem like our society has gotten much more violent due to our choices in entertainment. (and since we're talking about videogames and kids I'm going to give you a few statistics): (from Preventing and Reducing Juvenile Delinquency, James C. Howell):
* Violent juvenile arrests have been in a short downturn since 1994:
-The juvenile arrest rate for murder in the U.S. fell 68% from 1993-1999 reaching its lowest level since 1966 (there were also substantial drops in the juvenile arrest rate for every other violent crime during this period). The decrease in juvenile violence persisted into 2002 marking 8 consecutive years. (this book was published in 2003), but I did read recently that the juvenile violent crime rate is at it's lowest it has been in 30 years?
In my social psychology book I read of a few studies that they had done on video games and people who have played them. It stated that the people who have never played a violent video game and were asked to play one for the study increased their aggression level. The ones who had played before (were already pretty agressive) and there was no change in their aggression when they played an aggressive game or a non aggressive game. So the findings were that people who previously played aggressive video games remained aggressive, and the ones that never played them until the study became aggressive (and this was measured by another game that allowed them to blast their opponents with a noise (they picked the level of noise) if they were able to press a button quicker.
So perhaps violent video games do have an affect on aggressive behavior, however, police reports have not seen an increase in violent crime since the 1994. It was mentioned though that the media had a lot to do with the way crime is being perceived. And I agree with you, I think that at least morally speaking, the kids are going on a downward spiral :)
Good post.
It requires much more than a video game to instigate violent actions in individuals. Those who committed the atrocities of events like Virginia Tech were horribly mentally unstable and it manifested itself in writing assignments and social relationships. To be honest though, I'm not sure what the easiest way to prevent violent attacks that seem to be imitations of movies, tv, and like you mentioned in your blog here, video games.
There are many factors to consider when you lump together video gaming and what it may be doing to the mind. I wrote an informative blog entry on this a year ago, and if you are interested click on my user name and go to the very first page.
I think we need to consider the fact that humans are already violent creatures. I mean, it's sort of a Survival of the Fittest mechanism in our brains that makes us this way, and the anger center of our brain has been around since we were hunting mastodons instead of scholarship competitions.
Yeah, video games can have negative effects, but this is not always the case and there are other factors to consider.
~ *~
Visit my blog! I'll even provide a link for ya:
Comments are always appreciated! :)
Big difference between America and Rome in this circumstance.
Here- On Screen violence against pixels
Rome- Big pit where humans and animals were slaughtered for the entertainment of the masses
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
the thing that scares me is that i don't see such a huge difference between actually being there while someone is fighting for their lives against a rabid animal, and watching it on a screen. The screen is only there as a product of time and technology. How big of a difference is there if we are basically doing the same thing, except one way is more technologically advanced. I mean the on screen violence against pixels is still violence committed by one person against another... the difference being the screen
I'm assuming your talking about television by the way. If you are talking about video games, my point is still the same. Video games make the difference a little larger, but nonetheless there isn't much of a difference besides the time and technology. for whatever reason, people associate time with change, and assume since that happened way back when, we can't go through that again. Unfortunately, unless we do something, or at least realize something, we are going to experience some serious deja vu
No. There is a huge difference. In television and movies and video games, the things that are "dying" don't actually exist!! That is a big difference. A person who can't tell the difference between what is real and what is not needs a lot of help and would need a lot of help regardless of video games.
That is the difference. In Rome. People were actually, in reality, dying for the entertainment of the people.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
Very very true. Yeah i was wrong previously, i should have said there are major differences, and multiple of them. However, my point still stands. Isn't it significant that, although we do have our differences in the way we portray it, we both revel in death and destruction. I mean, we do portray it through acting, no longer actual deaths, but we, for one are getting so close to realism that it literally seems real, and they had dramas and plays and things like that too.
We have far different morals than they did in those days, and something like that happening now is nigh impossible. But, applying our standards now, we are getting dangerously close to being Rome of the 21st century. Of course we have different morals, they change with the time, and if that roman empire was here now, abiding by the moral rules of this century, I can almost guarantee they would be America.
you could say they were the beta version of America
There are many parallels between the Roman Empire and the United States. Fascination with violence is among them, but hardly unique to them.
It's not like there aren't violent movies and video games elsewhere. And in many places where there aren't, that's merely because of ridiculous censorship laws. This widespread fascination with death is fairly common in humans and is hardly comparable to the blood lust of the gladiatorial games. In fact, I'd say things like boxing or wrestling (especially the latter) are much more comparable, though still a far cry from them.
Anyone who is unable to distinguish between the fiction of death and the reality of death is mentally sick, and would be regardless of the presence of violent games or fictions in whatever amount of detail.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
Yeah. I never said that we were the exact same, and we both seem to be on the same page as far as the parallels go. The problem isn't that people are unable to distinguish between the real and the fictional deaths of people. Obviously what you said is very true, people who can't tell this difference have more severe problems then just a love of violence.
I agree when you say that people have a wide-spread love of violence, i forgot to mention it i think in my previous blog and comments. However, just because as humans we love violence doesn't mean that we aren't the Rome of the 21st century, nor does it mean that the blood lust we have now isn't comparable to then. The blood lust never decreased, it just changed to fit our changing morals, laws of equality, etc. etc. Those sort of things today would be impossible, and the point i was trying to get across is not that we are as blood thirsty as them, but that we are frankly mirroring their blood lust, but mirroring it in such a way that would be acceptable in our day in age.
And honestly, I really don't think that citizens of other countries (with their own culture, not like a different country with an Americanized culture) have the same blood lust and violence fetish as Americans do. I mean violence has always been around, but some how America seems to put new, more violent stuff on the table more and more than other countries
"The problem isn't that people are unable to distinguish between the real and the fictional deaths of people."
Those people would be like that regardless of video games. They are mentally ill. If they read a lot of books with killing people, they'd have the same problem.
Again, we have many similarities to Rome, including our interest in death. However, 1)this is in no way unique and 2)killing real people is on a completely different level than killing fictional people so that only severely sick people will draw the same kind of pleasure from the two. I love video games. I have lots of games where you kill people. I also detest violence I'd probably faint if I saw someone killed.
Have you been to other countries? I noticed no difference when I was in the UK. I've seen movies as violent, if not more so, come out of various different countries. (Spain, China, Japan, just to name a few) Sure, there are countries that don't allow violent video games. That doesn't mean, though, that there isn't the same fascination. It just means that the government has strict censorship laws.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
One, i never said that the problem was that people were unable to distinguish real from fictional depictions of death. I agreed with you that we are no where near that today, and people who can't tell the difference are indeed mentally sick.
Two, i never said that other countries didn't have a blood lust, in fact i said that you were right before in stating that our love of violence is something quite common for most humans. However, I still strongly believe that America is far more parallel to ancient Rome than other countries. Two answer your question, yes i have been to multiple countries, including Russia, New Zealand, Australia, and The Fiji Islands, and trust me, at least in these countries from what I've seen of their non-americanized culture ( or parts of their culture that have always been from that culture, not influenced by American culture at all) We are far more violent. I mean, look at American Movies against other countries movies (excluding like Great Britain, since Great Britain is basically the grandfather of America) Especially during the early movie period. A reoccurring theme in most American movies goes along the line of "Hey we are Americans, and we can't loose! So lets solve our problem by throwing violence at it." Compare a movie like the Passion of Joan of Arc (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0019254/) to a movie like The Black Pirate (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0016654/). (yes i realize both are quite different genres, but bear with me) Joan of Arc, which was made in Denmark in 1928, tells the gruesome story of Joan of Arc, which I'm sure we all know, yet it tells it without more than 1 scene with violence in it (the last scene when she is burned at the stake) The film, the Black Pirate is just a normal pirate movie, and of course it makes sense hat it would have violence, but for the sake of my argument, these two movies side by side show how American Movies are generally more towards the not make the audience think, and show them sex and violence, while non-American movies will take a different side to a normally bloody violent subject.
Now, this has to be taken with a grain of salt since the American movie business took off and boomed, especially since the advent of synchronized sound in movies, and because of this, movies have to reach a broader spectrum of people, and what better way to fulfill the blood lust that seems to be common between most/all people. Does this reason differ that greatly from Rome, and their coliseum? Not really, as the coliseum is a form of entertainment, however entertainment, in whatever form, generally has some sort of violence incorporated into it.
of course, my knowledge is limited so i could be horribly wrong, but this is just how i am seeing it. Are we spiraling down the path to doom and destruction due to neo-barbarians, and the break-down of societies morals and ethics. Not really, but still America does seem to be the neo-Rome, at least to me, and while Im not horribly worried for the future, it still kind of scares me.
So, do you think that a pirate movie made in Denmark would be less violent. Also, a lot of movies are made in the US. Many include a lot of violence. Many do not. You've got a lot to pick from.
And, again, the Coliseum is much more closely related to actual, real live (or staged) fighting then anything on the big screen, and it is still separated by a huge difference. Enjoying simulated violence is very different from enjoying real violence.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
Im not saying that a pirate movie made in Denmark would be less violent. What i am saying is that a Joan of Arc made in America would be more violent, but i was using the pirate movie and Joan of Arc as an example of how American movies differ from other movies. And Obviously there are many movies that don't have violence. The Romantic Comedy would be a lot more interesting if there were kung fu fights and long drawn out gun duels, but the same thing goes for Rome. Im sure there were plays and other forms of entertainment that didn't involve someone getting maimed. That doesn't mean that the civilization wasn't violent.
I still agree, watching Staged/live fighting as opposed to fighting on the big screen is different. But, it isn't like we don't have live/staged fighting. the WWE? Boxing? UFC for gods sake. Both Americans and Romans watch and Enjoy real and staged violence. We didn't invent movies/plays/actors in the 1900s. Since our morals have changed, making a coliseum of today all but impossible, we have been forced to change the way to watch and worship violence. Yes, the details are quite different, but does that mean we have less or that they have more blood lust then us? I still don't think so
thanks for debating with me about this btw! has been fun
Difference- none of our violence, staged or otherwise, involve the actual death of people. It's not just some tiny little step from a fictional death to an actual death. It's a huge difference and is hardly related. As for a lack of sensitivity towards real actual violence, again, that is not normal. Most people will find actual violence every bit as upsetting as ever. It is, as I said, only the truly sick who will be affected.
And, yes, the fact that they liked the real stuff while we're content with stage does make us less bloodthirsty than the Romans.
The debate is quite fun. :-)
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
The fact that we don't watch people actually die today isn't that we are more civilized (in my opinion) or that we are more sensitive to violence. It is because we have had a change in morals and law saying that slavery is bad, and humans shouldn't be treated as animals (and the coliseum, as im sure you know, had gladiators who were just slaves fighting for their freedom.)
because of that, we can't watch people fight to the death. if we had slaves today, would we be pitting them against each other and laughing as they slaughter each other? Probably.
Of course there are those who will find actual violence awful. But thats not really the point. A large majority would not mind violence, as long as it doesnt directly effect them. And how is a real death and the artistic portrayal of a death hardly related?
And how is a real death and the artistic portrayal of a death hardly related?
In the mind it is.....
mind explaining exactly why you feel this way?
The number one rule for a game to be successful is to approach reality in best detail and graphic possible, reason for this is to evoke the strongest emotion possible in order for the mind to get a rush.
Same is to be found in porn.
It tends to shift into perversions that are dangerous for the weaker minds which expose themselves o graphics they interpret wrongly causing hurt and damage within relations and in more dangerous ways to societies.
The more real, the more affected one becomes, it’s exaggerations exceed boundaries never to return to normal again.
Apparently, you're not a big video game fan. Realism has little to do with the success of a game, seeing as most people don't care.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
No, that isn't right at all. There are a lot of video games that don't even get close to realism, and would be crappy if they did. For example.. the Halo series? We aren't exactly at war with an Alien Race. Look at other games where the graphics are in a more cartoony style. Look at World of Warcraft. Like 10 million players, and its about as realistic and Dungeons and Dragons.
If people have too weak a mind to be able to play video games without damaing their "relations" and societies, than they shouldn't be playing video games, but it isn't up to the video game companies, or the government to control this. Its up to the parents. The government and the media isn't in charge of raising kids
So you don't think that the fact that we think slavery is wrong and that people should be treated with dignity doesn't make us more civilized.
And, yes, we are more sensitive to violence. Most people don't want to see people and animals brutally killing each other.
The artistic portrayal of death is related, but not in the way you're talking about. While it may play on our fascination with death, it does not indulge in it. That is the difference.
Let me say this plainly. People into video games of any sort are not made more violent and less sensitive to it.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
I never said that we aren't more civilized than the Ancient Romans, though the definition of civilized is somewhat debatable. I said that we don't watch real deaths and fighting is because of the huge change in social morals, which can be taken as becoming more civilized i suppose.. Are we more civilized? by our standards yes, but thats not really the point.
And in what way am i talking about how real deaths and acted out deaths are related, and how is that wrong?
And yes, in the grand scheme of things, the way we show violence doesn't completely indulge our blood lust, but since things like coliseums and real fights to the deaths are very illegal and impossible today, it is the best thing we have to "indulge" ourselves in it.
Plus, you, I am not so sure that people are as sensitive to killing and death as you think. If the news were to show a clip of soldiers in Iraq battling Iraqis, and pretty much slaughtering them, i bet most Americans would not only watch, they would enjoy the clip. It isn't so much that today we don't want to see people killed. its that we don't want to have any connection to the victim. With the world changing, and becoming more connected via internet, , etc. etc. you can imagine how hard it would be to create an enemy that could be killed in real life, without their deaths causing anger from the public who is watching.
BTW i completely agree that video games don't make people more violent at all. Violent people are going to be violent no matter what there environment is.
"BTW i completely agree that video games don't make people more violent at all. Violent people are going to be violent no matter what there environment is."
That is the point that I have been trying to make.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
We were talking about the similarities between Ancient Rome and America. I never said that this was wrong once ( I don't think, maybe i did), and in fact i stated that i agreed with this ( i think) a few times, and my whole blog was pretty much on this subject from that point of view)
I still think that America is the new age Rome, but my overall point is that its societies fault, not video games.
Video games turn our kids into warriors while making them indifferent to violence…