Slashdot Mirror
Columbine Student on VG Violence
Sophia wrote in to mention some discussion of Video Game Violence on 1up.com this week. Brooks Brown had the experience of attending Columbine High School around the time of the now infamous shooting incident. Via his blog, Brown goes into a detailed discussion of Why Violence in Gaming is a Good Thing. From the article: "GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops. It's a story of a guy who got screwed trying to get back on top. It is, by nature, a story game. Postal 2 may let you kill anyone you want in bloody and disgusting ways - but that's not what it is about either. It is, by nature, a tech demo in the abilities of programmers and AI. it is WE - the gamers - who change what the game is about and determine what happens. It is the person playing who determines what the game contains." Jane Pinckard has a quick reaction to his post. More commentary on this subject is available via John Davison's Blog, who met Brown at a taping of a news program which was ostensibly to be about gaming in general. Instead he was ambushed about violence in games and ended up walking out.
In the days after the Littleton, Colorado massacre, the country went on a panicked hunt the oddballs in High School, a profoundly ignorant and unthinking response to a tragedy that left geeks, nerds, non-conformists and the alienated in an even worse situation than before. Stories all over the country embarked on witchunts that amounted to little more than Geek Profiling. All weekend, after Friday's column here, these voiceless kids -- invisible in media and on TV talk shows and powerless in their own schools -- have been e-mailing me with stories of what has happened to them in the past few days. Here are some of those stories in their own words, with gratitude and admiration for their courage in sending them. The big story out of Littleton isn't about violence on the Internet, or whether or not video games are turning out kids into killers. It's about the fact that for some of the best, brightest and most interesting kids, high school is a nightmare of exclusion, cruelty, warped values and anger.
The big story never seemed to quite make it to the front pages or the TV talk shows. It wasn't whether the Net is a place for hate-mongers and bomb-makers, or whether video games are turning your kids into killers. It was the spotlight the Littleton, Colorado killings has put on the fact that for so many individualistic, intelligent, and vulnerable kids, high school is a Hellmouth of exclusion, cruelty, loneliness, inverted values and rage.
From Buffy the Vampire Slayer to Todd Solondz's "Welcome To The Dollhouse," and a string of comically-bitter teen movies from Hollywood, pop culture has been trying to get this message out for years. For many kids - often the best and brightest -- school is a nightmare.
People who are different are reviled as geeks, nerds, dorks. The lucky ones are excluded, the unfortunates are harassed, humiliated, sometimes assaulted literally as well as socially. Odd values - unthinking school spirit, proms, jocks - are exalted, while the best values - free thinking, non-conformity, curiousity - are ridiculed. Maybe the one positive legacy the Trenchcoat Mafia left was to ensure that this message got heard, by a society that seems desperate not to hear it.
Minutes after the "Kids That Kill" column was posted on Slashdot Friday, and all through the weekend, I got a steady stream of e-mail from middle and high school kids all over the country -- especially from self-described oddballs. They were in trouble, or saw themselves that way to one degree or another in the hysteria sweeping the country after the shootings in Colorado.
Many of these kids saw themselves as targets of a new hunt for oddballs -- suspects in a bizarre, systematic search for the strange and the alienated. Suddenly, in this tyranny of the normal, to be different wasn't just to feel unhappy, it was to be dangerous.
Schools all over the country openly embraced Geek Profiling. One group calling itself the National School Safety Center issued a checklist of "dangerous signs" to watch for in kids: it included mood swings, a fondness for violent TV or video games, cursing, depression, anti-social behavior and attitudes. (I don't know about you, but I bat a thousand).
The panic was fueled by a ceaseless bombardment of powerful, televised images of mourning and grief in Colorado, images that stir the emotions and demand some sort of response, even when it isn't clear what the problem is.
The reliably blockheaded media response didn't help either. "Sixty Minutes" devoted a whole hour to a broadcast on screen violence and its impact on the young, heavily promoted by this tease: "Are video games turning your kids into killers?" The already embattled loners were besieged.
"This is not a rational world. Can anybody help?" asked Jamie, head of an intense Dungeons and Dragons club in Minnesota, whose private school guidance counselor gave him a choice: give up the game or face counseling, possibly suspension. Suzanne Angelica (her online handle) was told to go home and leave her b
*weeps*
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
Uhh, I'm pretty sure it was pretty much a 'kill everything that moves, and even if it doesn't move, kill it anyway just to be sure' kind of game. It was innovative in the ways you could kill people though. Very creative.
Not that there is anything wrong with that.....
The real danger is with racing games. Try racing an Audi S4 around in Project Gotham all day, then hopping into a real S4 to go to the grocery store. Dangerous stuff.
If I'm not mistaken, all forms of drugs were legal up until around the turn of the century. People used to be able to medicate themselves as they chose. But after society perceived that drugs were causing harm to the youth, there was a big push for leglislation.
If the political push continues against violence in video games (and I think it will), it will be interesting to see if this "war on game violence" plays out the same way. That would mean either some kind of certification to use games or perhaps some biometric age device hooked up to game players. I don't believe games harm anyone, btw, but in politics perception is everything.
Can I Type What I Want In This Sig?
I have often thought that people who were likely to commit murder were attracted to violent video games, and NOT that violent video games created murderers. Perhaps we should find out what percentage of violent video game players DO NOT commit violent crimes... probably in the high 90 percentage count. Also, perhaps we should find out how many people who commit violent crimes didn't even play violent video games. For those who believe in the Bible... Cain slew Abel... and that was before violent video games, movies, or anything else of that nature.
Whatever happened to Jon Katz?! :D
Well, it's basically a game where you can drive around an ambulance and take people to the hospital, drive around a fire truck and put out fires, drive around a police car and catch criminals or drive a taxi and take people places. Of course, there's much more you can do, but I'm not into all that violent stuff.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
If video games caused violence, we'd have terrible world wide child violence and regular school shootings by now. We don't. I belive this is all about children with psychological issues that, of course, may be influenced by video games, but so would they be by movies, TV and news by this theory.
I believe a video game simulation is nothing compared to how convincing real events illustrating the true nature of gruesome human behavior, and we're basically fed with this daily through television. People call watching it educating.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops.
Then I think there's something wrong in my version...
"Around" the time of Columbine?
Hey, I was born around the time that Vietnam was taking place, but that doesn't make me an expert on evacuation plans.
Who cares what some bozo with hiw own blog thinks... Just becuase he went to that high-school doesn't mean his an all-of-a-sudden-expert on the impact of violent games on our youth. I play violent games, but not the disturbing ones. I get disturbed when part of the game involves hurting innocent people. Hurting the bad guy? Go for it. If we can't be honourable in our play, can we really be expected to be honourable in our lives?
How people are actual killers and nut jobs? I mean this in all seriousness. It is probably a split percentage point. How many people can watch a movie with gore and walk home without thinking twice? Probably 99.x percent of the people on this planet.
The problem with his blog entry is that he talking about the vast majority and not the absolute minority. And while I don't think that video games on their own create killing machines, they are an influence. That is the problem, the summation of all factors is what causes the problems!
Here is the kicker, in his last statement he says the killers were "f'd up". Well, duh, yeah! However, they blended in since our society does not think twice about violence and that is a problem.
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Violence in games is a GOOD thing.
We'll start this blog off really simply. For those of you who don't know me - i went to columbine, i was friends with both killers and the killed, had reported the killers to the police, the cops did nothing, etc.
If you look up Brooks Brown on google, you'll learn a lot about me.
But there is another size to me besides simply being that kid. I'm now 25, i do video work, work on computers, and dear god, i play way too many videogames. Enough that i gave up putting a weekly allowance into my budget - i didn't budget food, and videogames really were just as important.
I've spent the last 6 years of my life trying to figure out why my friends brutally murdered other friends of mine and kids at school. In this process, i've gone through many personal changes - some good, many bad - and i've also gone down many avenues of thought. One of those avenues is pop culture. Granted, i was sure videogames and movies wouldn't be a causal factor in why kids do what they do - I play violent videogames all the time, i love violent music, and i love violent movies. And i'm a taoist. I'm a pacifist. It just didn't seem possible to me. But, i knew i had to figure it out - so i began my journey of learning exactly how videogames do effect you, and how violent imagery has an effect on the human mind.
The first thing i did was look at my favorite violent games. Although the list has changed over time, my personal favorites are the Hitman Series, Postal 2, and naturally GTA. Each of these games depicts incredibly violent acts - from using a emathook to kill a man all to taking over a town with a town to using a cat as a silencer for your shotgun. All these moments gave me enjoyment, whether it be a cheap laugh or one of those great 'fuck yeah' moments (you know what i mean).
The great part about those games was that i could do what i wanted. I no longer was bound by the rules of 'jump on mushroom guy here, run right, jump mushroom guy here, run right'. Instead, if i wanted, i could, in the case of hitman, choose my path, whether it be blast everyone in the level away, or find a way to infiltrate and kill only my mark. Granted, it took more skill and time - but it was worth it. The bloody way is fun too, if i'm looking for a quick thrill. The same is true of Grant Theft Auto. The first time i fucked a hooker to restore my life, i laughed. When i killed her to get my money back, i was cracking up. When i took that money to buy a shotgun and went on a killing spree, i was rolling on the ground.
But here is where i realized that nobody was looking at these games right, not even me. Hitman isn't a game about going in balls-to-the-wall. It's about figuring out how to do things. It is, by nature, not a shooter, but a puzzle game. GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops. It's a story of a guy who got screwed trying to get back on top. It is, by nature, a story game. Postal 2 may let you kill anyone you want in bloody and disgusting ways - but that's not what it is about either. It is, by nature, a tech demo in the abilities of programmers and AI.
it is WE - the gamers - who change what the game is about and determine what happens. It is the person playing who determines what the game contains.
So i went to friends houses, to game stores, and i talked to people. Even went on a few message boards. And aside from a few shitheads who claimed they play GTA only to fuck hookers and kill cops, the vast majority of people are like me. The novelty of that new experience wore off - instead, we play these games now, trying to play them perfectly. Whether that means finding every square inch of land in san andreas, or getting a perfect assassin rating on Hitman - the things in these games that are violent are only a secondary thing. i no longer turn on GTA to randomly kill and nobody turns it on anymore to fuck hookers. I turn it on now to race around, find minigames, and that type of thing.
So, i wondered (like my parents, who i will get to in a b
This is all well and good, but I think it misses a crucial point - this.
Right...?
CC Licensed Serialized Story and Podcast: Ingenioustries
I've always thought that if a kid can't tell the difference between a video game and the real world, and thinks it's okay to shoot people like in a video game, his parents need to step in very quickly and get him help and stop him from playing those games. I've been playing computer games from a young age, and I've never had the urge to actually take out a gun and shoot someone.
Video games don't influence children; otherwise the 80s would have been full of teens sitting in the dark listening to techno and popping pills...
People find ways of rationalizing whatever the heck they want to do, regardless of how good or bad it may actually be.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
His observations on how it's not the game itself, but what you bring to the game, is right on the money.
As an example, how many people have played Civilization III?
So... what's it about?
Is it about a brave tribe of people who are struggling to establish a civilization under your benevolent leadership, and advance their learning and culture while they peacefully expand, only to be constantly attacked by less enlightened and/or more warlike cultures?
Or is it about a tribe of people who have fallen under your evil domination, who you will then guide forward through the ages in an orgy of conquest, until you stand astride the Earth as its sole Overlord?
Or is it just a bunch of pixels being moved around by the in-game AI, and you're a video gamer with a few hours to kill, amusing yourself by trying to defeat the AI opponents in the game?
It can be any one of those things, depending upon the imagination of the player.
One of my favorite waste of time games on the Atari ST was called 'schoolyard slaughter'. No way to justify , just senseless violence blasting children in a school playground. Great fun because of how offensive it is to dumb people who have no sense of humor and take everything way too serious.
I don't think there's anything wrong with it, and it would be better if people did those things in video games vs. real life.
Fun facts, at the time of Columbine and for long after, being from Colorado and not having a car at the time, I walked everywhere and I wore a trenchcoat. I got so much shit for it. And one of my friends used to fuck with people, like "Oh yeah? what are you going to do to stop me if I did want to go in there and shoot a bunch of people?" Here comes to police. LOL.
But the insanity didn't stop, I know many normal respectable business people, bankers and shit who wore trenchcoats, not even some dumb punk kids, who said they got lots of shit over it. And I'll finish suggesting that people that go off, and go somewhere and shoot a bunch of people are ritual mind programming victims, Dr. Josef Mengele from WW2 Nazi concentration camps, moved to the USA, working for "the good guys", Greambaum, being greenbombed/greenbaumed. Delta programs. MPD, multiple personality disorder... Someone with an agenda stirring things up to get a desired result. Create the problem, wait for the reaction, the enter with the solution to the problem, which is in fact the agenda you wanted to persue anyways.
Brooks Brown was the guy who was friends with Harris and Kleibold and warned the cops *a year before the shootings* that these guys were up to no good, that they were making bombs and planned to shoot up the school. If anyone has the right to make a comment about the connection (or lack thereof) between First Person Shooters and the Columbine Incident, it's Brown.
I don't know if I entirely agree with him...I noticed that I was getting a bit desensitized to real-world violence (on the news, in the movie "Fahrenheit 9/11") after a few years of avidly playing Unreal Tournament, and put down for a while. However, he has definitely the right to say what he has to say, and by dint of what he's experience he's earned the right to say it with some level of authoritativeness.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
but why is it most every game involves killing tons o'stuff... this is just the lame. not sure why so many people like to see animated death? makes my brain feel like its shrinking...
"If we don't take action, we end up at the mercy of unscrupulous media outlets in control of the message. They do exactly what the games they deplore do: make viewers watch by titilating them with sensationalistic violence. The difference is, games are entertainment; the news is not supposed to be."
Are you moderators retarded? This is a good article!
the game developers are the ones who gave us the tools who allow us to make the decisions that we make. I mean, you don't see people trying to go around in other games (say...Tetris) trying to rape people do you?
Grow up, kid.
I suggest you read Slashdot
If you leave your kid all day around games/movies/music/newspaper/TV, and you don't spend the time educating him, telling him about right or wrong, loving him, that sort of "old fashioned" stuff, well, maybe he will grow up with a skewed view of life.
The thing is that parents (even bad ones) are voters, so it's hard from the policital point of view to say "hey, you're bad parents! you're to blame!". It's much "safer" to blame "those darn videogames and rock music!" because videogames and songs don't vote!
Anyway, maybe we as a society should start paying a bit more atention to parenting. After all, to put it in Scott Adam's words, we need a license to drive/fish/whatever but to be a parent we only need a couple of organs. And maybe between all the people that have those organs there are some who can't take care of themselves, let alone a child...
"A sysadmin is a cross between a detective, a police officer, a gardener, a doctor and a fireman"
If the legislators succeed and try to push harder, eventually they'll push a ban on the tetris "L" shape because it is reminiscent of a gun.
Is it too hard to capitalize sentences now? Or is writing "I" in lower-case "stylish?" Is it too hard too ask for an apostrophe in "friends houses?" Has violence in video games killed grammar?
MAN FUCK VIOLENCE I HATE FUCKING VIOLENCE IT FUCKING SUCKS ANYWAY!!
"GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops."
Really?! Shit! Then why do I and all my ADHD friends just fuck hookers and kill cops? Oh wait, its about seeing who can punch in the cheat codes fastest too right?
Is there anything better than clicking through Microsoft ads on Slashdot?
I mean we all remember those famous Technical Demos:
- Mortal Kombat characters executing fatalities to demonstrate advancments in sprite scripting technology.
- Serious Sam's technical display of hugely explorable levels and efficient creation (and removal) of hundreds of agents simultaneously.
- The Playboy series of games which push the boundaries of graphics and strive for photorealism.
- Duke Nukem feeding strippers money and getting them to take their clothes off displayed revolutionary bounce-physics.
Why can't interviewees in that position think quickly enough to state on camera that they were obviously invited onto the show under false pretenses and then ask why their audience should expect to have the truth told to them when they obviously didn't tell the truth to get the interviewee onto the show?
This guy was 20 and still in highschool?
It's about the entry! Zonk is screwing up Slashdot one story at a time.
Isn't most of GTA:Sa(quite far into it) about a guy trying to go straight and stop drug dealers?
Shocking really.. who would of thought you that? I've only ever used a prostitute once just to see WTF it was that happened, then I couldn't careless.
I like muppets.
Please, very informative, though a little off. It was a fear of Chinese that lead to banning of smoked opium. The 'Drug crazed negroes' would lead to the banning of cocaine. Also:
1937 saw the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act. Harry J. Anslinger (Bureau of Narcotics Commissioner) testified in hearings on the subject that the hemp plant needed to be banned because it had a violent "effect on the degenerate races," notably Mexican immigrants.
Here's a nice section of a wikipedia article: War On Drugs, 20th Century
The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
This guy didn't see real violence coming when it was in his own neighborhood. No wonder he still can't see it. He's obviously trying to get picked up as a consultant on FOX TV.
I like to think it's a lot higher than 90%.
E.g., World Of Warcraft currently has some 2 million subscribers. If a whole 10% of them were that influenceable, you'd have some 200,000 people running around with swords trying to slash their class mates.
In reality, we have, what? Maybe 10-20 people who were anywhere near (debatably) influenced by games, out of maybe that many millions of gamers. We're not even talking one percent, we're talking maybe 1 in a million.
And were games the real reason there? Or is it just another scapegoat? We have people who got bullied _daily_, and eventually one of them breaks under stress and goes homicidal. Happens every day among non-gamers too. E.g., since "Postal 2" is mentioned, the term "to go postal" has to do with, you know, post office employees and pre-dates video games.
But games make an easy scapegoat and a very visible straw man. Blaming everything on one simple bogeyman (games, jews in 1930's Germany, world conspiracies, etc) is _easy_. It lets one ignore the more complex _real_ problems.
We're all suddenly no longer to blame for failed parenting, the massive cultural failure in which being smart in school is _uncool_, for the social factors involved, etc. Nosiree, bob, it's the games that are to blame.
I find it sad.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
"GTA isn't about fucking hookers or killing cops. It's a story of a guy who got screwed trying to get back on top."
So it's about a guy who got screwed and is trying to get back on top... On top of what again? The criminal world? By enacting all sorts of violent mischief? Who just happens to fuck hookers and kill cops along the way?
Now don't get me wrong, I love videogames, but the line this guy is trying to rationalize is so thin as not to even exist. It's as if the author is trying to explain away the fact that the game is putting you in direct control of a quasi-gansta whose missions are to almost exclusively commit acts of violence against rivals and society at large. I mean, let's not sugar coat this here. You can't divorse the two concepts, as well as the fact that it becomes more than "just a story" when you have user interaction. You're programming your brain with tactics, responces and behaviors in order to operate in that environment. I'll be the first to say most pleas of Videogame violence is way too overrated, but I'll also be up there in saying that it's not as harmless as some of the developers would have you believe. For most well adjusted people, it probably IS harmeless. But for a developing child? You have to be fucking kidding me. There's a reason sesame street exists and it's to program kids. Or, conversly, you can program them with GTA. Both purposely or inadvertantly will do the same thing, and to try and totally absolve yourself of the potential impact you're making on anybody playing is rationalist idiocy.
And yes, the parents have the biggest role in that development. But I wish these devs would call their games for what they are instead of trying to hide behind this conjured BS.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
It's the fact that mankind has an inborn propensity for violence. The problem isn't violent video games, but that we haven't addressed the fundamentally violent nature of mankind.
Lenin and Hitler killed millions before the first video game had been invented; our violent nature is as old as recorded history.
Instead of blaming a scapegoat (video games), parents would be better off recognizing this fundamental trait (propensity for violence) of human nature and teaching their children to overcome it. After all, keeping the kids away from violent video games won't keep the bullies from bullying, nor will it keep them from getting angry... The ability to take revenge isn't limited to those who have played violent video games.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Is it just me or is the author illiterate, or maybe barely literate.
I really tried to read the article after being deeply moved by the Columbine massacre, but I just couldn't read through that drivel.
God made the natural numbers; all else is the work of man - Kronecker
You'd have to be naive to suggest that violence in video games is a good thing, and equally naive to believe that violence in video games has parallel effects on real life.
For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.
Postal 2 may let you kill anyone you want in bloody and disgusting ways - but that's not what it is about either. It is, by nature, a tech demo in the abilities of programmers and AI.
Oh, so 9/11 was just a demonstration of how well a plane can stay intact when colliding with a building.. and the Unabomber was just testing the ability for volatile materials to stay intact through the USPS? I can get used to making up this sort of bullshit!
I think hes right on - video games are fast becoming world sims, and story aside, its you who controls the character. GTA has such great re-playability because you can just walk around doing whatever you like, i think the future of GTA is to just get rid of the story line all together and concentrate on making it a good world simulator, this is a place where you can do things you couldn't or wouldn't want to do in real life, you can drive around fast and shoot people with no consequences, when the game gets to the point where you feel the same sensations as real life then why would you feel the need to shoot someone in real life? you wouldn't.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I'd love for governments to try this one. Are they going to require liscencing and permits for compilers next? How about 3D libraries? Make large gate count FPGAs registered munitions? Haha.. er.. I guess with Intel's new DRM bios that might not be so funny.
Anyway: Prohibition of alcohol gave us 150 proof home distilled gin.. Prohibition of cocaine powder and coca leaves gave us crack cocaine.. prohibition of opium gave is Heroin and Oxycontin; prohibition of marijuana gave us hydroponic weed and hashish.
What will prohibition of video games bring? I'm kinda curious to find out, aren't you?
..don't panic
This guy's point is that you can choose how to play the game - it doesn't have to be as violent as it can be. But, I think that people who have violent tendencies will be attracted to such games, and will learn such techniques much faster and more completely than they can in the real world. As technology advances it's impossible to avoid having better simulations, but the implications for society are still scary even if you rule out the idea that violent games make good people into bad people. The bad people can just be worse than they would otherwise be. Then in the real world, it's kindof like being on PCP, reducing the fear barrier, because they've already been there and done everything virtually. Violence is nothing new but intensifying everyone's bad habits just brings it more to a head, and we have to figure out how to get more control over people like that if we're going to continue to live in a peaceful society. I'm not sure what the ideal mechanism is. I suppose when genetic engineering becomes mature, we will be able to modify our kids' tendencies to be more pacifist, assuming that there is a genetic component to that, not just upbringing...
Also a very good point that the parents are really to blame, because upbringing is such a huge part of one's future behavior.
Eric Raymond has a piece on why he thinks having guns and doing target practice are good for a man - just to have the realization that you wield a lot of power over life and death, and to have more respect for life. But again, everyone already has tendencies toward violence or pacifism, and having experience with guns will probably just intensify those pre-existing feelings. Just like with games. IMO gun ownership and violent games are both basic rights and neither one should be prohibited, but somehow we've got to figure out how to deal with the real root cause of violence.
As for me I simply don't like those games and my upbringing taught me that "fuck yeah" moments are a kind of sin, so I try to avoid them; and the only time I have that kind of feeling is when there is some kind of indignation behind it, that the violence is restoring something that was very wrong in the first place. I hate waste and destruction of all kinds, especially the pointless kind. Consequently I am a pack rat, because to me throwing something out is a kind of violence, and I respect inanimate objects almost as much as I do living things. And I think if more people had this attitude the world would be a better place, and we could forget about environmental problems. Environmental decay comes from a bad attitude, just as violence does. But this is unnatural for most people. Humans are mostly self-centered pigs.
If you own an Audi, join the Audi Club North America and come to one of the driver education events (actually, the DE events are open to any make/model, except trucks, including SUVs). I'd claim it was a plug, except it's not- I'm a volunteer, the club is a non-profit organization, and the chapter that I volunteer with donates a fair amount of money at the end of the year to charity.
Most people come to club driving schools thinking they know how to drive- especially the hot-shots who like to drive "hard" and have done all sorts of "performance modifications". Most leave realizing they knew nothing- and that half their "performance modifications" just served to cover up bad driving. They also realize that driving "hard" isn't best (smooth is key!) and that you should at any time (well, most of the time) be doing ONE thing- changing your speed (braking or accelerating) OR turning.
As the owner of a much older Audi which has performance exceeding a stock S4 biturbo (same weight and about 20-30 more HP) and no traction control...one of the blessings of all wheel drive vehicle is that under power, they understeer (plow) very much like FWD vehicles. Not exactly the same, but very similar.
What does this mean? That your first gut reaction (letting up off the gas) is usually the correct one; it puts weight back on the front of the car, and takes it off the rear; as a result, it lessens or corrects the understeer; just be careful you don't overdo it, or you'll induce oversteer.
In many high performance RWD vehicles (especially the 911, which became infamous with the turbo version, because peole weren't used to the lag, which would kick in mid-corner), lifting in the beginnings of a slide will spin the car very nicely. Also- understeering into something generally means you hit whatever you were avoiding reasonably head on. Spinning means you have about a 1 in 10 chance or less of hitting something head-on, and side (and especially rear) impacts are extremely dangerous compared to hitting something head on. Virtually every passive and active safety device in your vehicle is designed to work in a frontal collision.
Now remember kids, this advice is worth what it cost you- nothing. So don't be a dick and jump in your car and play Speed Racer on the street. Don't even do it after going to a driving school. Knowledge of how to drive, and practicing it at a track, is best applied in keeping your vehicle within BOTH your limits and its limits, and making correct reactions instinctual in emergencies.
I know there are a huge number of young people on slashdot, so bear this in mind- most of you crash because you don't understand your limits or your vehicle's limits. Compound that with the typical teenager car (many of you drive hand-me-downs or very used vehicles, which have -very- low limits), and you have a recipe for disaster.
Please help metamoderate.
In Japan, many kids play violent video games and see softporn pictures on the television. You will commonly see bared breats during the prime time on the television. Yet, the rate of violent crime, including violence (i.e. rape) against women, is much lower than that rate in the USA.
Similar comments apply to Western Europe. (I do not have statistics for Eastern Europe.)
What in American society is spurring the violence? American society encourages competition. It, in itself, is a form of aggression. In American society, if you lose your job, you just might suffer malnutrition because welfare-based food stamps have a finite duration. If you cannot find a job during that duration or before the expiration of unemployment benefits, you are screwed.
The Europeans take a kindler, gentler approach. They accept a lower standard of living in exchange for lowering the level of aggressive competition. The Europeans give cradle-to-grave entitlements to anyone with European citizenship.
Japan appears on the surface to be pure capitalism, but the Japanese also practice European-style paternalism. Companies are not allowed to fail, thus throwing millions out of work. Banks continue to lend money even to companies that surely should go bankrupt. Major companies in Japan avoid laying off workers. All this paternalism breeds inefficiency. The average Japanese worker is, in fact, less productive than the aggressive American worker. There are some exceptions: e.g. Toyota blue-collar workers.
Which society is best? Less aggressive society with a lower standard of living or a more aggressive society with a higher standard of living? There is no clearcut answer. The choice is one of tradeoffs.
As I drive to my brokerage to check on the high return of my mutual funds and other investments, I always pass by a prison. America has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world. America is one of the few industrialized nations to continue to liberally practice capital punishment.
In Silicon Valley, if you refuse to work 13 hours per day on minimal pay, the American multinational conglomerate or startup will fire you and hire an H-1B worker from China or India. You either compete or die.
YAZBS (Yet another Zonk blogging story)
There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
In the thought that video games are responsible for any of our actions shows, to me, an emotional instability and lack of capability to understand that video games are NOT real life. To actually think that video games are actually capable of 'suggesting' even to us to 'control' our actions..shows that the individual was weak minded and highly succeptable to suggestion. It is up to us to decide what we are capable of and what we arent. If we are taught we can do whatever we want, with education that can be a powerful thing, but also if we are taught to obey and follow then I guess video games could be a very dangerous thing for one too. I have been playing FPS's since Wolf3D, and ive never gone out and wiped out a family of 6 yet, nor do i plan to. Ive actually just finished playing postal 2 and have the addon installed, so does this mean im going to run out to my local gunstore and lock and load? no. because i recognize and KNOW that video games are entertainment, this is the difference between myself and someone who cannot possibly make decisions for themselves. who NEEDS a 'figure/idea' to follow at all times. Id LOVE to do a case study on ppl who are similar to me, who have played these games ALL their life...and why i am different than the ones who cant differentiate apparently between reality/fantasy.
His main point seems to be that modern games give people the freedom to do whatever they want, and it is the gamers that choose to cause violence. This is of course, bullshit.
Of the three games he focuses on, I have only played GTA, but while that games does allow you to do many things, the majority of the things it lets you do are violent. Where is the option to bring peace between the clans through negotiation? Where is the option to join the police, and help deal with the clan warfare through proper authorities? Going further, where is the option to help out the poor and homeless at the soup kitchen? Where is the option to move out to the suburbs, and get a real job, have some kids? Where is the option to travel to other countries, learn new languages, trek across the Andes?
While its true that fucking a hooker, then killing her to get the money back is not part of the main game of GTA3, and was only discovered by some sicko, there is no option to give her some of the hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars that you end up with up with to sponsor her through college.
I like GTA, and I don't think that violent video-games necessarily cause people to be violent, however it is very naïve to say that games like GTA are completely neutral, and it is games that make them violent
just because he was at that highschool has nothing to do with if he knows violence in video games matters. I would have to say I think he is totally right but I have no study or real science to back that claim up. I wish we could get rid of the whole political bullshit and just have a fscking real study. One that isn't skewed by what the person wants it to prove... It should be so simple. Well science is never that simple but stats are good over a really wide number of kids. I think this is all a product of our 24 hour news stations that have nothing to report on about 99% of the time so pick small stories that skew whats really happening in the world.
just because your a schizophrenic doesn't mean people arn't really out to get you
Man, I have so many problems with this, I don't know where to begin. So, in no particular order...
Of course games affect behavior. I write games for a living, and job depends on the fact that games affect behavior. Mr. Brown says it himself. "The allowance of violence, while it does play to our carnal nature, does suck us in."
Yes, yes, "suck us in" is not the same as shooting cops. But once you concede that games can affect behavior, it's not hard to conclude that nobody has a good idea how they affect behavior. So claims like "GTA does not force you to kill cops" are really groundless. And it totally misses the point. Even if games don't "force" people do to anything, they can still be dangerous if they encourage certain behavior, or make certain behavior seem better than it actually is.
"The great part about those games was that i could do what i wanted." Saying that you like violence in video games because they let you do what you want is frightening indeed. But I actually don't believe that Mr. Brown is violent in games because he wants to be violent in games. Later in the paragraph, he reveals the real reason: "Granted, it took more skill and time - but it was worth it. The bloody way is fun too, if i'm looking for a quick thrill." Games may give you a non-violent choice, but they make the violent choice more fun! Who doesn't want to have fun?
I'm really surprised at people who try to make the sale of games to minors an issue of free speech. I'm sure the game companies appreciate the connection between game sales and constitutional rights (I know my company does), but it simply isn't the case. In the US, you must be 18 to make many decisions for yourself, and you need a parent or guardian to make those decisions before that. Parents are responsible for their kids, a point that Mr. Brown makes! "My parents finally realized that parents suck. It's the parents fault."
So why, God, why are we trying to make it harder for parents to raise their kids? Parental advisories on games won't stop a 20-year-old from buying a game. But it will, at least, slow down the sale of certain games to minors. And if the parents don't have a problem with the game in question, they can still pick it up and let their kid play it. Restricting the sale of cigarettes and booze and porn to minors is not a violation of free speech, and neither is restricting the sale of computer games.
Simply, corporations like Take Two make games like GTA because violence and sex sells. And, like the tobacco industry or the auto industry, they'll keep claiming that "there's no evidence our product kills people" because they don't want to know. When people try to stop them, they'll claim that letting 13-year-olds rape hookers is free speech, and laugh all the way to the bank.
I remember Brooks Brown from back then, and I remember thinking what a remarkable guy he was. It's a shame that now, however unwittingly, he has become a corporate shill.
So, go ahead, flame away.
"Columbine student, and violent game advocate, patents the idea of school violence... could this mean the end of school violence?"
Being funny is my sig nature.
The next time a media source tells you that the US is defeated in Iraq or that Kofi Annan is a good guy that the "extreme right" is trying to shaft, think about some of the comments below. Media, both in the US and abroad, are all about shoving propaganda down your throat. Believe little of what they tell you and try to access as many sources as possible, both right and left. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle, but may occasionally be at one extreme. The burden is on you to educate yourself and make intelligent decisions.
The best policy is to assume they are all lying until proven otherwise. Don't act like one of the herd. The major point made here is that the host's behavior is not unusual, it's very much the norm.
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
-- Pablo Picasso
it makes me laugh when people blame video games for kids doing violent acts. i've played all the gta games and many other "violent" games and you don't see me going around killing people or have the intent to. society should blame the parents of these kids for their actions. if you have a son/daughter who's stupid enough to re-enact a video game then your doing something wrong. if video games make kids do violent actions, why don't we just ban guns and violent movies as well? its not going to happen. parents need to monitor their kids instead of pointing blame on the video game industry for the actions of their dumbass kids.
sorry if my grammar is bad, i was in a rush
I understand the empathy for the victim-villians of the piece, but I wonder just how many of the geeks who identified with the Columbine shooters would be willing to treat the 9/11 perps with the same consideration. I heard a lot of introspection about bullying and alienation in high schools after the Columbine massacre: if anyone dares put any historical or political context around 9/11, they are shouted down.
I was reading this guy's blog post and cringing - his grammar is TERRIBLE! First off, if you want to post on your blog in all lower case, that doesn't really impact either the meaning or flow of your post. However, if you plan on using capitalization, for G-d sake, do it right - capitalize I and start your sentences off with capitals. Furthermore, this guy repeatedly wrote in run-on sentences, used improper colloquials (Since when do you see another "size" of someone? I usually see another "side" of my friends.), starting EVERY paragraph with dependant clauses, started sentences with conjunctions, etc. That's just pathetic. Littleton, CO is a fairly affluent area, and Columbine High School is funding pretty well, given the high property tax values. There is absolutely no reason why any student from that school shouldn't be able to write a coherent sentence given all the resources at their disposal.
As far as I'm concerned, there's nothing wrong with this guy's message; in fact, I agree with a lot that he says. Violent video games can certainly be a tremendous way to blow off some steam. The biggest problem I see is that a message needs to be communicated effectively, and putting someone on a pedistal who doesn't even know how to communicate his message is a bad way to support a cause.
I think there is something missing tho. In games as well as in movies (well, the large majority of them) the violence isn't real.
I'm used to play WWII FPS. When I throw a grenade at someone, the guy is usually thrown away a dozen feet, losing a little blood, says "Uh" in a very British way (less noise man, you're only dying) and passes out.
In reality (I've asked my grandpa, who fought that war) it was different. The guy would probably have one of his legs chopped off, along with one arm, and would die after fifteen minutes, contorcing on the floor, with blood spraying out of his wounds like a broken water pipe and screaming in a way that would give you nightmares for ages.
Apologizing for the brutality of the post, I would point out that the most dangerous thing about such games isn't violence in itself, but is the harmless appearance it has. Which is what differs games from The Real World (tm): in games, violence does absolutely nothing. That's not the same once you turn off the comp.
nbody2002:If you can read this you may be addicted to the internet
"pedistal"?
I think that would be "pedestal". Thank you.
Maybe after living in the real world for a few more years, Brown will realize that life isn't "about" anything. That a storyline doesn't redeem gratuitous violence. Now, I don't know any more than he does whether videogaming influences kids to be more violent. Though the few days I played GTA were followed by a couple of incidents here in NYC when I came closer than I have in decades to taking up the common offers to get into a serious fight, with a jerk in a bar. But since such a risk is such a threat to profitable videogame companies' profits and owners, I'm starting to wonder why they don't fund scientific studies by reputable researchers to come up with some numbers.
If they'd started such a study 10 years ago, we'd already have a decade of developmental psychology to study, with actual data on subsequent violence (or its lack) by the people being studied. Such a study is, of course, incumbent on those who'd make a claim that violent games "cause" violent acts, or violent people. But the industry would do itself a favor by clearing the air with such a study. Of course, if they perhaps have such a study already, though unpublished, that shows that there is a cause/effect, they'd be in serious trouble. Although suppressing such studies in the tobacco business just put off the inevitable, with much higher cost to those liable, as well as those unwittingly damaged.
Just hearing from a person who grew up in the Columbine environment, which fostered such a violent event, doesn't convince me. He might be more sensitive to violence, having seen it played out, but he isn't any more expert in child psychology itself. In fact, his closeness to the event could just as easily influence him to engage in denial, that he's that similar to the killers, or capable of it himself, with their common background. Especially when he believes that children's choices are entirely their own responsibility.
--
make install -not war
The thesis is that aggressive/excessive competition can have severe side effects. One side effect is a high rate of violent crime.
Can you explain why the American rate of violent crime is an order of magnitude greater than the European rate or the Japanese rate? Try to formulate a cogent response without trying to create a strawman argment that you then proceed to crush in order to whore some karma points.
The first time i fucked a hooker to restore my life, i laughed. When i killed her to get my money back, i was cracking up. When i took that money to buy a shotgun and went on a killing spree, i was rolling on the ground.
Uhhhh.... ok.
"Time is an illusion, lunchtime doubly so." - Ford Prefect
I wish you well, and hope that you find peace quickly.
350,000 jobs created in march of 2004 The New York Times reports Bonds down on employment news.
Elections Go well in afghanistan country is enjoying the best economic growth it has ever had, reporting Opium traffic on rise and taliban still holding out.
20/20 Stages Explosions in cars auto companys are filleted by lawyers.
I don't really want to go into the media's coverage of aids and environmental except to point out that because of them (by and large) our policy on these issues might better have been framed by hysterical children.
I can go on this is just things off the top of my head. My point is that the media is by far doing greater violence to the body politic than video games. There is no real standard of liability for reporters and if you look at shield laws in most states if they use anonymous sources they can just make up whatever they want. A prime example is the sacramento bee where a reporter had been doing queen for a day sob stories about people for 20 years. The problem most of the people didn't actually exist.
Just things to think about when you see the News Media gathering to bang the drum on an issue.
Given the way these guys were ambushed on the show, I thought I'd share a pic putting the intelligence of the host in perspective, mullet and all. Post an appropriate caption for it if you like.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
I got to about the fourth level which sees you fighting arabs in a church and I just couldn't take it any more. I would have chucked up if I played it any more.
As for the violence, a game can be ultra-violent and great. The GTA series is one example but violence does not a good game make. Humour, level design, plot, graphics and variety are needed too.
Even Rockstar can screw up. I thought Max Payne 2 was excreble. It was certainly attractive and well produced but the game play was mind numbingly repetitive.
Computer games are just the latest incarnation of the human desire to _play_ at violence. It's fine to play cops and robbers so long as you know when you're the bad guys.
I worked at a company doing QA work for a while. Long hours (like 80 hour weeks). Low pay. 30 people crammed into workspaces that more ideally fit 10 or 15 people max.
After a while, crammed in with the same people in close proximity for 6 days out of 7 for weeks on end, the rough edges of everyone's personality starts to grate on your nerves.
Then we started setting up LAN games of Ghost Recon: Desert Seige during the lunch hours. It was great.
For an hour a day, I wasn't a sardined-in cog in a corporate machine... but I was ZANG, mighty hunter of the eviiil otherpeople, ownz0ring each game map with my trusty sniper rifle, or M60 machine gun... striking terror into those unfortunate or foolish enough to be in my path. Lots of adrenaline, and shouting back and forth between sections of the cubes.
Then the lunch hour would end, and it'd be back to checking out a few hundred more entries in the database searching for dupes, and wading through a couple dozen more non-sensical blathering emails from clueless upper management posers.
But, after the massive adrenaline rush and mental escape provided by each day's LAN game, things went smoother.
Personally, I think that there would have been a lot more problems and breakdowns in the work group structure if there HADN'T been the "release" of video-game violence every day at lunch time.
Same thing with kids and video-game violence. Better that the local 16-year-olds be all at home playing at being imaginary thugs in GTA, than be hanging out bored in front of the 7-11 at 10 at night looking for something to do.
If the Japanese adopted the American model, Japanese companies would quickly layoff millions of employees and quickly return to profitability. Aggressive competition like that in the USA has benefits over mild competition like that in Japan. The negative is that aggressive competition is a significant factor in the high rate of violent crime in the USA.
Your point about "The killers at Columbine weren't geeks, nerds, goths, dorks, weirdos, metalheads, skaters, or punks." is true. But I don't buy your conclusion. The groups you point to have found outlets for their frustrations. "I'm a homicidal maniac," says Wednesday Addams in The Addams Family Movie, explaining why she apparently didn't dress up for Halloween. "They look like everybody else."
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
It's worth noting that Michael Moore did make a serious attempt to figure out the context of Columbine, and he took a lot of flack for it from the right wing. Ironic, since he had some criticism of Clinton in that movie. I guess the neo-cons will never be happy until Moore does a feature-length film of his lips attached to Tom Delay's ass.
And it was a really good movie. Yeah, he did a bit of gotcha-journalism by ambushing Charlton Heston and Dick Clark, but other than Katz, he was probably the only guy to make a serious attempt to figure out what the heck is going on with gun culture in the U.S. as it related to Columbine.
And no offence to Katz, but neither he nor Moore are big shots in today's media environment. It's one of the reasons I laugh whenever the phrase "liberal media" is used.
What I don't understand is how parents never seem to understand that ratings are on games for a reason, they wouldn't walk into an adult video store & buy their kid Cum Guzzlers if their kid asked, but yet they buy them an explicit video game with no problems, but then complain about it after they realise what it is.
These days parents are never blamed for anything, its always someone else's fault, its Rockstars fault my kid steals cars, its Manson's fault my kids satanic & shoots his school friends, its the Movie Industries fault my kids on drugs.
Parents are responsible for their own kids, they control what they can & can't do, its that simple, excuses like "I don't have time" or "I can't be there 24/7" are pure crap, if you can't handle the responsibility of having a kid, dont have one!!!!!!
My parents controlled what I had access to and could see, I was never allowed to sit zonked on video games or TV all day, they would allocate me time where I could play games & watch TV, then make me do other things like play out side, which is what any parent should do, your job is to raise and educate your child teaching it morals & ethics, not just give it a playstation so you have more free time.
The real issue is with the parenting, not with the violent video games, but as I said before, its always somebody else's fault!
If anyone were to suggest that Parents should be criminally responsible for raising a criminal it would cause a shit storm, but everyone is happy to blame everyone else.
Maybe it is the "End of the world" :-)
(or the giants drink)
I still think we are missing two larger more important questions:
Do videogames trigger violence?
If so, is it reasonable to limit their sale?
Of course my view is that the negative contribution of videogames to a players behavior is dwarfed by other outside influences such as the condition of the family, which I think is the single most important contributer to a persons behavior next to their biological chemistry.
I know plenty of people that don't get the least bit angry while playing a violent video game, but for me, I can't start up an online game without falling into a rage. Hell, even Tetris pisses me off.
Unfortunately, we live in a cutthroat capitalist society which teaches us that our value lies within our ability to succeed at any task given to us. Can't preform to some expected level at your job? Good luck finding a new one. The disposable nature of our society is beyond reproach. Can someone tell me how anyone can find security in a country where you can be expected to work 80-100 hour weeks, and where failure to preform to these standards will result in your inevitable replacement?
The combination of competition, profound individualism, unrealistic expectations, and our lack of personal value leads to fear. One of our natural reactions to fear is anger. Anger, of course, correlates well with violence. Is it any wonder why America has such a dissproportionate amount of violent crimes when compared to other industrialized nations.
The only solution is for our country to place limits on what is expected and to strengthen the value of the community.
So would it be correct to say that the British Isles is a Barrel of Fish?
Postal 2 was a social satire. Anyone who is legally old enough to play it, and educated beyond high-school should see this. Most people only know the game by the sensationalized headlines and poor comments in slashdot articles. Play the game completely through and enjoy the same humor you find in mainstream media movies such as Team America: World Police.
Actually, I think I need to thank Slashdot. It gave us a voice when we didn't have one. A stupid local journalist decided to write an article on us because his daugther, who went to our school, told him about us. Did he ever interviewed us? NOPE. He just made it all up from hearsay. Then one of us posted the experience on Slashdot and got the NYT Times and Katz' attention. The article was a vindication for us. We really had nowhere to go. Some of us were applying to colleges at the time and didn't want the world to know who we were. Who knows how colleges would have reacted. People just knew there was EvilCON and the article let them know we weren't psycho without revealing exactly who each member was. It's a bit hard to explain but thanks /.
EvilCON - Made Famous by
http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html/
This article is pretty good. In the context of Columbine, it states, what I believe to be, a partial why of the situation. Other than the obvious fact the shooters were fucked up. Then again, save self-defense, what human being that shoots another isn't fucked up?
Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
I didn't experience quite the hell spoken of here in High School. I got my dose of it starting in Kindergarden.
It starts pretty simply. Some kids are bigger that others, and they discover they can use this to get what they want. Honest children who understand that violence is wrong, or at least that their parents don't want them to be violent, get beat up by the kids that don't.
Elementary School was stacked against me the moment I entered it. I was smarter than most, deeper thinking, moral, criticizing of others (best way to piss people off), and utterly different. I was the only kid in my school with utterly curly hair, and I was also something of a crybaby. You couldn't have done a better job of setting me up for trouble if you had designed me with torment in mind.
In any case, my only friends were outcasts like myself. The worst part about it is the downward spiral it leads you into. No one includes you in the games, or the sports. So, you begin to detest the activities you're excluded from. Finally, you end up being skilless and unathletic not because you never wanted to exercise or play with a ball, but because no one would let you.
Because you can't play basketball or tag properly, you get made fun of more and excluded more. So, you get worse at the game, and then get made fun of even more. A vicious cycle if ever there was any.
After fourth grade, I was pulled out of public school and homeschooled by my parents, something I fully intend on doing with my own children whenever I have any. My friends at college may sometimes use me as an example of how homeschooling leads to being anti-social, but that's hardly true. My older sister was homeschooled as long as I was, but wasn't ostracized the way I was. Social butterfly is a phrase that comes to mind for her. What made me anti-social was my experience with the society of my own kind giving me an obvious "you're not welcome here".
I was homeschooled through high school, though I took a couple science and language courses at the local public High School because having dangerous chemicals around the house wasn't my parents idea of safety.
I was probably spared much of the hell that permeated the air around me because I had been out of the system for so long. My actual interest in learning and talent for it got me on the good side of every teacher I took a class from, which probably played a large factor in the relatively light attacks made against me.
Perhaps the reality simply was that I was being excluded, but I didn't notice because I had already been actively excluding myself from the public school system anyway.
In that regard I was an anomaly. I had no interest in being a part of the system, and that cut off most anything they could do to me, aside from hurl random insults. Without interest in the system, excluding me was worthless (and trying to include me would have been a victory for outcasts everywhere), and with a home base of supportive friends also set apart from the system, ostracizing me simply maintained my disinterest without hurting me.
Without a typical social life, I spent most of my time reaching out to my outcast friends. However, after all of elementary school and middle school to screw them up, the kinds of problems they had weren't curable by the reappearance of a fellow outcast.
One by one, I watched and reached and cried as I saw all of my outcast friends descend into depths of darkness that many of them remain in to this day, even after years of graduating.
When Columbine happened, my mother said, "Where were their parents?" My parents watched me play video games, plenty of violent ones at that. They also watched my sister who'd never taken a single karate lesson best me despite the fact I had a black belt because I was utterly against actually hurting anyone. They knew what was up.
Both the government and its extremities and parents these days are concerned with finding a scapegoat for their failures, and not fixing themselves. How else
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
Lol, your opinion is one deluded by the NRA I bet as my Uncle used almost the same words when we were talking about Columbine and he has been a member for decades. Fess up, you Heston-lover.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Fable weirded me out in that respect. I ended up only marying one chick, and it was some true love thing where you chose her over the mayor. I dont really remember the specifics, it was months ago. But yeah, it was a weird thing to have in a game.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
Ever since Space Invaders, I can't stop running from house to house firing straight up into the air.
I happen to agree with his point, but I wonder why he's considered more credible than the average person just because he was at Columbine when the attack occured. I don't see how getting shot at some how miraculously turns you into an authority of the psychology of violent crime.
We kinda see the same bizarre deference paid to the 9/11 families. Somehow having a skyscraper collapse on their relatives magically made them experts on international terrorism.
I don't mind violent video games, but this guy from Columbine has no clue. Hearing such ridiculous arguments will only make people sitting on the fence think the other side sounds more reasonable. Among games that caused a public outcry, my favorite was the original Carmageddon. It may sound horrible to get style points for squishing pedestrians, animals, and other vehicles in weird and interesting ways, but it was an incredibly silly and fun game. Arguments that a game like that would make teens want to run down pedestrians in real-life were ludicrous. Pretend violence doesn't make people more violent, real violence does. I can remember the media circus that happened after Columbine, and I can remember thinking that the media coverage itself could cause a rash of similar incidents. The Columbine shooters wanted notoriety and to get everyone's attention in a big way, and they got it in spades. For a time, they literally changed the world in some ways. Other malcontent and disturbed teens considering suicide could see this and decide to attempt the same thing. After all, most teens who attempt suicide are looking for attention.
while it's great that you have come up with a theory that violent video games actually reduce the amount of engaged violence IRL, you have absolutely nothing to back it up with. point me to some papers to back up your claim, and then we'll talk.
it's a good theory, but it doesn't stand any better than an opposing one without some decent studies.
the news may not be entertainment, but they still look at viewer rating. The more the people like it, the more gruesome things they'll put in the news. If you hadn't watched the news lately, bad news is good news. You never hear about the people celebrating in Iraq, you only hear about the suicide bombings. And that sends viewer rating through the roof.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." - C.S. Lewis
Damn you AC. I'd finally forgotten about JonKatz, and now you have to remind me. A pox on you.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
... the caretaker had a dog.
Kids picked on that dog for months, while the caretakers weren't watching.
One day the dog, up until that time friendly and well-behaved, went psycho, and started randomly baring its teeth and snarling, even attacking the kids.
Its behaviour had changed suddenly and instantly.
I've seen the same thing happen with school kids.
Humans are pack animals - we have a psychologically profound requirement for love from our own pack.
Constant harrasment from our peers deeply violates our psyches, and makes young humans with still-forming minds, extremely unhealthy.
I guess all here already know all of this.
Its deeply shameful and absurd that so many teachers lack this basic knowledge.
You can't blame games, no matter how violent, they are not the cause of violent behavior.
Man is a violent creature. You cannot ignore millions of years of evolution and survival instinct. Most men resist the urge to choke the living shit out of some asshole on a daily basis.
Are our soldiers insane? I think not, how can a soldier be a hero and a murderer be insane? Most criminals who kill are not insane. There is a big difference in killing an enemy willing to kill you and gunning down unarmed fellow students and teachers. Obviously there was something very wrong with these kids, no doubt about that. I suspect the leader was a psychopath and the other pretty much brainwashed by him over a long period of time.
What happened at Columbine is hate was allowed to breed unchecked. The bullies were allowed to heap unending torture and humiliation onto a few outcasts and the bullies were not chastised from doing so. Therefore, they kept pushing the outcasts. The outcast themselves experienced a good deal of stress on a daily basis. In an effort to strike back they planned to use homemade bombs and guns to kill as many of their classmates and teachers as possible. The assault was planned for over a year. Some knew about it ahead of time, in fact at least one or two were told by the killers to skip the rest of the day and go home.
The killers parents are ultimately responsible, these kids were completely unsupervised while their rich parents were preoccupied with their careers. Neither parent was home very often. The killers neighbor heard them breaking bottles in the garage (they were making shrapnel for their bombs).
I don't know about you, but these kids were rich, how many of you had a BMW to drive to high school? (even used)???
There are no easy answers, you can't blame video games, you can't blame television, if these were the cause there would be a whole lot more violence going on. Kids would put down their video game controllers and kill everyone in their house, etc. Hmm, sounds like a good idea for a movie! Subliminal messages broadcast through video games and movies to kids telling them to kill everyone!
Oh we all go a little mad sometimes.
Oh come on, this is hypocrisy.
First of all, I have to say I was prosecuted and singled out because of my love for videogames and other geeky things since I was 6 years old so I think I have been in similar situations to those described above. But hearing the arguments of those who defend GTA and Doom as if they were life-changing pieces of art make me feel sick.
I think the people attacking videogames as the source of all teenage related evil are despicable, and I certainly don't want restrictions on how games should be made, but most gamers are also wrong. Why don't you admit it's the violence that draws you? without it, it wouldn't be "fun". Why aren't you reading good books or playing games with actual depth if you are really interested in story? why do you feel so obsessed with FPSs and repetitive third-person shooters if you are really interested in gameplay?. The truth is that you don't. The first and foremost thing you seek in a game is how the killing takes place. You probably don't even realize it anymore.
They may claim that's not the only kind of game they like, but if that's so, why do those games have the most sales in the United States while so many good games have only moderate sales at best?
I wanted to sympathize with the american geeks when hearing about their plight but the fact that you adore these kind of games as if they were some sort of revolution and defend them with such hypocrital claims is just too sickening.
Those stories from those kids are terrifying.
... the point is, I never, *EVER* saw any trouble or hostility from the "mainstream" once I reached high school. The worst I got was a bit of teasing every now and then, and even that was pretty tame and only during the first two years. We have a term here - "Year 9s are animals." It's kinda expected. After that, any distance from them was mostly because I just didn't "get" their interests - which at the time mostly seemed to involve getting so drunk they threw up. Yay. Not.
I was a geek in high school. I'm sure many here were. Y'know what? Any isolation I felt - and yes, there was quite a bit in the first few years - was largely my own fault. I had people try really hard to be nice, to include me, etc and I just didn't know how to respond. I mostly got confused, or thought they were trying to tease / mock me. In my defense, that's because that used to be a problem, but I think mostly because of my lack of social skills rather than any geekyness. I was one of those people who wakes up one day and says "huh. People. Who would'a thought."
One I learned some utterly minimal social skills, things improved a lot. This frequently meant walking home talking about coding / maths with a couple of friends, though that's not all I did. Anyway
Having come from that, and reading stories like this, is terrifying. I've never heard of anything even remotely like this here (Western Australia). It makes me even more frightened that before about the increasing American media influence and cultural influence* here - because it makes me even more inclined to believe the place, collectively, is insane, though obviously most of it's citizens are just fine.
Pass the cluebat.
* Yes, I know I'm responding to an American article on a website largely full of Americans. I wouldn't call either of these the mainstream American, though.
Interestingly enough, I recently wrote an editorial for the University of Arizona's "Arizona Summer Wildcat" regarding the topic of violence in video games after watching the "60 Minutes" segment on Grand Theft Auto. I agree with the masses that violence in video games does not correlate to violent behavior, and instead, those particular individuals were predisposed to commit such crimes. My article can be found here.
However I would seriously urge you to go and find a theripist to talk to. Sounds like you had some serious rage issues as a kid. Now hopefully with the removal of the cause comes the removal of the rage, but that doesn't mean you still might not have things to work through. The reason I say seek treatment is because you really can come to terms with and deal with this kind of thing, and at the very least you'll be no worse for it, and most likely you'll be much better off.
/. tells me that you aren't afraid of it, at least, and sessions with psychologists are very non-threatening. They can help you come to terms with un-resolved issues from your youth, and give you stratiges for coping with and managing your anger.
If you are the kind of person who tends to react to stress of a certian kind by getting extremely angry, you are more likely to lose it some day and actually act on your anger. Worse, it might be against someone you care about. Should you ever get married and have kids, you'll have some seriously trying times. You certianly wouldn't want to lash out physically against your spouse or children.
So, really, go see a psychologist and talk about this. That you are willing to talk about it on
While you won't walk in, have them say a few words and be magically whole again, with work you can become more at peace than you are, and that's worth something.
While I think there is merit to venting steam in a game, if you need to vent steam, I suspect it's not the whole story.
See, if there was an inverse proportion between how much you do X in a game, and how much you need to do X in the real world (where X can be violence or anything else), then those of us playing Lawful Good, and if at all possible peaceful, characters in games would be the Antichrist incarnate in Real Life.
E.g., I invariably play a lawful good person in games. I find the idea of harming inocents inherently abhorrent. And btw, by "Lawful Good", I don't mean only D&D games, but rather the general idea and code of conduct. Even if it's not even an RPG at all, I try to help the NPCs and keep them happy. E.g., in city/empire building games I try to give my citizens/subjects/whatever the highest standard of living possible in the game/scenario.
The only game I could force myself to play until the end as an evil son-of-a-bitch was KOTOR. I find it more like repulsive than anything even resembling entertainment. Taking out frustration on an inocent, even an NPC, is something that's hard-wired as "wrong" in my brains.
(And no, I'm not gonna foam at the mouth against games where it's possible to play an evil SOB. _I_ don't find that entertaining for myself, but then I don't find RTS entertaining either, and that doesn't mean I'm gonna lobby against RTS. If that's what floats _your_ boat, sure, knock yourself out, for all I care.)
By now someone's probably just itching to jump in and say some variant of "WTF? Are you a total nut-job? They're NPCs, for f-word's sake. They don't have feelings. WTF is wrong with harming those?" (Yes, I know that. It's just not the kind of story line I enjoy, ok?)
But it actually brings me to the real point: I suspect the real factor there is precisely that you know it's just a game. Regardless of whether you give money to NPC beggars or beat them with a baseball bat to vent steam, in the end what matters is: you _know_ it's just a game and they're just NPCs.
You _know_ that what happened for example in World Of Warcraft is just that: something that exists only in WoW. You won't ever wake up in the Real World thinking "I must drop by at the smithy and pick a new mithril breastplate on the way to work."
Or to give another example, in City Of Heroes people often jump off bridges and skyscrappers to save time, because COH heroes can never die from falling damage. (Lowest you can get from falling is 1 hp.) But you know that that happened only in a game, and is valid only in that game. The closest I've ever come to extrapolating that to RL was along the lines of "heh, if it was COH I'd jump down instead of taking the stairs." Worth a brief chuckle, but nothing more.
Ditto about venting frustration by beating up NPCs. You _know_ that you're not really hurting any real human. You know it in the back of your brains even while you're doing it in a game. That's IMHO really what keeps you from doing it In Real Life.
And that's what all these "waaah, but games get them used to being violent" scare-mongers just don't get. In the end games get you used to being _not_ violent. You're immersed into something which you _know_ to not harm anyone.
For someone to put an equals sign between violence in a game and violence in the real world, their perception would have to be deffective to start with. And if someone really is that brain-damaged to not be able to tell the difference between a fantasy world and reality, then IMHO it won't be just games. They'll likely confuse any other fantasy world, be it from novels or from movies or from comics, with the real one.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Who doesn't have super-traumatic memories of school? Sure it was crap, but it's not meant to be fun, it's school. All these people moaning about how "it's because I'm different". newsflash: you're not different, you're not special, no-one gives a shit if you're good at programming or wear "unique" clothes. Kids, along with everyone else, are nasty little bastards. If you take it all too personally, then you are the problem. Stop sympathising with these murdering little criminals, and putting yourselves in their shoes. Bollocks to 'em, they should have picked up coping skills by now, and if they didn't well boo hoo. I sympathise with the families of those who died, normal kids, not attention seeking little freaks...
*breathe*
C17H21NO4
heh, sadly but true, immigrants without the knowledge etc, who are used to doing it tough and dont complain bout working hard to keep the backbone of america and other countries running
From Jane Pinckard's reply:
Yet as a community we should be cautious in embracing too whole-heartedly the over-simplified conclusion that violence in games has no impact, especially when taken out of the individual, anecdotal sphere and applied en masse as a cultural phenomenon.
I'm fine with this but I think its time the "concerned" lobby were also similarly cautious about embracing whole-heartedly the over simplified conclusion that violence in games has an impact especially when taken out of the individual, anecdotal sphere and applied en masse as a cultural phenomenon.
Plays violent online games as: Nerfherder76
And there were many. I was in a Colorado Public School system during the then rampant and still ongoing Columbine McCarthyism. I can still remember the day it happened. I remember chatting with the school resource officer trying to find out what exactly was happening. The greatest horror of the day was not the event itself, but the complete lack of intel as far as what was happening. Rumours of the school being leveled by a bomb, dozens of bullet-ridden bodies lying in the parking lot. Theories of organized efforts to shoot-up several schools at the same time, with Columbine being used to trigger lock-down and make for cornered targets.
I was even a proponent of instituting calm. Made specific efforts to hush the fear of the same happening at our school, making sure that everyone knew that the situation is isolated; no helicopters would be flying into our school after taking off from Columbine. Asking the teachers and counselors if I should aid in the ensuing lock-down.
I didn't go to school the next day. Coincidentally, the most changed that day. April 21st carried more repercussions for the alternatively clothed students of the US than any other. All across the country, Principals came on the PA system urging students to report any students who exert qualities they may think to be "violent or psychotic." Without investigation or inquiry, the reports of hundreds of thousands of students were acted upon. In one day, the Colorado School systems saw more suspensions and expulsions than the decade previous in total. This fact was not realized for QUITE some time due to lack of referrals or reports, it was by hall passes and hourly absence roles that suspensions and expulsions were tallied in the federal investigation made in late May. I dodged the first wave of cleansings by merely missing a day of school.
The months that ensued didn't heal any wounds. The years past since the event aren't letting them heal either. In naught but a week, the media had managed to engineer quite an affective scape-goat out of the "Trench Coat Mafia." They actually managed to make a scapegoat out of practically every counter-culture icon at the time. "Insane Clown Posse," "Doom," "Marilyn Manson," "Anarchist's Cookbook," "Internet Chatrooms (which at the time were counterculture). The political "Hot wording" of the event to gain votes had managed to do the same to every new counterculture icon for quite some time. "Grand Theft Auto," "Mortal Kombat," "Dungeons and Dragons," "Pagans," "Wiccans." In one fell swoop all the kids congress critters thought were little freaks in highschool are now conveniently oppressed to the convenience of their children's "Safety."
And unbeknownst to anyone was the legal rampage that was the bills coming to vote. Measures that betray almost every fiber of meaning in the words "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" were being passed by the dozen. Public Schools were given almost complete and total control over the children that were enrolled there. You see, it used to be that the parents were brought in for a meeting when children were suspended. It used to be that the parents were urged to get counseling for their children, and that counselors names were given. Today, children are assigned counseling and expelled or suspended if they don't agree to it. It used to be there was a group decision between both vice principal, counselor and usually the principle himself when suspension was involved. Now suspensions are handed out by a single person.
Through middle school, specifically 7th grade after Columbine all the way through 8th grade; I had managed to get suspended 11 times. Were it not for the hard work of one very passionate counselor I would have been expelled after the first occasion. There are many good teachers and counselors that kept me afloat for quite some time, but to no avail. They had all the heart they needed to make a difference, they just couldn't put a dent in the negative influence that was society in general. Here you are, not able to af
Of all the Universal Constants, here's one I know: Nice guys finish last
The ISO-standard counter-example to the "fundamentally violent nature of mankind" hypothesis are the Bushmen. Those are literally the perfect commune kind of a community, and if two people have a conflict they can't reconcile, one of them simply moves to another tribe. Which _will_ accept him/her.
Or look at the stone age paintings on cave walls. You'll find plenty about them hunting mammoths, deer, whatever, but I'm not aware of any which were about great military victories against other humans. If there are any, they must be a tiny minority.
The problem is a cultural one. We raise generation after generation with the idea that violence is _cool_ and _manly_. Well, then we don't need to act surprised when they act that way.
What did you learn in history in school, for example? Right. Lots of battles, and how _cool_ we are for beating up them. Yay, we beat up the british! Yay, we shot the indians for their land! Yay, we shot each other and burned our own cities in the Civil War! We're sooo cool for that. Yay, we beat the snot out of Mexico! Etc.
There's a whole indoctrination in the us-vs-them cult, and how violence is _the_ solution. It's _the_ thing we celebrate. It's _the_ thing that gets you remembered in history books. (Try quickly naming one Roman Emperor or a Pharaoh or whatever, which is noted for economic success and not for military campaigns. Right. They don't teach much about _those_ in history class, do they?)
So maybe it's the culture that needs to be fixed.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I can sympathize so much for everyone here who was ostracized and picked on in high school. That was me as well - I went to a small school, so I could play sports, but sitting on the end of the bench doesn't make you popular with the girls.
But in the end, it all came down to realizing two things.
1) I didn't need to give a fuck about what they thought about me.
2) Just because I didn't care, didn't mean I needed to be an ass.
Growing up is about learning how to keep true to yourself, find what you enjoy doing and people who enjoy it, and going with it; while at the same time learning how to deal with the people who value entirely different things. It's all about picking what actually matters to you and fuck the rest.
Let things slide. Learn how to socialize, because all those asshole jocks (and the nice ones who just happened to like the right sports) are still going to be around once you get out of high school, as your boss or your coworker or your fiance's dad. Just because we were ostracized doesn't mean we need to stay on fringes of society - socializing is an acquired skill. Play it like a game, realize that it has no inherent value, but that it is nonetheless important.
Stay cool, play the game, and stay true to yourself underneathe. In the end you'll find you have a lot more time to do what you want to do, and a lot less tension with the world around you.
It's all about realizing that specifically avoiding name brands is shallow and pointless as caring about them. Everything else follows from that.
"There is no god, and there will be no justice. Don't kid yourself. Christianity is a lie. My only peace will be the day that I die." Justice lies in the fact that no matter who you are, you will die.
I am surely not the first person to notice the growing similarities between schools and prisons: random searches, video surveillance, security guards, metal detectors, undercover snitches, even barbed wire. In a prison and especially a labor camp, one of the main ways the authorities maintain control is by enlisting the aid of the prisoners. This is done through selective granting and removal of privileges, and by using the strong to terrorize the weak. The strong and privileged have power among the other prisoners, but this power is dependent on the authorities. Violent video games are actually another means of control. They channel the anger away from the tyranny of school into an imaginary, inconsequential world-inside-a-box. Blowing things up in a video game is no threat to the powers that be. If that fury were directed toward the system that shuts us up for twelve years of our lives, the system that humiliates us, confines us, and breaks our spirit, then that system wouldn't last long. The real purpose of schooling is to break our spirits, so that we will submit to the lesser lives the society of the Machine has to offer us. The technologies of control implemented in schools (and prisons) bespeak the insecurity of the authorities. I remember when a girl in my high school started an independent student newspaper. The principal strode down the hallways, red in the face, brandishing a fistful of newspapers and shouting, "Who is responsible for this?!" Because school's main purpose is to make students submit, any hint that they are losing control fills the authorities with fear. "How to keep control of your classroom" is often a subtext of teacher training programs. And when control seems to slip, the response is always more control. Metal detectors! Drug tests! Chemical medication! Imagine a pressure cooker that springs a leak because the pressure is too high, and rising. Is the solution to seal it up even tighter? You can do that for a while, but we all know the end result. So people turn to "outlets" like video games, D&D, sports, etc. to vent their rage or express their innate desire to be magnificent. It is all practice for an adulthood in which you do an unfulfilling job because you "have to" (motivated externally by money just as grades motivate us externally in school), and in which you can only "be yourself" on the margins of life, the weekends, the vacations. What kind of life is that? Has anyone read the essay: "Grades, A Gun to your Head"? http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/index.php?p=16
I think that being fully prepared to offer violence in certain situations is a Good Thing. Because the fact is that we live in a violent world. And no amount of programming is going to change that; we animate monkey meat shells which are wired to fight or flight, and it ain't gonna change any time soon.
I met a woman a couple years ago who was preparing to set up a birthing zone for poor people in central America, where women could come and give birth to their babies in a warm water tank. Her rationalization was that babies born into a soft, warm environment, as opposed to a clinical brightly lit hospital, makes for more docile humans. Wow. That is a hippy-dippy pipe dream.
I live in Denver, very close to Columbine. The two young men (they weren't boys when they decided to murder their school mates) had plenty of positive environmental feedback; they simply chose to be evil motherfuckers. It is a horrible shame that some concealed carry person on hand wasn't able to cap them before they killed all those people.
This whole violent video game thing is a red herring. Let's focus on a real problem, like the bloated growth of government, or the lack of checks and balances on the power of the Supreme Court.
> How people are actual killers and nut jobs? I mean this in all seriousness. It is probably a split percentage point.
Nah, I'd say it's most people, given the right (well, wrong) circumstances. Predilection for it only seems to broaden the range of those wrong circumstances.
But that's just my guess. I have no intention of getting into such circumstances where I might find out (and you'd have to be fairly bent already for a video game to push you over the edge, but I can't say it's completely out of the realm of possibility just because it wouldn't do it for me).
The first (and only) reply to the thread's original post that isn't all pity-fishing and "oh, woe is me!"
Everybody had problems in high school, including the popular kids, and a lot of these problems were self-inflicted. And most of the so-called "non-conformists" were as conformist as everyone else, just to a different ideal. None of this justifies killing people, and you probably need professional attention if you sympathize with Klebold and Harris. Get over yourselves.
That said, high school is certainly designed to have a Lord-of-the-Flies social system, so created to prepare kids for the corporate-dominated real world, which is a lot more similar to high school than most people would like to admit. Read this.
Rob
I guess YMMV applies...
All good things...