The Year in Game Politics

The Next Generation site has a look back at 2007 through a political lens. Manhunt 2, crackdowns on game sales, and endless stories about gaming and aggression seemed to dominate game headlines this year. The article runs down the details on each of these thorny issues: "There is no conclusive evidence that playing violent videogames leads to violent acts. That hasn't stopped researchers from looking for links between videogames and aggression. A study released ... in November tainted [the role of games as teachers] ... A University of Michigan study by psychology professor Rowell Huesmann called violent videogames a public health threat ... And Villanova University in Pennsylvania found that games caused aggression, but not much: 'It's not as if this is a light switch that either videogames do or do not cause aggression...Most people assume it has a really big effect, but what we find from research is it actually has a very tiny effect,' professor Patrick Markey told Next-Gen in April."

Comments

Good science

[PFI_Optix]

"There is no conclusive evidence that playing violent videogames leads to violent acts. That hasn't stopped researchers from looking for links between videogames and aggression."

Good. That's what they *should* be doing. I'd hate to see the day when science went back to standing on the findings of others and saying "that's just the way it is" rather than continuing to investigate, experiment, and study.

They've made some significant links between violent video games and violent *thoughts*, and I'd wager that eventually they will find a direct link between violent games and violent acts. We should not feel threatened by such ideas and summarily dismiss them because we don't like the findings; that will do nothing but encourage those who would let the lowest common denominator make the rules.

What we as gamers need to do is continue to expect the gaming industry to properly rate and label their products. We should give our business to retailers who make it easy for consumers to understand ratings, and find games of a certain rating. And we should admit that sometimes a minority of people take their gaming experience too far and become violent in real life...just like a minority of people do things based on what they saw or heard in other entertainment media. Just like a minority of people become violent while playing or even passively *watching* a sport.

The public needs to be reminded that this sort of reaction has accompanied every new medium of entertainment. When people realize that this is nothing new and that some people have a problem with SELF CONTROL, not with video games, then we'll get back to our regularly scheduled programming.

I wonder if Star Fleet will have to put up with this nonsense when they invent holodecks. "They're training our kids to be murderers" blah blah blah

Re:Good science

[PlatyPaul]

Well put, succinct and lucid.

The problem, though, lies in very fact that there are people who cannot or will not formulate their opinions on the matter this way. Whether it be the "think of the children" proclaimers or those who believe that video games are blameless, there will be people who will approach the situation with a closed mind. When they have power, decisions will be made accordingly. Trying to remind such people that they should think openly may not work - perhaps it would work better to see that they don't continue to wield power?

Video game prejudice shouldn't be your only key issue when selecting politicians, of course, but it might be worth thinking about before the polling booth.

Re:Good science

[volpanic]

I agree with much of what you've said. For one thing, one of the problems in the discussion of the potential link between videogames and violence is the fact that comparisons are usually drawn to passive media (film, tv). Someone will always bring up the fact that games must be worse because you are a participant in the fantasy violence.

IMO it's far more fitting to make a comparison between videogames and sports - both abstractions of fighting in an us vs. them activity. I don't think there is any way to deny that these kinds of activities come with risks attached for people with undeveloped or impaired self control. I mean, just witness what inebriated football fans can get up to.

But would someone sue a sports league because it made them beat someone up - okay, don't answer that - there is always some litigious idiot. But most people would probably roll their eyes.

Don Quixote

[ChromeAeonium]

Whenever I hear about video games being a menace to society, I always think of the book Don Quixote. There's a part in the book where the priest goes through Don Quixote's romantic knight novels, and declares that they are the reason he went loopy and took off to play knight. Hundreds of years later, it's the same story, just a different medium. Just something to think about.

Think of the children?

[KtHM]

When the average age of a gamer is somewhere around 30, why are violent games which are obviously marketed towards the adult market being banned?

You know what, beer is bad for kids. Let's ban that too.

I played video games all throughout my childhood. Some of them were violent. I turned out fine. The kids who have a tenuous grasp of reality, who snap and shoot up their schools (supposedly) because of a game, probably would have done it anyway. It's not like there's not enough violence in other media to set them off.

I seriously doubt that being the player makes that much difference, versus watching the movie through the (violent) protagonist's eyes.

Video games, violence, and me.

[Pojut]

Just for reference, I'm 23 years old now. I have been playing video games every single day (literally...not a day has gone by that I haven't played for at least ten minutes, even if it's on my cell phone) since my sixth birthday. For a very long time, I have played violent video games...some would say I started playing violent video games at an age when someone that young shouldn't be (in case you were curious, my first violent game (and first game altogether) was NARC on NES.)

I have played countless hours of video games...gibbing friends, blowing up planes, slashing people apart with swords, and just generally being as destructive as possible. Violent video games have had a profound effect on me...they have desensitized me to violence.

Now, many people would say that is a bad thing; personally, I find it to be a good thing. I can give you a perfect example: From the ages of 18 to 22, I was a car mechanic. A buddy of mine lost two fingers in a metal radiator fan when the moron inside the car started it up, thinking we had given him the all clear signal (the all clear signal actually came from three bays down...and yes, the bay number was shouted along with the words "clear". The guy in the car was just a moron.) All of my coworkers around me were unable to help him, because they couldn't stand to look at his hand. While my manager was calling 911, I, totally unaffected by the two missing digits and exposed bone, was able to properly wrap it and position my coworker (due to him going into shock) until the ambulance arrived.

Something similar happened on a four wheeling trip. A guy we were wheeling with was exploring the trail up ahead a little bit (it had rained recently, and he was checking for stability). The guy slipped and fell, breaking his arm on a rock, his bone sticking out of his forearm. Again, unfazed, I was able to help him out and do what was necessary to help get him down off the mountain.

Many people suddenly panic when something violent and bloody happens, and that's how people get more hurt than they already are. Yes, video games have desensitized me to violence, and as a result I have been able to help people that I otherwise would have been powerless to help.

Desensitization is NOT a bad thing. It allows you to see past the violence that is occurring and to address the situation with a clear head, calm head. Desensitization is how one of my childhood friends was able to become a very effective EMT...blood and guts simply don't phase her, and she is able to approach the given situation without paying any attention to the gore that may present itself.

A stupid question...

[argStyopa]

"There is no conclusive evidence that playing violent videogames leads to violent acts."

I understand the motivation by gamers to press this argument. I've been playing FPS's since Doom1, loved most of them, and as far as I can tell I'm not a homocidal maniac. I've never shot a human, nor do I ever hope/intend to. The 'anti-game' community is simplistic and generally ignorant, so I can understand trying to undermine their every argument.

But (re the above statement) - really? I mean, if one claims that repeatedly watching (in this case, violent) imagery *doesn't* in any way change behavior and values, doesn't that ipso facto perjure the ENTIRE concept of our $multi-billion$ (trillion?) advertising industries?