Violence in Video Games

[GeorgeMichael]

To celebrate Grand Theft Auto's IV release I thought that we should come together and discuss... debate... about all these controversies over violence in video games, the most blasphemous of these being the GTA series and the Manhunt games.


How do you all feel on this subject? Do you really think that video games are to blame for the social problems of today's youth? or is it just a bunch of crap made up by congress to make us think that they're doing something...

[Rafael Domination]

Well...I think violence is just human nature. If humans wanted to get violent, they could do it without any help from video games. Gladiators fought to the death without any video game 'corrupting' their minds. I don't think a gew shooting games are responsible for the sad state of youth today. Maybe for a few cases, but not all.

[jordanisonfire]

I say that some video games have ratings that are just stupid. Take Fable for example. It has NO blood in it, and it's pretty childish in some parts, it's got no swearing either, yet it's a 16. How thick is that? The only bad thing it has is your guy hitting someone with a sword and them staying exactly the same, even though their health is going down.

[Nyx]

I think it definately has something to do with "the state of youth". Because in games shooting is a good thing and at some point it becomes fun.

[Midnight_Moon]

In my opinion video games are all stupid, violent or not. Why spend your time watching, playing video games, and rotting your brain cells when you could go outside or write and play your music? I understand that some parents let their children play video games but they shouldn't have violence in it. I mean, look at those 3rd graders that were trying to kill their teacher. The experts were saying that the must have gotten the idea from movies and/or video games. So, I am against violence in video games.

[Shaun]

There is no proof that video games make people more violent. In fact, let me put it to you this way:
What video games did Hitler plays? How about Stalin? Vlad the Impaler? etc...
None, they didn't play games and they were still violent. It's irrelevant that they didn't have them, since the fact remains that they became violent, angry people from other reasons. I think the major cause of violence has nothing to do with television or video games, but with society and culture itself, with a little biology thrown in. Humans are predisposed to being violent. That doesn't necessarily mean we are predisposed to go around stabbing people, but we do have a tendency to resort to violence, because that's just natural. It's the same in the animal kingdom. The argument that animals don't have wars is absurd because they do have brutal fights. They can't have wars because they aren't intelligent enough to organize for that (most of them...chimps actually do have wars by the way...and they are more brutal than most of our wars since they will intentionally group together and hunt down all the young of another group of chimps...).

Video games are just GAMES and 99.999999999999999999999% of people know this. The nation isn't getting more violent because they are playing games. The nation has ALWAYS been violent. This crap about how the U.S. is becoming more and more violent and we're so much worse than other nations...well when you compare us to countries that are 300 times smaller in size and population it's no wonder you can make those assumptions. Larger cities have a more difficult time of maintaining order and this is historically proven as well. Major cities tend to have greater instances of violence for a good reason: people don't know each other. You'd be much less likely to stab your next door neighbor if everyone in the entire town knew who you were, who your mother was, etc.
Meh, anyway. Nope, not involved in creating violence :P. Name me one person who went on a shooting rampage that can be proven to have thought that GTA was real...

[Midnight_Moon]

But what about world peace? I am sure that video games with violence in them could be affect it. I just think playing video games are stupid. I am not going to reply again to this thread. Trust me it's better that way. I don't want to blow up in any ones face.

[Nyx]

There is no proof that video games make people more violent. In fact, let me put it to you this way:
What video games did Hitler plays? How about Stalin? Vlad the Impaler? etc...
Hitler was more organized violence, the kind of violence I think video games inspire are just random shootings, without much thought behind them.

Video games are just GAMES and 99.999999999999999999999% of people know this.
I don't believe that's an actual fact, can you give a source?
A nine year old probably can't differentiate games from reality as easily as you can. Therefore , just because adults/young adults can say PFT..everybody knows it's a game!, it doesn't mean a third grader sees it as simply.

This crap about how the U.S. is becoming more and more violent and we're so much worse than other nations...well when you compare us to countries that are 300 times smaller in size and population it's no wonder you can make those assumptions.
I don't even know how this is THAT relevant :P

[Nyx]

I know I am double posting but I missed this post before:

. I just think playing video games are stupid. I am not going to reply again to this thread. Trust me it's better that way. I don't want to blow up in any ones face.



If you can it'd be cool for you to continue replying (without "blowing up in any one's face") because it's interesting to see other people's different opinions.

[jordanisonfire]

Some games can relieve stress. For example, games that involve killing people stop my anger. I just pretend that the person I'm angry at is the person I'm killing. ^^

[Shaun]

Hitler was more organized violence, the kind of violence I think video games inspire are just random shootings, without much thought behind them.

They blamed the Columbine shootings partially on violent video games. They were exceedingly organized and you'd be surprised how many "random" shootings are actually planned out. Very very few people just "randomly" shoot people. They have some idea what they are doing. You don't carry a gun around if you don't intend to use :P. That'd be like a hunter carrying a rifle and never shooting at the deer.


I don't believe that's an actual fact, can you give a source?
A nine year old probably can't differentiate games from reality as easily as you can. Therefore , just because adults/young adults can say PFT..everybody knows it's a game!, it doesn't mean a third grader sees it as simply.

It's not an actual fact :P. I made it up based on the fact that I've never met anyone in all my years of playing games that actually thought it was real and representative of real life...not a single person. And I've known some crazy people...like certifiably insane.
Well here's my question: why are little kids playing these games? It's against the law. That's not the child's fault, that's the parent's, and if the parents don't want to teach that kid "this isn't real", well, that's the parent's fault again.
Besides, we seem to have this predisposition of thinking that kids are retarded. Kids are smart. They don't watch Barney and think he's a real dinosaur. Kids can and do make distinctions between film and real life, games and real life. Kids are smart. Adults are stupid for thinking kids are stupid. You all remember that show "Kids Say the Darndest Things" or whatever it was with Bill Cosby? Yeah, prime example that kids are much smarter than we think they are. We seem to have this assumption that they don't really understand a lot of things, but really they understand things very well...they just don't go around telling us they understand.

I don't even know how this is THAT relevant :P

It's not directly relevant I suppose. I just get irritated that people poke at the U.S. for all its violence, but ignore the fact that of all the nations out there of this size, we're the safest. Look at Russia. Yeah...screwed up country there.

[jordanisonfire]

Yeah, I got my first GTA game when I was like 10 and when my guy could take like ten bullets and not die, I just thought "Yeah, right..."

[Nyx]

They Very very few people just "randomly" shoot people. They have some idea what they are doing. You don't carry a gun around if you don't intend to use :P. That'd be like a hunter carrying a rifle and never shooting at the deer.


I didn't mean random as in they grabbed a gun and shoot, I mean they didn't have a very thought out process (i.e. they were just really pissed off, confused, etc). And it's not all about shootings when it comes to violence.



It's not an actual fact :P.

I know, I was being sarcastic:rolleyes:



I made it up based on the fact that I've never met anyone in all my years of playing games that actually thought it was real and representative of real life...not a single person. And I've known some crazy people...like certifiably insane.

First off, your friends aren't 99.99999- % of the world.
Second, it might be based on A. the age of the people you are basing this on B. The kind of people you know.


Well here's my question: why are little kids playing these games? It's against the law. That's not the child's fault, that's the parent's, and if the parents don't want to teach that kid "this isn't real", well, that's the parent's fault again.


Not all parents are GOOD parents, not all parents are involved enough in their kids' lives to understand and some parents played games in their times and they don't know how the games have changed.
It's next to impossible to make all parents perfect or completely informed. Therefore making games a. more realistic b. less violent,
is far easier.

Besides, we seem to have this predisposition of thinking that kids are retarded.

I think you're forgetting that I'm still considered a kid at times, and I definately do not assume I am "retarded".


Kids are smart.

That's true, but kids also trust much faster than adults. They could talk to a stranger a few times and after consider them a good friend. The same way they can play a game a few times and start to trust it.

[Shaun]

I didn't mean random as in they grabbed a gun and shoot, I mean they didn't have a very thought out process (i.e. they were just really pissed off, confused, etc). And it's not all about shootings when it comes to violence.

No, but generally it refers to gun violence. And very very very few people commit crimes like murder, rape, etc. without thinking about doing it. All those actual "random" acts out there are caused by people that randomly snapped and it's almost always because of mental instability. Someone who turns around, screams, and pokes your eyes out and very likely insane in the first place. That has nothing to do with video games. That's biology.


First off, your friends aren't 99.99999- % of the world.
Second, it might be based on A. the age of the people you are basing this on B. The kind of people you know.

I've known 8 year olds that play GTA and go around an do what I do when I play that game: kill everyone and everything, blow stuff up, and cause as much mayhem and destruction as possible while evading the authorities. Those same 8 year olds didn't go out and shoot up their school.

Alternately, quote me an actual scientific study that proves that video games are the cause of increased violence. It's not possible to blame increased violence on video games, or movies. I blame the parents because parents have become lax. Not to mention we're not allowed to spank our kids anymore, since that's child abuse, and we're not allowed to do a lot of other things to our kids that would do them a lot of good. Guaranteed, if parents and teachers were able to actually DISCIPLINE children, we'd have far fewer problems. There is a correlation between lax parenting and poor behavior.


Not all parents are GOOD parents, not all parents are involved enough in their kids' lives to understand and some parents played games in their times and they don't know how the games have changed.
It's next to impossible to make all parents perfect or completely informed. Therefore making games a. more realistic b. less violent,
is far easier.

That's still the fault of the parents. As a parent you are responsible for what your child views, does, etc. If your child blows up his school, you are responsible for it. Good parents, bad parents, doesn't matter. If you're not being involved in the lives of your children, that's your problem, not the video game's.


I think you're forgetting that I'm still considered a kid at times, and I definately do not assume I am "retarded".

Nope, you're quite smart actually. That's my whole point though.

That's true, but kids also trust much faster than adults. They could talk to a stranger a few times and after consider them a good friend. The same way they can play a game a few times and start to trust it.

You're assuming that kids can look at a fake situation in the same way they would look at a real life situation. A video game about talking to strangers isn't the same as actually talking to strangers. The video game isn't going to buy you an icecream bar to gain your trust. Kids are not retarded. They can tell the difference between a video game and real life. The biggest clue is the controller. I've never been in a real life situation that required using a controller (except in playing a game). The only thing that will make games actually real is virtual reality, and that's a long way off :P

[Nyx]

No, but generally it refers to gun violence. And very very very few people commit crimes like murder, rape, etc. without thinking about doing it.
They think about it but not in a sane way.


I've known 8 year olds that play GTA and go around an do what I do when I play that game: kill everyone and everything, blow stuff up, and cause as much mayhem and destruction as possible while evading the authorities. Those same 8 year olds didn't go out and shoot up their school.

You've only known a limited amount of 8 year olds.

Not to mention we're not allowed to spank our kids anymore, since that's child abuse, and we're not allowed to do a lot of other things to our kids that would do them a lot of good. Guaranteed, if parents and teachers were able to actually DISCIPLINE children, we'd have far fewer problems. There is a correlation between lax parenting and poor behavior.
You think spanking kids is how to "actually DISCIPLINE" kids?:O What the...

That's still the fault of the parents. As a parent you are responsible for what your child views, does, etc. If your child blows up his school, you are responsible for it. Good parents, bad parents, doesn't matter. If you're not being involved in the lives of your children, that's your problem, not the video game's.
It's not so much about pointing fingers. Yes it has a lot to do with parents but controlling video games is an easier solution than controlling the parents.

Nope, you're quite smart actually. That's my whole point though.

That was my point too :P, my previous statement had nothing to do with thinking kids are "retarded"


You're assuming that kids can look at a fake situation in the same way they would look at a real life situation.

That's not it at all, I'm saying they can look for a solution to something real from a fake source.

[Shaun]

They think about it but not in a sane way.

Define sane.


You've only known a limited amount of 8 year olds.

Yes, and? Show me a whole load of 8 year olds running around thinking GTA is real. There might be one...maybe two in 100,000,000 of them. And guaranteed their parents aren't doing what they should be doing in the first place.

You think spanking kids is how to "actually DISCIPLINE" kids?:O What the...

It's one way of doing it. It's not abuse and it does work. Spanking and beating are entirely different things.


It's not so much about pointing fingers. Yes it has a lot to do with parents but controlling video games is an easier solution than controlling the parents.

Yeah...ignoring evidence that Osama Bin Laden was going to bomb the towers in New York was an easy solution too. The easy solution is often the wrong solution. Additionally, banning something as the "easy" solution only punishes the people who are doing things correctly. Do you think controlling video games is going to stop them from being violent? Nope. In fact all that will happen is that game designers will pick up shop, move to countries where the U.S. has no extradition laws and put their games out online for people to download. Short of pulling a China Communist move and banning these items from the net there's not much we can do and all you've done is punished all those people who did the right thing. This happens all the time and it's disturbing. We ban things because a few people screw things up. That's not how democracy should work.

That was my point too :P, my previous statement had nothing to do with thinking kids are "retarded"

I know :P. I was just sayin' :P

That's not it at all, I'm saying they can look for a solution to something real from a fake source.

Kids are smart enough to see the difference. They see the difference all the time.

[Nyx]

Define sane.



Yes, and? Show me a whole load of 8 year olds running around thinking GTA is real. There might be one...maybe two in 100,000,000 of them. And guaranteed their parents aren't doing what they should be doing in the first place.



There doesn't need to be a whole load, one is enough to scar 500 lives in a school.



It's one way of doing it. It's not abuse and it does work. Spanking and beating are entirely different things.

I don't see how it helps... I'd feel abused if my parents did it to me.


Additionally, banning something as the "easy" solution only punishes the people who are doing things correctly.
A. What is correctly?
B. So we should try to control parents instead? :rolleyes:
In fact all that will happen is that game designers will pick up shop, move to countries where the U.S. has no extradition laws and put their games out online for people to download.
Who said we were only talking about U.S.?




Kids are smart enough to see the difference. They see the difference all the time.

You either didn't read my answer or you're not understanding it. They see the difference when they're holding a controller and shooting the bad guy. But when in a tough real life situation they resort to the fake virtual world for solution. And no, I don't mean they think: "Oh well since that guy shot the other guy in Kill Zombies version 5, I should kill my mom" What I mean is that there's something in the back of their head now as shooting/violence being a solution.

[jordanisonfire]

There doesn't need to be a whole load, one is enough to scar 500 lives in a school.

And you think this can be stopped? Be realistic here. We can't just ban stuff and impose laws and expect it to all go away. It's gonna happen. It's impossible to make the world a perfect place with no crime, violence etc. We could do an infinite amount of protests for black rights, write a thousand books on racism, impose as many laws we want for their rights, but there's still gonna be people who hate blacks, no matter what. It's the same with this. We can ban guns, violence, everything, but there's still gonna be people who'll kill others.

[Shaun]

There doesn't need to be a whole load, one is enough to scar 500 lives in a school.

So? Humans have been this way for thousands upon thousands of years. Before video games. Before guns. Before swords. This is human nature.


I don't see how it helps... I'd feel abused if my parents did it to me.

Yup, that's the exact mentality that has taken control. There's nothing abusive about a quick pat on the butt.

A. What is correctly?
B. So we should try to control parents instead? :rolleyes:

Let's say, for arguments sake, that there is evidence that one kid goes nutso from playing a video game and shoots up a school (hasn't happened yet, but we're using it for an argument here). Well, that's just one kid. So are we going to ban video games because he went nuts and punish all those millions of other kids who play the same games and go to school and don't shoot people? Is that the right choice?
To your second point: why is it that that kid flipped out after playing that game? Was it because he was actually mentally unstable or was it because his parents never sat him down when he was 4 and explained the difference between a game and real life? It's the fault of the parents here. No we shouldn't control parents. I never said that. But we should punish those parents who failed to do their jobs as parents. Even if that kid is mentally unstable it is the parent's fault for not taking him to get proper medical care.

Who said we were only talking about U.S.?

Nobody. But that's generally where all the arguments go since we're such a horrible nation of violence *rolls eyes*

You either didn't read my answer or you're not understanding it. They see the difference when they're holding a controller and shooting the bad guy. But when in a tough real life situation they resort to the fake virtual world for solution. And no, I don't mean they think: "Oh well since that guy shot the other guy in Kill Zombies version 5, I should kill my mom" What I mean is that there's something in the back of their head now as shooting/violence being a solution.

But there isn't. That's the whole point. They can see the difference between virtual violence and real violence.

[jordanisonfire]

It seems that you're just saying the same thing over and over again, Nyx, but in different words every time. Shaun is pretty much doing the same thing in answer to it. We're getting nowhere with this.

[Nyx]

It's impossible to make the world a perfect place with no crime, violence etc.
It's not impossible however to make the amount of "crime, violence, etc" smaller.


So? Humans have been this way for thousands upon thousands of years. Before video games. Before guns. Before swords. This is human nature.
It's human nature to want to commit big acts of violence? I'm a human, that's not in my mind.



Yup, that's the exact mentality that has taken control. There's nothing abusive about a quick pat on the butt.

There's nothing productive about it either.



Well, that's just one kid.
One kid who killed many others.


So are we going to ban video games because he went nuts and punish all those millions of other kids who play the same games and go to school and don't shoot people?
It's not punishing them. I never said we should ban video games or even violent video games. I don't beileve I said that...did I? *oh_oh*
However, video games COULD become less violent.


But we should punish those parents who failed to do their jobs as parents. Even if that kid is mentally unstable it is the parent's fault for not taking him to get proper medical care.

How do you plan on finding ever parent who failed to do their job as parents? And how do you plan on punishing them?:rolleyes:

Nobody. But that's generally where all the arguments go since we're such a horrible nation of violence *rolls eyes*
No, it's generally where you take the argument. Yea, yea, a lot of nations get stereotyped, get over it.


But there isn't. That's the whole point. They can see the difference between virtual violence and real violence.
Ugh. Shad's right, we keep putting it in different words, and I still don't think you're reading what I say the way it's intended. I can watch a movie about a kid who's fat and does blah blah blah to get fit and does, and then after I can think if I do blah blah blah I'll get skinny too. And I can try those methods based on the movie. Yes, I am not retarded, I do realize the movie wasn't real, but in some minds it's this: if I can't find the solution in my real life, I can surely find it somewhere else.

[Shaun]

It's not impossible however to make the amount of "crime, violence, etc" smaller.

Yeah, but getting rid of video games isn't going to do that. The primary cause of criminal behavior in youth is from poor parenting.

It's human nature to want to commit big acts of violence? I'm a human, that's not in my mind.

It's still in your nature. Whether or not you think about it is irrelevant. We are humans and for some of us that violent side comes out and for others it doesn't. It's there regardless. Your upbringing will have a lot to do with how you react to certain situations, but for everyone there is a line, and when that line is crossed, they'll resort to violence. You would too, even if you say you wouldn't. If the only thing you could to do save your family was fight, you'd fight.

There's nothing productive about it either.


If it serves to teach a lesson, it's productive. Spanking does serve to teach children a lesson. They did something bad, they got punished for it, and they learn not to do that again. If you don't issue punishment for bad behavior, what do kids learn? Nothing. And contrary to popular believe, time outs don't work for everyone. Some kids have to be spanked. You know what time outs did for me? Nothing. When I was 10 you could put me on time out all you wanted to, it didn't matter, I'd still do whatever it was I was in trouble for again. What taught me a lesson was a spanking.

One kid who killed many others.

Your point? So we should still punish all those good kids who didn't kill anyone just because one kid did? That seems fair.

It's not punishing them. I never said we should ban video games or even violent video games. I don't beileve I said that...did I? *oh_oh*
However, video games COULD become less violent.

Violence sells. They don't need to be less violent. They just need to keep doing what they're doing: entertaining people.

How do you plan on finding ever parent who failed to do their job as parents? And how do you plan on punishing them?:rolleyes:

You can't find them. But when their child does something that could have been prevented with good parenting, or attentive parenting, we punish those parents for their failure. It happens from time to time. Parents are held responsible for whatever stupid thing their kids did. We also hold them responsible if their kids kill themselves with guns. You have a job to do as a parent and if you don't want to do it, don't have sex and have kids. Being a parent involves sacrificing to make sure you do a good job.

No, it's generally where you take the argument. Yea, yea, a lot of nations get stereotyped, get over it.

Why? Why should I get over it? Fine, the Jews should get over the Holocaust then. It happened a long time ago...just get over it. That logic doesn't work, Nyx. You can't tell me to get over it when my country is often misrepresented. I don't like it, and I'm going to say so. You have the choice not to listen.

Ugh. Shad's right, we keep putting it in different words, and I still don't think you're reading what I say the way it's intended. I can watch a movie about a kid who's fat and does blah blah blah to get fit and does, and then after I can think if I do blah blah blah I'll get skinny too. And I can try those methods based on the movie. Yes, I am not retarded, I do realize the movie wasn't real, but in some minds it's this: if I can't find the solution in my real life, I can surely find it somewhere else.

Except it doesn't work that way. Movies very rarely try to be actually "real". And if someone can't see the difference that is the fault of the parents for not establishing that movies, television, and games are nothing but fake reality.

[Alex]

Violence in video games and media is not the problem, its the child's perspective of reality. If responsible figures are too ignorant to create the line between fantasy and reality then its their own damn fault.

Don't bring Columbine into this, alot of stupid people said alot of stupid things about why the shootings happened. The argument is null to me because the shock of the events created unecesary clamor, I don't know enough to look at the situation objectively, but its not video games.

Quite possible one of the best lines from any movie I've ever seen "Did you know I read this statistic once. An average child sees 10,000 dead bodies on television before they turn 18."

Japan creates just as many violent video games as America, yet the crime rates are much lower. That in and of itself is telling enough. Street Fighter, Tekken, all the arcade style fighters we know and love, almost all made in Japan.

About the "rotting your brain cells" argument, you can learn alot about the world from video games. Violence sells because its a stimulant. Playing a video game about a courtroom lets say isn't entertaining. Make those video games and people will laugh and mock.

I agree with Shaun, let them do what they're doing. Its called entertainment. Nyx, your stereotype argument is way out of line as well. Get over it? Thats arrogant beyond belief, I hope you know that.

The entire rating system for video games and movies is completley illogical and skewed in a direction it shouldn't be. I'm sure if someone tried to sue the case would go all the way up to the Supreme Court. That is a little bit irrelevant, but I want to prove why you can't ban video games.

Each step the American government takes to ban this free speech, the more and more the original constitution is ignored. There is no false advertisement, there is no clear and present danger, there is no slander, and there is no basis for banning them. This is about as constitutional as the censorship trials against the music industry in the early 90s.

They shouldn't be banned, nothing should be done about it. It should be viewed as nothing but entertainment and people should enjoy it. If I see a movie about a guy who commits suicide does it make we want to commit suicide. There is no point in arguing the topic because nothing well ever be changed and good riddance.

[GeorgeMichael]

Ok, I'm just jumping in here finally :)





It's human nature to want to commit big acts of violence? I'm a human, that's not in my mind.






And to follow Alex I'll quote another movie in response to that Nyx, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." It's not in your mind, it's not in mine either. I'm not going to go out and start shooting people, I'm not going to join a gang, I even loathe the very idea of guns, gangs, and stuff of the like, and yet Grand Theft Auto is one of my favorite video game series ever! I already pre ordered GTA IV, and I'm looking forward to playing it. I've been playing games for years and despite this fact I have never been associated with anything gun/drugs related nor gang related. i have watched movies about murder, suicide, and related stuff but it never influenced me at all to do any of those things, on the contrary it motivated me to move further away, if it was possible to begin with, from those things.

When I play a game, no matter how violent it may be, I know that I am entering the realm of fantasy. (which ironically throws out my entire definition of fantasy in mine, Andy's, and Shaun's debate :P) and I know that I won't repeat it. I know that I can't go out, and suddenly be able to drive like a mad person and have no consequences, I know that none of it is real.

Occasionally you'll get a person who does something bad in real life, he murdered someone, or just shot them. Now most people's first instinct would be that's a crazy guy, or he was really angry at whoever he shot, or he has problems. Well, that's most likely what cops would think too, but they need a motive to show in court or any place like that, and violent video games provide a sort of safety cushions for people to fall on. It's so easy to say that the violence problem is caused by a video game when you have nothing else to go on. It's all "what a psychopathic murderer" until they go to his house and "GASP!!! He played Grand THeft Auto!!!"


The next thing you know the president is going to arrest anyone who plays a violent video game in fear that they are training to be a terrorist. The entire issue over video games has gotten extremely out of hands. Take for example, as Alex I believe pointed out, Japan. Statistics show that Japan has the most video game players in the world... maybe next to china, but don't quote me on that one, and they do not have the violence problem that we have here. For more statistics take into account that a recent study has shown that since these 'too violent for the public' video games started being released, the violence and crime rates have begun to go down. "Wow! now why hasn't anyone heard about that?"

Let's see, back in the day before video games a man in New York shot a person, and a man down in Colorado would breathe easily and never know about anything, not a care in the world. As time progressed, every act of violence began being publicized by the news, before too long people were questioning, "what has happened to our world, when I was young I never played witness to so much violence!" That's because it wasn't told to every single man, woman, and child on the face of the planet. "However no one cares about that, now that everyone knows that there is violence in the world they want an explanation for something that's been happening ever since... oh I don't know, before Christ, and they shift the blame onto a modern piece of entertainment.

I have to go to sleep now so I'm gonna stop there for right now :P but you get what I'm trying to say, this whole issue placed onto video games is just ridiculous. Tomorrow I have something to say about Manhunt though... but yeah, I'll leave it at that for now. :)

[Shaun]

Japan creates just as many violent video games as America, yet the crime rates are much lower. That in and of itself is telling enough. Street Fighter, Tekken, all the arcade style fighters we know and love, almost all made in Japan.

This is a prime example of what I'm talking about when it comes to parenting, and to a certain extent, culture.
Japan has a culture primarily occupied with honor. It's been this way for thousands and thousands of years. To do something like murder, or commit an act of violence is considered dishonorable to one's family. America and, typically, most, if not all, western cultures have had a huge issue with concepts of honor and moral rigidity. In fact, if you compare the differences between Japan and the Western World you'll find that those nations that became heavily Christian tended to become the most "immoral", while nations that became more Buddhist tended to have higher levels of honor and stability. It wasn't until Christian and Western influence came into Japan that they started doing things that seems incredibly wrong.
That being said, when one looks at the culture of Japan, which is extremely violent as far as its media is concerned, we see that it is, as a culture, less violent. Japan does produce some of the most violent games and movies of any modern nation, yet it's citizens are, for the most part, far less violent than other nations. This has a hell of a lot to do with the way Japanese children are raised. They go through intense school programs, are heavily influenced by honoring their families, and themselves. In fact, the most prevalent mode of death in Japan is suicide, and that's due to what they perceive is failure--failing at succeeding to get a great job is the same as failing to honor one's family...and whether this is right or wrong is really irrelevant. Good parenting and discipline = good kids. Like I said. The parents instill the drive in their children, their children go off and do what they're supposed to, or fail and dishonor their families.

Each step the American government takes to ban this free speech, the more and more the original constitution is ignored. There is no false advertisement, there is no clear and present danger, there is no slander, and there is no basis for banning them. This is about as constitutional as the censorship trials against the music industry in the early 90s.


Oh no, I don't agree on this point. I don't think it has anything to do with free speech. That's a very bad card to try to pull in this case. It's less about that than about misrepresentation of the facts. You can't really pull the freedom of speech thing here because there always has to be a limit in what you can and cannot do with "free speech". I can't go running around downtown screaming "kill the Jews" because that's a violation of our right to free speech. There is always a limitation and with video games there is a ceiling you can't cross, for a good reason. We can't have games about raping children, can we?
Video games aren't really speech anyway. You have freedom to SAY something, not to show it. I can't legally show you videos of children having sex, because that's wrong. The same can be said about showing videos of people being murdered in public. Think of the ceiling.
That's also why we need ratings. I support the rating system to a point, because we have to. There is a limit to what we can show children at certain ages for a reason. It's more for their protection than anything else. We unfortunately cannot rely on parents to do the job of monitoring what these kids watch, so to some extent the government has to. Likewise, we cannot rely on parents to teach all of these kids the difference between real and not. Kids are smart, but 5 year olds shouldn't be watching all those Saw movies or Hostel or playing Manhunt.
I do agree that the rating system is often unfair though. That's for sure.

[Rafael Domination]

Violence sells. They don't need to be less violent. They just need to keep doing what they're doing: entertaining people.

So you mean to tell me those blood-sports the gladiators participated in are justified? Don't get me wrong, I've probably enjoyed more violence than you've ever seen in your 20+ years of your life before I became a Christian, and even today, I admit it still fascinates me...but just because it's entertaining that doesn't mean it's justified that it has to go on. Besides, you haven't given a real reason why they shouldn't get violent.


In fact, if you compare the differences between Japan and the Western World you'll find that those nations that became heavily Christian tended to become the most "immoral", while nations that became more Buddhist tended to have higher levels of honor and stability. It wasn't until Christian and Western influence came into Japan that they started doing things that seems incredibly wrong.



Ha. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. That made me laugh. (Obvious much) Let's not go there. Keep to the games. You'll have to give concrete evidence - not just 'educated guesses' cuz' that's all you seem good at - before you post such strong comments without any regard whatsoever to the other side of things.


There is a limit to what we can show children at certain ages for a reason.


For once, I agree. If I had it my way, the ratings would be a little more strict, but at least we brushed on something in common there (finally)

Well, it all boils down to this...are the kids, like those Japanese angels you've mentioned, being taught by their parents to withstand the influence of video games? Is there a way to make sure those kids aren't influenced by the violence? I agree that not everyone needs video games to turn them into complete monsters, and that it's all in human nature, but wouldn't it be better to play it safe? And if there has to be violence, does it have to include gore and blood? I've watched Advent Children, and that has got to be one of the most violent, high-action anime movies I've ever watched, but there is no gore. Does the violence have to be mindless, cuz' there's a lot of that in video-games nowadays? If there has to be violence, there has to be a meaning and purpose behind it.

It's like sex and violence in novels. We've discussed it and a lot of you agree that whenever the author is considering to put either one in their novel, it has to have a purpose. But the thing with a lot of video games, is just pur violence. The plot sucks because no effort has been put into it, just the gore and violence.

While I also agree that violence is unavoidable, I prefer to avoid it unless it's needed. Better yet, if I have to watch violence, it's usually gore-free, and mostly just pure, well-coordinated, creative action.

[Shaun]

So you mean to tell me those blood-sports the gladiators participated in are justified? Don't get me wrong, I've probably enjoyed more violence than you've ever seen in your 20+ years of your life before I became a Christian, and even today, I admit it still fascinates me...but just because it's entertaining that doesn't mean it's justified that it has to go on. Besides, you haven't given a real reason why they shouldn't get violent.

You're making the comparison between a VIDEO GAME and actual combat. There's a huge difference. One is REAL and one is not. Nobody really dies in a video game or a Hollywood movie. People actually died in the gladiator tournaments.
I don't have to give a reason why they shouldn't get violent, but I don't think they should stop doing what they're doing.

Ha. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. That made me laugh. (Obvious much) Let's not go there. Keep to the games. You'll have to give concrete evidence - not just 'educated guesses' cuz' that's all you seem good at - before you post such strong comments without any regard whatsoever to the other side of things.

Do the research, Raf. Case in point: Samurai and Knights. They both had roughly the same code of ethics, both based, primarily, upon a form of religious ideology (though in the case of the Samurai it wasn't really a religion, but Zen Buddhism). Who were most likely to rape and pillage? Historically it was those of the Knight class, and of comparable classes outside of England (such as in France where Christianity was just as strong...or Spain). The honor code of Japan was so strong and their dedication to the ideals of Zen were unsurmountable.
They're not educated guesses, Raf. It's a reality.

Well, it all boils down to this...are the kids, like those Japanese angels you've mentioned, being taught by their parents to withstand the influence of video games? Is there a way to make sure those kids aren't influenced by the violence? I agree that not everyone needs video games to turn them into complete monsters, and that it's all in human nature, but wouldn't it be better to play it safe? And if there has to be violence, does it have to include gore and blood? I've watched Advent Children, and that has got to be one of the most violent, high-action anime movies I've ever watched, but there is no gore. Does the violence have to be mindless, cuz' there's a lot of that in video-games nowadays? If there has to be violence, there has to be a meaning and purpose behind it.

I never said the Japanese were angels. You're just upset because I made an unfavorable comparison to your religion.
The Japanese aren't being taught to not be influenced by games. In fact, they're being taught something completely different in life. Whether or not the way they are taught is the right way to do things is different, but the level of discipline created by the honor system there does prevent a lot of the violence.
Playing it safe, however, means we punish innocent people, which are the majority. I don't like mindless violence and gore, so I don't watch those kinds of movies or play those kinds of games, but that's my decision. That doesn't mean I think we should ban such things. People should have the option to view them if they want, provided such things remain "not real". As soon as we start having games where you actually kill people...yeah, that's crossing the line :P.

It's like sex and violence in novels. We've discussed it and a lot of you agree that whenever the author is considering to put either one in their novel, it has to have a purpose. But the thing with a lot of video games, is just pur violence. The plot sucks because no effort has been put into it, just the gore and violence.

Yeah, but the same principle applies to both: if it's nothing but mindless sex or violence, I won't read it and it doesn't belong here on YWO. Mostly we have that rule here because there are loads of young folks and we can't have a lot of rated R material, partially for legal purposes. I'm not saying mindless sex and violence in games or movies is a good thing. I don't like it either (well, to a point...I like violence in game for sure), but I still think it should exist for those that do like it.

While I also agree that violence is unavoidable, I prefer to avoid it unless it's needed. Better yet, if I have to watch violence, it's usually gore-free, and mostly just pure, well-coordinated, creative action.

Yup, and you have the choice to do that. That's freedom :P. You can choose whether or not to watch or play such things, just like everyone else. So shouldn't the choice be there for you to make?

[Rafael Domination]

I don't have to give a reason why they shouldn't get violent, but I don't think they should stop doing what they're doing.

Then it’s not exactly a valid point without reason

Who were most likely to rape and pillage? Historically it was those of the Knight class, and of comparable classes outside of England (such as in France where Christianity was just as strong...or Spain). The honor code of Japan was so strong and their dedication to the ideals of Zen were unsurmountable.
They're not educated guesses, Raf. It's a reality.

Here we go again: grouping different eggs into the same basket. For the last time, those ‘Christians’ were no better than barbarians, and they hid behind the mask of retrieving the Holy Land when all most of them wanted was to get some extra cash. We’ve been here before. You and I agree on the wrongness of the Crusades while bickering on whether real Christians led it. Frankly, to associate me with the same people who tried exterminating my sect is like a direct insult. Let’s just get this straight. A true Christian would never rape and pillage. It’s against the rules. Those knights did it anyway. Ergo…not real Christians.

I never said the Japanese were angels. You're just upset because I made an unfavorable comparison to your religion.

You seem to have misunderstood my comment. I wasn’t making any attack towards the Japanese. You said it yourself: you never called them angels. I did cuz' it's true to some extent.

I was merely compiling questions that gaming companies should at least consider before they release a game into the western hemisphere because as you’ve said, Japanese kids are more resilient to video games.

Yeah, but the same principle applies to both: if it's nothing but mindless sex or violence, I won't read it and it doesn't belong here on YWO. Mostly we have that rule here because there are loads of young folks and we can't have a lot of rated R material, partially for legal purposes. I'm not saying mindless sex and violence in games or movies is a good thing. I don't like it either (well, to a point...I like violence in game for sure), but I still think it should exist for those that do like it.

That’s all I want. To encourage people, NOT FORCE THEM, into picking more flavorful and creative violence if they absolutely have to. The choice for those who want gore is still there, but there should be something protecting those who can’t handle it like kids. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not some Amish kid sitting in my barn. I’ve created quite a bunch of action-packed fight scenes in my spare time, be it typed or animated (check out Damien vs. Dante in A.R.M’D.) and I admit that the action thrills me. But that’s all I want: the thrill. I don’t need blood for it. And for crying out loud, the Bible itself is quite violent. The thing is, it portrays violence and lust, and decit in a different way that can lead into a moral (e.g. a consequence for sin, violence begets violence, turn the other cheek, a life lived without God breeds more sin - eg. Lot and his two daughters commiting incest - and more) that can be used to educate people to live better lives, etc.

Yup, and you have the choice to do that. That's freedom . You can choose whether or not to watch or play such things, just like everyone else. So shouldn't the choice be there for you to make?

Agreed. I’ve always been taught not to force anyone. I never will, but there’s nothing wrong with encouraging others to opt for better tastes.

[Shaun]

Then it’s not exactly a valid point without reason

It's a point I never made. That's why I don't have to support it. I never said that games shouldn't get violent. Why should I support a point that I didn't make? I like violence in games thank you very much.

Here we go again: grouping different eggs into the same basket. For the last time, those ‘Christians’ were no better than barbarians, and they hid behind the mask of retrieving the Holy Land when all most of them wanted was to get some extra cash. We’ve been here before. You and I agree on the wrongness of the Crusades while bickering on whether real Christians led it. Frankly, to associate me with the same people who tried exterminating my sect is like a direct insult. Let’s just get this straight. A true Christian would never rape and pillage. It’s against the rules. Those knights did it anyway. Ergo…not real Christians.

I never associated you with them. You did. What you are accusing me of doing is what you are doing to yourself.
There's no such thing as a true Christian, Raf. Never was. You're not more a true Christian than anyone else who thinks they are a true Christian. There's no such thing.
And the point still stands because there is a direct correlation between the difference in cultures between Europe and Japan, where two very different "religious" ideals were prevalent. Clearly Christianity was not strong enough to maintain the masses and it goes without saying that Western Christian ideals have been damaging agents in nations that have never had such religion as a part of their section of the world. Japan is a prime example. WW2 was in part a cause of western influence, which was pushed and forced by the hand of Christianity. Whether you identify yourself with that form of Christianity or not, it is still a part of the very fabric that is your religion: The Bible.

That’s all I want. To encourage people, NOT FORCE THEM, into picking more flavorful and creative violence if they absolutely have to. The choice for those who want gore is still there, but there should be something protecting those who can’t handle it like kids. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not some Amish kid sitting in my barn. I’ve created quite a bunch of action-packed fight scenes in my spare time, be it typed or animated (check out Damien vs. Dante in A.R.M’D.) and I admit that the action thrills me. But that’s all I want: the thrill. I don’t need blood for it. And for crying out loud, the Bible itself is quite violent. The thing is, it portrays violence and lust, and decit in a different way that can lead into a moral (e.g. a consequence for sin, violence begets violence, turn the other cheek, a life lived without God breeds more sin - eg. Lot and his two daughters commiting incest - and more) that can be used to educate people to live better lives, etc.

My question is how is what you're saying here any different from what already exists? If you don't want to force people away from things, then what do you propose we do to get them to not play those gore filled gamed? You can want people to read the Bible, but you can't force them to do it and the same is said for games. So what do you propose we do? (I'm not saying you want to force people to read the Bible, I'm just saying that as an example).

[lango]

This subject can get me very worked up. :P
Man Hunt was definitely not supposed to be made. But hey, there are video-tapes of real-life deaths for adults.
Yet, you dont watch games on tv (well, not quite), so you dont accidentally stumble by man hunt while flipping channels, yet you stumble by rambo, 007 and many other such movies where a dude gets a gun and single-handedly kills everyone in sight.

I do understand that some gun games can actually train a real-life shooter's skills. Counter-strike, for example, is played by some japanese(not sure if its japanese, or chinese, no offense meant) cops for the fact that it trains them into team-work, using the scenario to their advantage, and the such. But hey, a kid can play paintball or "lazer-shooter" just as easy (even in singapore where chewing gum is forbidden, they are allowed to play lazer-shooter, which is pretty much paintball with "lazer guns".

What gets me mad in this subject is that here, in brazil, where our latest "telenovela" (soap opera) is based on a slum full of bandits, where we see some shooting, counter-strike was forbidden to minors. Most counter-strike teams here have players under 18, yet because of this dumb rule (created by a judge who prohibited counter-strike for being violent and everquest for missleading young minds), no tourneys are being as good as theyre supposed to be lol

[Rafael Domination]

It's a point I never made. That's why I don't have to support it. I never said that games shouldn't get violent. Why should I support a point that I didn't make? I like violence in games thank you very much.


I never associated you with them. You did. What you are accusing me of doing is what you are doing to yourself.
There's no such thing as a true Christian, Raf. Never was. You're not more a true Christian than anyone else who thinks they are a true Christian. There's no such thing.
And the point still stands because there is a direct correlation between the difference in cultures between Europe and Japan, where two very different "religious" ideals were prevalent. Clearly Christianity was not strong enough to maintain the masses and it goes without saying that Western Christian ideals have been damaging agents in nations that have never had such religion as a part of their section of the world. Japan is a prime example. WW2 was in part a cause of western influence, which was pushed and forced by the hand of Christianity. Whether you identify yourself with that form of Christianity or not, it is still a part of the very fabric that is your religion: The Bible.


The Bible, which condemns rape and murder. Just because a few idiots have twisted it to suit their own desires, or disobeyed it outright it doesn't mean they can get the privelge of that title. And those who do follow the Bible without twisting is deserve more credit than you give them. Anyways, they won't need it from you. And how am I associating myself with them when I was the one who denounced their activities.

And no, the Bane of Society isn't the Bible. The rulebreakers are the real culprit. If everyone in a country gave the ten commandments a try I'll bet my life that a Utopia will bloom from it.

The problem is, not everyone will listen to 'Don't Kill', 'Don't Steal', 'Don't commit adultery', so hence, they're the problem. Shift the blame where it really belongs.

My question is how is what you're saying here any different from what already exists? If you don't want to force people away from things, then what do you propose we do to get them to not play those gore filled gamed? You can want people to read the Bible, but you can't force them to do it and the same is said for games. So what do you propose we do? (I'm not saying you want to force people to read the Bible, I'm just saying that as an example).

Encouragement exists in a variety of forms. As for video games, maybe the government could spare a little extra to fund those companines with more general ratings, allowing them to come up with better games. Better games will reel in more fans. Stricter ratings can be imposed. If people don't want to play those games, it's perfectly up to them.

As for the Bible, patience and encouragement, as well as invitation has always worked. It worked for me, and to tell you the truth, the 'me' a few years ago was probably worse than Hypocrit and J combined. You think they hated God? I call them second-rates compared to a 13-year-old Rif-Raf. But the tenderness, warmth and forbearance of a pastor won me over without forcing me.

So what if the results are not drastic? Even the small efforts count. I'm not calling for a video game revolution where all we do is prance in a field of flowers or something. Just a little shift from mindless gore. That's not too much to ask.

But yeah, light encouragements work.

[Shaun]

It wouldn't be Japan. The Japanese police don't carry guns :P. Probably China or Korea. It's kind of funny to see them trying to chase down armed felons with nothing more than pepper spray, tasers, and night sticks...

[Nyx]

If it serves to teach a lesson, it's productive. Spanking does serve to teach children a lesson. They did something bad, they got punished for it, and they learn not to do that again. If you don't issue punishment for bad behavior, what do kids learn? Nothing. And contrary to popular believe, time outs don't work for everyone. Some kids have to be spanked. You know what time outs did for me? Nothing. When I was 10 you could put me on time out all you wanted to, it didn't matter, I'd still do whatever it was I was in trouble for again. What taught me a lesson was a spanking.
There are better ways of teaching a lesson. Children aren't going to learn respect if you don't show them any.


Violence sells.
That's what it goes down to: the companies need to make money so who care what kind of influence the games have, or if they inspire someone to pickup a gun, right?:rolleyes:




You can't find them. But when their child does something that could have been prevented with good parenting, or attentive parenting, we punish those parents for their failure.
That's not going to stop the next parent from being a bad parent.



Why? Why should I get over it? Fine, the Jews should get over the Holocaust then. It happened a long time ago...just get over it. That logic doesn't work, Nyx. You can't tell me to get over it when my country is often misrepresented.
Ok, sorry for saying that. I just don't like when it's irellevantaly pushed into the debate.



Except it doesn't work that way. Movies very rarely try to be actually "real".


It doesn't need to be real, it's enough for it to display a solution that can be applied to real life.

[lango]

Shaun, it takes one karate master to bring down a gang of unarmed thieves :D

[Shaun]

There are better ways of teaching a lesson. Children aren't going to learn respect if you don't show them any.

Certainly, but they don't always work. Sometimes a spanking is the only way to get the point across. There is a direct correlation between lax disciplinary action from parents and increased rate of rebellious teenagers. The 50s were a different time with some real great things going for it, and some bad things. Take all the good of today and all the good of then, put them together, and you'd probably have a great little society.
I'm not saying everyone should spank their kids. If you can get your point across to your kids with a time out, great, then do that. But if it doesn't work, what do you propose parents do? If time outs, grounding, taking away toys, etc. don't work, are parents just supposed to throw up their arms and say "well, I guess none of that worked, so I give up"? Face it, for some kids a spanking is the only thing that works.

That's what it goes down to: the companies need to make money so who care what kind of influence the games have, or if they inspire someone to pickup a gun, right?:rolleyes:

Except there is no proof that games have any significant influence at all. Kids are more influenced by real life than games. So you can't blame the companies for doing nothing wrong. There has yet to be any case where a child was given the proper grounding in reality, saw a video game, and thought "hey, if I can blow up cops in Grand Theft Auto, then I can do the same in real life". Games don't have the influence you think they do. If they did, we'd see crime in countries where gaming is a huge industry increasing exponentially, but we don't.


That's not going to stop the next parent from being a bad parent.

It stops some of them from being bad parents. But for the most part you're right. And what are we to do about it? We can't force people to be good parents. And you can't punish gaming companies for doing nothing wrong.


Ok, sorry for saying that. I just don't like when it's irellevantaly pushed into the debate.

No problem :P.

It doesn't need to be real, it's enough for it to display a solution that can be applied to real life.

And again, it doesn't work that way. Kids are not that stupid. The only way that works is if the parents don't say "killing people is bad" at some point in their life.

[Shaun]

The Bible, which condemns rape and murder. Just because a few idiots have twisted it to suit their own desires, or disobeyed it outright it doesn't mean they can get the privelge of that title. And those who do follow the Bible without twisting is deserve more credit than you give them. Anyways, they won't need it from you. And how am I associating myself with them when I was the one who denounced their activities.

Try millions of idiots. Try entire countries of idiots. You don't have a monopoly on the term "Christian". They were Christians, whether you want to admit it or not. And they did terrible things.
You associated yourself with them by saying I was doing that to you, which I wasn't. So you gave yourself that title.

And no, the Bane of Society isn't the Bible. The rulebreakers are the real culprit. If everyone in a country gave the ten commandments a try I'll bet my life that a Utopia will bloom from it.

Utopias don't exist. A utopia for you is a dystopia for someone else. The rulebreakers are pretty much ALL Christians, by the way. There isn't a single Christians that follows the Bible to the T. You all break the rules here and there.

The problem is, not everyone will listen to 'Don't Kill', 'Don't Steal', 'Don't commit adultery', so hence, they're the problem. Shift the blame where it really belongs.

On Christianity. Since clearly the belief in a Christian God is not strong enough nor valid enough to maintain any sense of order. Whereas the belief in no god and only the belief in the honor of helping oneself through karma and love produces the exact opposite: strong-willed, honorable, moral individuals.
Not to mention, Buddhists don't hate on you for not believing. They don't condemn you to hell for your actions. They don't do anything to you, in fact, other than try to help you or themselves.
I shift the blame to exactly where it belongs. If Christian ideology were entirely noble, it wouldn't have created the violent, terrible, wicked problems we see in western society. Entire Christian nations have done terrible things in the name of God. That can't be erased. The good of Christianity isn't enough to erase the evil it has created. If it could, it would, but it can't. And when it tries, like it's trying to do now, all it does is push people farther away and create further instability and hatred.

Encouragement exists in a variety of forms. As for video games, maybe the government could spare a little extra to fund those companines with more general ratings, allowing them to come up with better games. Better games will reel in more fans. Stricter ratings can be imposed. If people don't want to play those games, it's perfectly up to them.

If you want to pay for it out of your pocket, go for it. I don't want any government subsidies for companies, in any form, big or small. I don't want extra taxes. What you're proposing is a government subsidized program to induce values on people that they may or may not hold.
We have a rating system and it works. The problem isn't that ratings are stupid, it's that parents buy games rated M for their 10 year olds anyway. And what does that do? Nothing, other than give violent games to 10 year olds who play it, like it, and want to play more. They don't go running around firing off guns and murdering people because of the game. This all goes back to the parents. If you want kids to play games appropriate to their ages, then you have to get parents to do that. But since you can't force them to do that you're out of luck.
Find solutions that don't involve raising my taxes to impose values on people and we'll talk.

As for the Bible, patience and encouragement, as well as invitation has always worked. It worked for me, and to tell you the truth, the 'me' a few years ago was probably worse than Hypocrit and J combined. You think they hated God? I call them second-rates compared to a 13-year-old Rif-Raf. But the tenderness, warmth and forbearance of a pastor won me over without forcing me.

You show me a church that has patience, encouragement, and tolerance, and I might be suckered in. But every church I've gone to has eventually shown the same exact hatred that I despise and loathe when it comes to religion. Christianity is too hateful for me. I want to hate people for valid reasons, not because a book says so. And I don't believe in things that I can't see with tangible evidence. A book written by men isn't evidence.
That was a personal decision for you, and I'm glad it worked for you. Besides, I don't hate God :P. I'd have to believe in God to hate him :P.

So what if the results are not drastic? Even the small efforts count. I'm not calling for a video game revolution where all we do is prance in a field of flowers or something. Just a little shift from mindless gore. That's not too much to ask.

Except there's nothing you can do beyond verbally asking for it. That's the problem. There are plenty of games that don't have mindless gore. They just don't sell as well as the more violent games. Supply and demand.

[Rafael Domination]

Try millions of idiots. Try entire countries of idiots. You don't have a monopoly on the term "Christian". They were Christians, whether you want to admit it or not. And they did terrible things.
You associated yourself with them by saying I was doing that to you, which I wasn't. So you gave yourself that title.

Says you. Please try to make sense. One does not associate himself with something he just denounced. I say that I do not associate myself with them, so my opinion concerning myself overrules whatever you’ve got to say about me. You game me that title. I didn’t.

And no, they’re not Christians, and that will always stand whether you want to admit it or not. They’re under the façade of Christians, but real Christians would never commit barbarism like they did.


Utopias don't exist. A utopia for you is a dystopia for someone else. The rulebreakers are pretty much ALL Christians, by the way. There isn't a single Christians that follows the Bible to the T. You all break the rules here and there.

Utopias don’t exist because people have messed up minds, are either too proud to live by the rules, or just don’t care. It’s people that are wrong, not the Law.

And when a person considers a world without war, without adultery, without deceit, without covetousness as an imperfect world, then that person needs to go have his brain checked…or have someone put him/her out his/her misery.

On Christianity. Since clearly the belief in a Christian God is not strong enough nor valid enough to maintain any sense of order. Whereas the belief in no god and only the belief in the honor of helping oneself through karma and love produces the exact opposite: strong-willed, honorable, moral individuals.
Not to mention, Buddhists don't hate on you for not believing. They don't condemn you to hell for your actions. They don't do anything to you, in fact, other than try to help you or themselves.
I shift the blame to exactly where it belongs. If Christian ideology were entirely noble, it wouldn't have created the violent, terrible, wicked problems we see in western society. Entire Christian nations have done terrible things in the name of God. That can't be erased. The good of Christianity isn't enough to erase the evil it has created. If it could, it would, but it can't. And when it tries, like it's trying to do now, all it does is push people farther away and create further instability and hatred.


You've just proven to me that the Christians you're speaking of aren't real ones, just mass murders hiding behind the 'title' of Christianity

Speak for yourself when you say a belief in God won’t breed order. My father gave up alcohol and abusing his wife and kids because of God. I stopped becoming a delinquent behind my parents’ back because of God. I used to hate people for not having the same viewpoints as me. Not anymore. I admit that I’m not perfect. No one is. But the last person in the world who’d support the crusades would be me. And even if it's just one account - and I can call on a lot more, but you'd probably never believe me - its till disproves that mindless comment.

Real Christians don't hate you if you don't believe in God. I've known you for how long now, and yet I've never condemned you for anything.

Belief in no God creates honorable individuals. What a joke. Tell that to Hitler and his millions of Nazis. Tell that to Stalin and his ten of millions of Communists. Tell that to every single criminal who's ever existed and I guarantee 90% of them don’t believe in God. And even if they did, they’re too proud to listen to Him.

If you want to pay for it out of your pocket, go for it. I don't want any government subsidies for companies, in any form, big or small. I don't want extra taxes. What you're proposing is a government subsidized program to induce values on people that they may or may not hold.
We have a rating system and it works. The problem isn't that ratings are stupid, it's that parents buy games rated M for their 10 year olds anyway. And what does that do? Nothing, other than give violent games to 10 year olds who play it, like it, and want to play more. They don't go running around firing off guns and murdering people because of the game. This all goes back to the parents. If you want kids to play games appropriate to their ages, then you have to get parents to do that. But since you can't force them to do that you're out of luck.
Find solutions that don't involve raising my taxes to impose values on people and we'll talk.

Not extra taxes for you. Extra taxes for the 10-year-old kids who buy M-Rated games. If they want their parents to do the buying, let them go ahead. Besides, I did say that they’re free do that, but at LEAST the gaming companies could show a LITTLE more concern for people’s well-being.

You show me a church that has patience, encouragement, and tolerance, and I might be suckered in. But every church I've gone to has eventually shown the same exact hatred that I despise and loathe when it comes to religion. Christianity is too hateful for me. I want to hate people for valid reasons, not because a book says so. And I don't believe in things that I can't see with tangible evidence. A book written by men isn't evidence.
That was a personal decision for you, and I'm glad it worked for you. Besides, I don't hate God . I'd have to believe in God to hate him .

If you ever get the time to come to Canada, you’re always welcomed at Metro Baptist Church. We might be conservative, but the last thing we’d do is condemn you for not believing, and the first thing we’d do is pray.

FYI…the Bible, if you’ve ever read it, advises to hate sin, not the people. Sure, there’s only a certain amount you can tolerate someone, but the thing is, we’re always taught to be on the defensive. Never to lash out at someone else. Never to hate someone. You’ve obviously been going to the wrong churches who say they’re ‘Christian’ but don’t know what it’s really all about.



Except there's nothing you can do beyond verbally asking for it. That's the problem. There are plenty of games that don't have mindless gore. They just don't sell as well as the more violent games. Supply and demand.


Think of it as sex-ed. The people only talk to you. They don’t sit there while you do it and MAKE you do it properly. But the thing is, even if it was just talk, it helped. If people still want to reproduce un-safely, no one can force them. But they’ll be the loser. I don’t care if it’s just talk. At least it’ll make some people AWARE of some POTENTIAL risks they MIGHT be taking.

Now, I'm willing to go back to the topic of violence in video games if you are. Because, we've gone straight off topic, and this is ruining this debate (if I recall you started it) but if you want to go ahead and bash on my religion a little more, I'll be more than happy to offer my side of the argument to tip the scales and reduce the stench of bias in here.

[Shaun]

Says you. Please try to make sense. One does not associate himself with something he just denounced. I say that I do not associate myself with them, so my opinion concerning myself overrules whatever you’ve got to say about me. You game me that title. I didn’t.

I never gave you the title. You did, as I already said.
You can denounce them all you want, but you don't control what is and isn't a Christian. If you think you do then you are being exceedingly naive.

And no, they’re not Christians, and that will always stand whether you want to admit it or not. They’re under the façade of Christians, but real Christians would never commit barbarism like they did.

Real Christians? And that would be? There's no such thing, Raf. That's an illusion. You can no more define it than the people hundreds before you could. You can try, but you'll fail, because the term is illusive in its definition.
And no, it will never stand that they were not Christians. They were Christians. Period. That's what they are identified as. They did nothing less evil that what is in the Bible.

Utopias don’t exist because people have messed up minds, are either too proud to live by the rules, or just don’t care. It’s people that are wrong, not the Law.
And when a person considers a world without war, without adultery, without deceit, without covetousness as an imperfect world, then that person needs to go have his brain checked…or have someone put him/her out his/her misery.

The only way you will get your utopia is to create a world I don't want to live in, one in which government control how their citizens exist and survive in the world. Science fiction writers write about this all the time. IT has nothing to do with someone being screwed up in the head. A utopia where everyone believes in God and runs around screaming Bible verses and being fruity and loving to everyone is not a utopia to me. That's a fucked up world that I don't want to live in. Individual freedom to believe what they want. If that means we have to have war, adultery, deceit, covetousness, etc. in order for me to believe what i want, to live how I want within a certain parameter, then so be it. I don't need to have my brain checked. I just don't want to live in a world where I can't be who I want to be because that's who I am. Religions try to create utopias, and they fail and always will fail because they are too restrictive.


You've just proven to me that the Christians you're speaking of aren't real ones, just mass murders hiding behind the 'title' of Christianity.
Speak for yourself when you say a belief in God won’t breed order. My father gave up alcohol and abusing his wife and kids because of God. I stopped becoming a delinquent behind my parents’ back because of God. I used to hate people for not having the same viewpoints as me. Not anymore. I admit that I’m not perfect. No one is. But the last person in the world who’d support the crusades would be me. And even if it's just one account - and I can call on a lot more, but you'd probably never believe me - its till disproves that mindless comment.

You stopped being a delinquent because you thought it had something to do with God. But what exactly was stopping you from just being a good citizen in the first place? It had nothing to do with God. That's your personal delusion. Whether God is good for you or not has no bearing on who you were before.
I speak for an entire continent when it comes to the belief in God creating the opposite of order. Europe used to be the most heavily Christian continent in the world. What was the result? Hatred, bigotry, violence, crusades, rape, pillaging, racism, etc etc etc. How about now? Well with almost 60% of Europeans no longer believing in God we see...tolerance, relative peace, acceptance, economic stability, reduced crime, reduce rape, no Inquisitions, no Crusades, etc etc etc.
America, on the other hand, has seen a rise in religious ideologies. In fact, it's staggering the amount of mindless religious badgering in this country, with the loss of entire standards in scientific thought for something that cannot be proven and doesn't belong in a classroom. The result of this? Well, bigotry, hatred, violence (in relation to bigotry and hatred), discrimination, and even a crusade, What we don't see is acceptance and tolerance. There's a direct correlation between religious dogma and negative behavior. You can tell me all those people that don't act like you aren't Christians, but they think they are Christians, they tell us they are, they scream the Bible at us, and they take actions in the name of God. If you don't want to be associated with them, then do something about them instead of telling me "well they're not Christians". Because for all intensive purposes, they are Christians.

Belief in no God creates honorable individuals. What a joke. Tell that to Hitler and his millions of Nazis. Tell that to Stalin and his ten of millions of Communists. Tell that to every single criminal who's ever existed and I guarantee 90% of them don’t believe in God. And even if they did, they’re too proud to listen to Him.


Hitler was a Roman Catholic. Stalin may have been atheist, but his actions were never in the NAME of atheism. He did them from his own prejudice, not in the name of an ideal.
Actually a vast majority of criminals do believe in God. I don't listen to God, because for me he doesn't exist, and I'm far from an immoral individual. The believe in God has nothing to do with whether or not someone is a good person. History shows us that often times it's to the contrary.


Not extra taxes for you. Extra taxes for the 10-year-old kids who buy M-Rated games. If they want their parents to do the buying, let them go ahead. Besides, I did say that they’re free do that, but at LEAST the gaming companies could show a LITTLE more concern for people’s well-being.

How is taxing M-Rated games showing concern for the well-being of others? Games are nothing more than entertainment. So what we do by taxing is punish people who have done nothing wrong in hopes of doing what? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense there.


If you ever get the time to come to Canada, you’re always welcomed at Metro Baptist Church. We might be conservative, but the last thing we’d do is condemn you for not believing, and the first thing we’d do is pray.

My skin burns when I go in churches now. :P
Honestly, if you pray for me, it will offend me. I hate people praying to save my soul and crap. My soul is fine. If anything I'll just be reincarnated as a chipmunk, and to be honest, that would be totally kickass. You might welcome me there, but it won't make me believe because some of the ideals you hold on to are not my own and I'll never hold those beliefs.

FYI…the Bible, if you’ve ever read it, advises to hate sin, not the people. Sure, there’s only a certain amount you can tolerate someone, but the thing is, we’re always taught to be on the defensive. Never to lash out at someone else. Never to hate someone. You’ve obviously been going to the wrong churches who say they’re ‘Christian’ but don’t know what it’s really all about.

I've read the Bible. It's full of hatred, especially the highly edited versions of today (which is scary because those are the versions believed in so firmly, yet they don't represent the original text at all). It has good stuff in it, but I think too many people focus on the bad end of it and use that for their own means...particularly the stuff about gays.

Think of it as sex-ed. The people only talk to you. They don’t sit there while you do it and MAKE you do it properly. But the thing is, even if it was just talk, it helped. If people still want to reproduce un-safely, no one can force them. But they’ll be the loser. I don’t care if it’s just talk. At least it’ll make some people AWARE of some POTENTIAL risks they MIGHT be taking.

What risks? You can't make people aware of risks if they don't exist. So explain :S.

[Rafael Domination]

That's a fucked up world that I don't want to live in. Individual freedom to believe what they want. If that means we have to have war, adultery, deceit, covetousness, etc. in order for me to believe what i want, to live how I want within a certain parameter, then so be it.


This has gone from video games to this. Honestly, I think you've done a swell job at running this debate and keeping it on track. But to wish death and demise upon a world to further your own messed-up interests...well, that speaks for itself. This debate has gone from a test of wits to twisting words, and if you won't be mature enough to end it, then I will.

Good day.

[Shaun]

This has gone from video games to this. Honestly, I think you've done a swell job at running this debate and keeping it on track. But to wish death and demise upon a world to further your own messed-up interests...well, that speaks for itself. This debate has gone from a test of wits to twisting words, and if you won't be mature enough to end it, then I will.

Good day.

What you are asking from me is to assume the mental will of something entirely not my own. If there has to be war and death on the Earth in order for people to have FREEDOM to choose who they want to be, then it is well worth keeping the negative aspects of humanity around. Freedom is more important to me than living in a land of bunnies and fluffy stuff where the ability to be who and what I want to be, to pursue my own interests in life are subject to totalitarian, fascist thinking.
If we can have peace and have freedom, great. But if we can't, I'm not willing to sacrifice personal freedom for totalitarianism...to allow someone else to control my life, to control what I'm allowed to think, to feel, and how I can exist as a human being, that is unacceptable.
I in no way wish death and destruction on the Earth. You just make that assumption. I simply hold the position that there are things worth fighting and dying for, and one of them is freedom. What you are proposing is a world controlled by people who think they know what is best for you. But how do you know what is a utopia to me? How do you know what is a utopia to someone who is Buddhist, or Muslim? You don't. Utopia is impossible because you cannot make EVERYONE happy with the same idea. The only way a utopia can exist is to become the very thing democracies fear: totalitarian regimes where every aspect of an individuals life is controlled by something else, all so we can have whatever it is someone thought we all needed. What you end up with is 1984, or Brave New World, or We by Yevgeny Zamyatin...you end up with exactly the opposite of what you want: a dystopia.
Explain to me what is messed-up about my interest to maintain personal freedom. I like being Shaun Duke. Are you saying that in order for your world to exist it would be okay for me to cease being Shaun Duke? For me to be controlled by someone else? Are you suggesting that it would be okay to sacrifice the freedom of billions of people to be who they were born as just so you can have your utopia? What sort of society would you have? It would be a lie, a sham, an existence in which more than half the world would be miserable, or incapable of feeling because in order to feel would be lost to the will of the controllers. The darkest aspects of religion, all those evil and wicked people who used their religion for this very purpose, that is exactly what you are supposing we need: a controlled world of automatons who can no longer think for themselves because the mega-republic does everything for them.
No thank you to that. I'll stick with my freedom, my choice to be agnostic, my choice to like writing, to speak out about the things I don't like, etc. That is a cause I'm willing to die for. I'd go to war for that cause. I would destroy others to make sure that everyone else can still have the freedom of choice...because nothing is more necessary than that.

[Shaun]

Now having said that part: anyone else have something to say about violence in video games :P

[Rafael Domination]

we can have peace and have freedom, great

Isn't that what a utopia is all about?

And if we're back to the topic of video games, then I'm back in. ^^

[Shaun]

Isn't that what a utopia is all about?

And if we're back to the topic of video games, then I'm back in. ^^

Well, he basic principle is about that, Raf, but the problem is how you achieve peace.
How do we get all the world religions to stop fighting one another (whether you're particular sect is fighting is irrelevant, because other sects are...and even if they aren't...other religions hate your religion more than I hate your religion :P...so much so they want to kill people who believe what you believe)? We can't just say "well, you all have to love each other" because the hatred is so rooted in their psyche and culture.
There are so many problems with utopian ideas because we all don't believe the same thing and some of us hate other people for their believes so much so that we actually want them to die. I don't want you to die, Raf, but that's me. I'm not someone else :P. I might think you're slightly insane, but you're still a good person and as long as you don't hit me in the head with a Bible I think we're cool :P.
But that's where the problem sits: getting people of vastly different religions, cultures, beliefs, customs, etc. to actually live in peace while being free to believe what they want. It just won't work. The only way to get it to work is to get rid of some of the religions, cultures, beliefs, customs, etc. But then that's not really freedom?
Utopias are nice thoughts, but the means to achieve peace and freedom across the board aren't possible in this complex world of humans...the only way to do it is through controlling other people :P


And yeah, we can go back to video games :P. Violence rocks.

[Rafael Domination]

I might think you're slightly insane, but you're still a good person and as long as you don't hit me in the head with a Bible I think we're cool .

Seven months with me on the site and you finally notice? :rolleyes:

Yeah, that's not me. I don't use the Bible to hit people...I use a cheese grater. (Kidding), but if others won't be tolerant, I've been taught not to return the favor. And with that tolerance, at least in my family and friends, that utopia can be established.

Anyways, I don't have the answers, Shaun, and I don't plan to fabricate them. I know humans can't create a utopia and that the don't exist here, but the principle of aim high, shoot low can apply. If we aim for a utopia of tolerance and freedom, we'd probably only achieve a relatively peacful world. So what if it's not perfect: at least it's better than world war 3.


And yeah, we can go back to video games . Violence rocks.

Final Fantasy violence ranks in the top 10 cuz' it's so creative and stylish, plus there's not much gore :P

[Shaun]

Seven months with me on the site and you finally notice? :rolleyes:

Yeah, that's not me. I don't use the Bible to hit people...I use a cheese grater. (Kidding), but if others won't be tolerant, I've been taught not to return the favor. And with that tolerance, at least in my family and friends, that utopia can be established.

Anyways, I don't have the answers, Shaun, and I don't plan to fabricate them. I know humans can't create a utopia and that the don't exist here, but the principle of aim high, shoot low can apply. If we aim for a utopia of tolerance and freedom, we'd probably only achieve a relatively peacful world. So what if it's not perfect: at least it's better than world war 3.

Well, that's what I'm saying. To have that fluffy bunny land where everything is exactly how you or your neighbor or whomever would like it, down to the T, is just not possible.
Can we achieve relative peace? Probably, but that doesn't mean it's peace that will last. Tolerance is the big problem. In order to have tolerance a lot of people are going to have to get over traditions they've held on to for generations. There's also the issue of certain religions being so violent and hateful that it is impossible to reason with them (certain sects actually, particularly some really nasty ones in Christianity and Islam...you know...those really mean ones that you denounce :P, and I do too cause I don't like them one bit...)
We had a relative peace, by the way, at least for a lot of the world. You know who screwed that up? Terrorists. Thanks Osama bin Laden!

[Rafael Domination]

Agreed. He's on my to-eat list.

But, the way I see it, if video-games can become an outlet for all that stress and anger, it might help a BIT to improve people's relationships with each other. It might not be a lot, but it COULD help. For example, when someone's ticked me off, I go online, find that 'Kitty Cannon' game and relieve some of my stress. I know it's not a real cat, and that no felines were harmed, but at least I feel less angry and can think straight. :P

[Shaun]

Agreed. He's on my to-eat list.

But, the way I see it, if video-games can become an outlet for all that stress and anger, it might help a BIT to improve people's relationships with each other. It might not be a lot, but it COULD help. For example, when someone's ticked me off, I go online, find that 'Kitty Cannon' game and relieve some of my stress. I know it's not a real cat, and that no felines were harmed, but at least I feel less angry and can think straight. :P

Well, in a lot of ways video games are an outlet. Think of it this way:
If a teenager is really effing pissed off, wouldn't you rather he go play Manhunt for a few hours to let off steam rather than bottle it up and potentially explode and hurt someone for real? I would. If violent games can act as a good outlet for kids who might have anger issues, then I'm all for it.

Plus, a lot of those really violent first person shooters actually help kids with hand/eye coordination :P

[GeorgeMichael]

http://www.darkandpink.com/?20080430


oh yes, it's proof. comic proof :)

[lango]

Shaun actually, if a teenager was very pissed at me, and he started playing manhunt obsessively, Id be very afraid :P

[Rafael Domination]

Well, if he or she just kept playing man-hunt, I'd be fine with it! :D

As long as he/she doesn't come after me. I think I'll buy my future girlfriend that game just in case we break up and she's really unhappy about it...

[Syd Skydreamer]

Some games can relieve stress. For example, games that involve killing people stop my anger. I just pretend that the person I'm angry at is the person I'm killing. ^^

I only get violent after six straight hours of Tekken, Burnout, Halo 2, and Nano Breaker, or when the enemy manages to get past my defenses in Red Alert 3.But it fades away with time.

My point is: humans are naturally violent. So let's stop the hypocrasy and admit it.

[Rafael Domination]

I'm there with you! :P

Now only if we can focus that violence where it won't hurt others...

[Simone]

True dat :)

[Rafael Domination]

Anything else to add, Simone? I mean, c'mon, you must have something more to add than true dat! ^^

I mean, what are your views on the influence of video games, and etc?

[Simone]

:P fine :P

I think that vidio games can sometines be too vilent, an exces of then can result in the person becomming vilent.
.....

But..... they are also a great way to relieve stress when played more sparingly.


:P happy? :P

:)

[Crocolyle]

I'm not very into video games, so I'm not sure how well, I can speak on the matter, but...

It's just a game. I think most people can make a distinction between fantasy and reality whether in video games, literature, or television. A question arises of desensitization of the nation's youth through the portrayal of realistic violence and gore, but that's a completely different matter--a matter for psychologists and sociologists to debate. I personally do not think that video games encourage violence or turn anyone into a killer, but that's another issue for the shrinks.

The more important issue is this: does the government have the right to ban or impose a rating system on video games, restricting who can purchase them, play them, etc. Though I personally don't think a very young child should be playing overly violent or sexual video games, I do not think that the government has the right to restrict who can purchase what game--to do so is a form or censorship and the imposition of the government on a private matter that should be a decision left up to the legal parents or guardians of the child (because of this I do support the rating system to serve as a guide). The government should stay out of life as much as possible; people need protection from criminals, terrorists, and corporations--not from themselves...

For the record, censorship sucks.

[Shaun]

I'm not very into video games, so I'm not sure how well, I can speak on the matter, but...

It's just a game. I think most people can make a distinction between fantasy and reality whether in video games, literature, or television. A question arises of desensitization of the nation's youth through the portrayal of realistic violence and gore, but that's a completely different matter--a matter for psychologists and sociologists to debate. I personally do not think that video games encourage violence or turn anyone into a killer, but that's another issue for the shrinks.

The more important issue is this: does the government have the right to ban or impose a rating system on video games, restricting who can purchase them, play them, etc. Though I personally don't think a very young child should be playing overly violent or sexual video games, I do not think that the government has the right to restrict who can purchase what game--to do so is a form or censorship and the imposition of the government on a private matter that should be a decision left up to the legal parents or guardians of the child (because of this I do support the rating system to serve as a guide). The government should stay out of life as much as possible; people need protection from criminals, terrorists, and corporations--not from themselves...

For the record, censorship sucks.

In all actuality the way the rating system works right now is basically to tell parents what it is their kids are going to be playing so the parents can make the decision. The law doesn't apply the same to children as it does to adults, which is why it's okay to have a rating system that is supposed to work to prevent people too young from getting their hands on things they shouldn't be playing. The system doesn't really prevent them from getting the games though. It tries to, but really it's a lot easier to get a violent video game than it is to get alcohol for kids. Parents really don't care much. Only nuts care :P

[Crocolyle]

And it's surprisingly easy to buy alcohol under 21 (but over like 16 or 17). You just have to know where to go... or have a decent fake ID or a beard.

Some people are against the rating system because they think it's border-line censorship. I think they're idiots. It's a valuable tool to parents, as I previously stated.

But yeah you rebottled a lot of what I was saying. I'm sorry for not being clearer.

[Shaun]

I was mostly agreeing with you anyway :P. I think if they tried to enforce the system like it's supposed to be there could be potential for censorship.

[GeorgeMichael]

http://www.tensionbreaker.com/2008/04/celebrating-30-years-of-video-games.html

the history of violent video game talks :) Shortened down for the public :P

[Shaun]

The first comment on that blog post says exactly what I would say. It's really sad. People have been telling us that games are ruining the youth, but the reality is that they haven't really done anything but create a new subculture that, unfortunately, comes with just as many issues as any other subculture :P. Nobody was murdering people over Space Invaders, Doom, or Halo...they're not murdering over Manhunt (for the record...I don't like Manhunt...I think it's too violent, but I'd never condone removing it from the market unless it portrayed something extremely wrong like pedophilia, but then this poses a big problem for games, which I'm going to bring up out of quotes).

Okay, so I assume we all agree that pedophilia and beastiality shouldn't be in video games simply because it's gross and, well, illegal. So far no game companies have tried to cross that line, but if one does you can bet that the law will come down hard on them. But why? Technically the law wouldn't have a case and here is why:
The law is going to tell us one of two things. Either it's immoral and wrong to have pedophilia and beastiality in games or it shouldn't be in there because we have laws against it. Except...killing is generally considered immoral and wrong, and certainly is illegal...so is stealing cars, etc. So technically speaking there's no case.

What do you guys think about this? Do you think there is a legal way to control what goes into games?

[Chie'N'Kadath]

Fantasy has always been an escape for ones mind. Honestly, when it comes to sex and language in movies always being the target of the media, yet violence is openly shown on TV all the time, I am honestly unnerved. Fictional violence far from bothers me, and I do not think it is the cause of violence in society today, however, I support both sides of the argument.

It all depends on the mentality of the player. I am very outspoken on violent video games and young children, since you mentioned Grand Theft Auto, I'd never let a 6 year old child play the game. We have to be mentally ready for such things, at a young age, we don't totally discern the difference between 'right' and 'wrong' and we are still learning from our parents what is right and what is wrong. If a parent hands GTA or any other game with high concentrations of violence to a young child still in their learning years, they are likely to see the content in said in a positive light, as if their parent is advocating it. When I have children, I am going to have a strict rule on what I let them play. Until they are at least 10 or 11, I want them to stay away from any given 'violent' shooter (All shooters are violent, but 'shooters' like Ikaruga or space invaders won't do any harm) although other T rated games I'm likely to give a fair review based on what I see in the content. A game like Ratchet and Clank (Although the new E 10+ rating was given to it instead of a T) isn't gonna bother me, because it's far from realistic and 'real' people aren't killed. When they turn said age, I'm going to take it slowly and see if they are mentally ready for that kind of game, if they are, I'll slowly become more lenient. I still wouldn't want my kids playing a game like GTA or Postal at this time, but if they prove themselves that they can see that it's nothing real and the actions taken in the games are wrong, when they turn 13 or 14 I'd probably be okay with moving into M rated games. I myself, actually thank my mother for taking violent video games away from me at a young age. When I was very young, I had Goldeneye on the nintendo 64. I got so gun happy I would start screaming things like 'This is what I want to do!' and 'serve me blood for dinner!' and other morbid sayings, and I was probably little over 4 or 5 years old. I almost did shoot someone once, and willingly too, as I had found the key to the gun closet and grabbed my mum's baretta. Thankfully, it was not loaded and it had the safety on, or I could have harmed someone, and in my mind, I was thinking 'I'm like James Bond!'. She took away the game and all other games like that until I was around 10, when she said she thinks I was ready to give it another shot, and she had raised me to believe that sort of thing was wrong over the years, and I've had no problem since.

I think it's ridiculous to pin all violent crimes on violent video games, but I can understand it being a mild concern. I support the ratings system heavily, and I think that if parents payed more attention, their kids wouldn't get games their parents don't want to play. I will however state, that I got very upset when I saw a lone 5 year old buying Mortal Kombat once at a gamestop. I do agree with some politicians that the sale of M rated games to minors without the express permission of a parent is wrong, and since it is only a policy at game stores to keep parents from whining, I would support a bill that 'regulates' it, saying that to buy an M rated game under the age of 17, you need a parent with you. I think it's ridiculous to pass laws banning violent games all together or that they can fine the parents for buying M rated games for their children though. Although I cannot agree with giving young children M rated games, I cannot make a parents decision about their own kid for them. But I also hold the parent responsible in some ways, if they buy GTA for their kid and then see that the content is too their disliking, they shouldn't complain or act like it's the game makers fault, for it's not. The game has a warning on the box, both the front and the back. If the parents can't see that, then it's their fault for supplying their kids with a game to their disliking.

For me, games are a release. The heavily violent game Postal 2, where you take upon the role of a serial killer, using tasteless weapons like diseased and severed cow heads to kill people, is one of my favourites. Whenever I have pent up anger, the game helps. I also like postal 2's satire on the controversy of video games, one of the Postal dudes comments is absolutely brilliant and true, after killing someone, sometimes he will utter "I know what you are thinking! But the funny thing is, I don't even LIKE video games!"

All in all, while I think game protesters go overboard in saying that violent video games cause real life violence, I can agree I wouldn't want my children playing violent video games at a very young age.

[Shaun]

The problem with regulating the rating system is two fold:
1. Parents will just buy the games for the kids or other adults will and give it to the kids.
2. How are you going to prove or disprove that the adults buying a game for a minor are in fact the parents? Some minors don't have ID cards or ways to identify them, and even if the names are different on the cards doesn't mean anything. My mother's last name is Crawford, but mine is Duke. She took back her maiden name. And there are parents who decide to keep their original last names after marriage. There's just no way to enforce this without requiring a bunch of paperwork for parents, and the result will be that parents will just buy the games on their own and hand them over to the kids.

The rating system is doing the job it was meant to do: tell parents what's in a game. If you don't want your children playing them, pay attention to what your kids are doing. I don't like 6 year olds playing GTA, but a 6 year old isn't retarded. He or she knows that a game is a game and that games aren't real.

The anti-gaming folks are just looking for things to blame. The real problem is lax parenting. But games are the perfect thing to attack when it comes to crime. The logic is ridiculous, since people have been violent since well before games were ever invented, let alone VIDEO games, but they'll stick to it. It's sort of like the logic of "global warming is real because everyone says so."

[Guessed]

The real problem is lax parenting.

I think that sums up this argument - and plenty of other, similar ones - nicely.

Kids will be influenced by violence in videogames only if their parents have raised them to be so suggestible and morally weak. Television and videogames are the shiny new scapegoat of inept parents. Er, I'd like to continue this, but the bell is ringing.

[Shaun]

You said it perfectly too, Guessed. Scapegoat. We need someone to blame for why our kids are being delinquents.