I think this makes a better argument.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Again, you're looking at this in the context of it being a game. That's fine when you're playing it. The thing is, after a week or a month or a year or a decade, the context has been lost, but you've still got the message floating around in your head as part of the set of "things you know". Now...obviously you're not going to think that it's okay to murder people. You also possess information that conflicts with that, information that tells you that murdering the $*** out of people will get you prison and maybe even the death penalty. But you're still going to maintain the more subtle message that violence is cool (sometimes), violence is fun (sometimes), that violence gets rewarded (sometimes). That's still probably not going to get someone to go on a murder spree. But it very well might just be that little nudge that results in someone punching his wife, fighting a dude at a bar, or shooting a dude during an argument over money. And it's not just games. I agree, it's unfair to single out games. This whole attraction to violence, the whole idea of violence being desirable is rampant across so many aspects of culture. So if you aren't picking it up from games, guaranteed you're picking it up from some other source. It's almost completely unavoidable.MrGeezer
How come violence is the only thing that your reasoning applies to, IF it were right?
[QUOTE="o0squishy0o"]The research I looked into it looked rather conclusive. N30F3N1X
Getting angry over a videogame doesn't make you violent, it's only a catalyst. The reaction would happen anyway in a different context that has nothing to do with videogames like card games or chess. It depends on the person.
The research you looked into is bullsh!t and you should feel bad if you think you can do inference on something like that. Even Pachter would laugh at the level of dumb your premises, execution and conclusion of the "research" are.
You insult my intelligence yet you fail to read my posts. Nice one. I said the word "PRIME", as you say it acts a catalyst. However with games such as chess or snap, there is no imagery or participation of weapons or shooting people. Example is the gameplay part where you act as a terrorist mowing down as many people as you can. For me that was a pure shock scene and added zero gameplay or story to the game. However there is evidence that people become more aggressive. I mean the reaction of "gaming" community about this highlights there is already an aggressive undertone. Its so massively overly defensive its quite scary. I am not for one second saying if you play games you become a killer. That fact is simply not true. However what I am saying and research done by alot of people suggests that when individuals play games that are violent, they themselves for a short period of time during and after can become more aggressive. As an example, if you drink alcohol you can become violent. Not everyone does, but some people do. (I know its an extreme point but it covers what I need to convey). Now in this example, people of the gaming community would be saying "drinking doesnt make you violent!!!!" however some people obviously do, they can become abusive etc. Now obviously the drink itself doesnt make you violent in the sense that you drink it as a violent/agressive juice, but the effects on the person can unlock that side of them. Now again I have to say I am not saying that these things make you a killer. However I am saying from my own research and looking at other papers, things as simple as a picture of a gun, can raise blood pressure etc which is all apart of aggresion. Its a scientific fact. So when you give someone who is not right in the head the chance to play a game that can cause them to become agressive, it can prime them to do aggressive or violent acts. Its literally as simple as that. But it seems that noone is coming out to say this when the evidence is clearly there. I wouldnt say ban games, but I would say, if you child suffers from some sort of aggressive or violent tendicies they shouldn't be allowed to play aggressive games or partake in things that can upset them (by that I mean lose control or whatever). So to me, what I am saying isn't crazy talk its quite simply the facts I have come across. I agree and as I said before that "violence" is an iffy subject with games like Mario where you stamp on peoples heads but its not the same as gears of war. Its the overall delivery. If "shocking" content wasnt shocking, why do we have certificates, why are we not supposed to watch beheadings, rapes, etc. Because its not normal, but apperently doing that in a game is A O K.You insult my intelligence yet you fail to read my posts. Nice one. I said the word "PRIME", as you say it acts a catalyst. However with games such as chess or snap, there is no imagery or participation of weapons or shooting people. Example is the gameplay part where you act as a terrorist mowing down as many people as you can. For me that was a pure shock scene and added zero gameplay or story to the game. However there is evidence that people become more aggressive. I mean the reaction of "gaming" community about this highlights there is already an aggressive undertone. Its so massively overly defensive its quite scary. I am not for one second saying if you play games you become a killer. That fact is simply not true. However what I am saying and research done by alot of people suggests that when individuals play games that are violent, they themselves for a short period of time during and after can become more aggressive. As an example, if you drink alcohol you can become violent. Not everyone does, but some people do. (I know its an extreme point but it covers what I need to convey). Now in this example, people of the gaming community would be saying "drinking doesnt make you violent!!!!" however some people obviously do, they can become abusive etc. Now obviously the drink itself doesnt make you violent in the sense that you drink it as a violent/agressive juice, but the effects on the person can unlock that side of them.Now again I have to say I am not saying that these things make you a killer. However I am saying from my own research and looking at other papers, things as simple as a picture of a gun, can raise blood pressure etc which is all apart of aggresion. Its a scientific fact. So when you give someone who is not right in the head the chance to play a game that can cause them to become agressive, it can prime them to do aggressive or violent acts. Its literally as simple as that. But it seems that noone is coming out to say this when the evidence is clearly there. I wouldnt say ban games, but I would say, if you child suffers from some sort of aggressive or violent tendicies they shouldn't be allowed to play aggressive games or partake in things that can upset them (by that I mean lose control or whatever).
So to me, what I am saying isn't crazy talk its quite simply the facts I have come across. I agree and as I said before that "violence" is an iffy subject with games like Mario where you stamp on peoples heads but its not the same as gears of war. Its the overall delivery. If "shocking" content wasnt shocking, why do we have certificates, why are we not supposed to watch beheadings, rapes, etc. Because its not normal, but apperently doing that in a game is A O K. o0squishy0o
I insult your intelligence because you've made very poor use of it. You're still doing that, in fact.
I especially love how you keep relying on psychological projection to discredit others and how you barely mentioned my point and treated it as irrelevant while in fact it's a perfect example that rips your "research" to shreds ;) Fact is, people get angry and, at times, violent in all entertainment, even if there is no display of violence, especially in competitive activities. Therefore you done goof'd, no buts, no ifs, your point that videogames have some kind of special effect is dead and buried. Better luck next life.
Alcohol makes one violent because it dampens a person's thought process, games on the other hand don't. The analogy doesn't make a lick of sense.
"Evidence" my arse. If what you're saying were true evidence would be various orders of magnitude easier to find.
Also, you should really stop with the "you are just reacting badly at what I said therefore you're irrational and defensive" bullsh!t. It makes you look like a whining pvssy.
It's not the only thing it applies to. People pick up habits and mannerisms from other people without knowing how that happened, people's beliefs get influenced by other people without them realizing it. Like I said, the context has a tendency to get lost, and then one is just left with information in their heads. And if there is one thing that people are very good at, it's soaking up information like a sponge. Why would you think that this suddenly just stops when the "information" in question has to do with violent content?How come violence is the only thing that your reasoning applies to, IF it were right?
N30F3N1X
Has happened....though games do make the individual an active participant rather than a passive participant.Never understood this argument. If thats the case couldn't every form of entertainment from books to movies be considered a bad influence ? Lame...
nooblet69
America is truly a violent place to be, more violent than Somalia!
I mean sure, violent crime is dropping, violent videogames exist, there are more gun owners than ever before, and schools are safer but America is a haven for crime! It must be true because every idiot is saying it's true right? Right!?
Sarcasm? I hope. A video game alone doesn't teach someone to use a gun. Either a person teaches themselves how to use a gun or someone else does. I'm sure we're being desensitized to violence just from hearing the news all the time. It's always about something political or violent. Movies and music probably add to this. But who cares? Millions of people watch violent movies, listen to music about violence, and play violent video games, and they do not go out on shooting sprees with AR-15 rifles and Glock pistols. America's violence glorifying, gun-loving culture, easy access to guns, and mental illness have more to do with these shootings than some Call of Duty or Battlefield games. Not to mention that there are things out there that kill thousands more innocent people every year than gun violence and mass shootings. For example, more people commit murder with their bare hands than people that commit homicides with weapons of any kind. Not to mention the amount of DUI related car accident deaths, and car accident deaths alone. You never hear about anything like that on the news though, because the media wants to keep us scared and ignorant. And the fact that Gun Restrictions are even an argument is appalling to me. It's unconstitutional to revoke those rights given to us in the Bill of Rights. Don't get me wrong, I know the second amendment is very specific to what it actually intends to convey, and that is the right to bear arms and create a militia, in the event that the government oversteps its bounds set forth by our forefathers. Which, with re-considering gun ownership rights, is pretty close to overstepping their bounds in my opinion. What's next? Freedom of speech?[QUOTE="cheese_game619"]yes it is teaching kids to use guns and desensitising them to the violencegamerguru100
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment