Violent Games and Life

[Reality vs Adventure]

Any entertainment tool can be used to cause violence. Randomly violent video games do not cause a person to act in violence. Add in something very political and dominate almost every game with that political intent, then yes, the sheep will follow suit and act in violence. Imagine living in an isolated country where everything you see or do is controlled to make you see things a certain way. In a violent certain way against opponents. There will be violence. 

Now take a teen who may not watch movies, news, or listen to music. They play video games. The controlling government has to reach that target audience as well before they can become the opposition. To reach that youth, all the video games relay a certain violent message. Those individuals likely will become brainwashed like everyone else and act in violence against any perceived threat they were taught to act upon. 

So in an open market video gaming world, no. Video games are not the cause of somebody's violent act. In a closed authoritarian regime gaming world where the government is actively involved in manipulating your thoughts and producing tailored gaming, yes. ANY entertainment tool can be used to incite violence for political purposes. Not just one game out 1000. Not 5 games out of 100. ALL games the government has made and released just for you with political violent flavor to indulge yourselves everyday. And if you were the opposition and didn't like the games, spoke aloud, I'm sure your peers would send you to the hospital after school. 

 

[Crazycrab]

Will you get over yourself!  The actual answer as to why we are attracted to violent media is actually quite simple.  It’s not Trump. It’s not China, It’s not Oil or the laundry list of commercial, political or any of your conspiracy theories you might come up with.  It’s because we are PREDATORS!  It’s not some elaborate spy movie scenario!  Whether you like to admit it or not we like the thrill of the hunt, we enjoy the challenge presented by our prey, our bloodlust satisfied by the kill, the admiration from our potential mates and the jealousy from our sexual rivals.

 

We are a sentient species with established moral codes, so to fully expose these kinds of primal instincts would normally mean to engage in antisocial or even criminal behavior like wild animals.  We are generally able to keep these instincts under control because we have a conscience.  This is why for thousands of years we have had violent media.  Whether it be through Paintings, Sculptures, Music or stories told through Novels, Movies or the most recent goto scapegoat… Video Games.  It’s a method through which we can stimulate those violent primitive instincts without actually hurting anyone.  Video Games is arguably the most effective method of suppressing that we have ever had since it allows you to control the violence yourself.

 

You say that:

 

54 minutes ago, Reality vs Adventure said:

Any entertainment tool can be used to cause violence. Randomly violent video games do not cause a person to act in violence. Add in something very political and dominate almost every game with that political intent, then yes, the sheep will follow suit and act in violence

 

Listen carefully... EVEN "SHEEP" ARE NOT THAT FUCKING STUIPID!!!!!  If that were the case then at least 1 million people would have flown to Russia and shot up the airports because "Modern Warfare 2" told them to! Are you really this dense? It's nonsense!  Human beings are actually capable of something suspension of disbelief.  That means they can tell the difference between seeing or even simulating a fantasy and weighing the consequences of a reality.  What you have just done here is not only yet another unwarranted effort to push your own political agenda OUTSIDE of the designated political thread, but you have actually pushed the idea that video games directly cause violence in that pursuit.  Shame on you!

[Reality vs Adventure]

People on here get mad way too easy. What I said is worst case scenario. Doesn't make it not a possibility. And simply denying anything outrageous to be possible is exactly how things become possible. 

[Shagger]

1 hour ago, Reality vs Adventure said:

People on here get mad way too easy. What I said is worst case scenario. Doesn't make it not a possibility. And simply denying anything outrageous to be possible is exactly how things become possible. 

 

@Crazycrab did not deny anything outrageous, he denied something that was ludicrous. I said something similar in another thread, life is not that hard. There are things that happen and that don't happen that can be easily explained without some needlessly complicated political conspiracy. I don't know why you feel the need to do so, but for your own sake you have to stop reeding into things and twisting them around to fit that pattern.

[Reality vs Adventure]

52 minutes ago, Shagger said:

 

@Crazycrab did not deny anything outrageous, he denied something that was ludicrous. I said something similar in another thread, life is not that hard. There are things that happen and that don't happen that can be easily explained without some needlessly complicated political conspiracy. I don't know why you feel the need to do so, but for your own sake you have to stop reeding into things and twisting them around to fit that pattern.

For those that play video games I might have confused: no, what I said is not happening. No, it is not a conspiracy. My only point to make is that all entertainment can be used as a tool to incite violence if fallen into the wrong hands. That’s it. Bada bing.

[The Blackangel]

Anything can incite violence. Whether it's something as petty as a video game, or something serious as rape. It all depends on the individual. Now, I'm not going to go on a political tirade, but there is always the minuscule possibility that the government is using a video game for a nefarious purpose. It's highly unlikely, but it can't be called impossible. In the 80's there was the Satanic Panic. People were falsely labeling people as Satanic. they were unjustly trying to connect them to crimes they hadn't committed. Fast forward a few years to Columbine. The fault for that was Marilyn Manson. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were brainwashed by Manson to shoot up their school. There is always a scapegoat for violence. And behind that scapegoat is always some political involvement. Even if it's just a tiny bit. And in some of these instances, the term "political" doesn't mean government. It's a more generic term. I don't know how to define it in words, but I'm sure everyone knows what I mean.

[Reality vs Adventure]

27 minutes ago, The Blackangel said:

Anything can incite violence. Whether it's something as petty as a video game, or something serious as rape. It all depends on the individual. Now, I'm not going to go on a political tirade, but there is always the minuscule possibility that the government is using a video game for a nefarious purpose. It's highly unlikely, but it can't be called impossible. In the 80's there was the Satanic Panic. People were falsely labeling people as Satanic. they were unjustly trying to connect them to crimes they hadn't committed. Fast forward a few years to Columbine. The fault for that was Marilyn Manson. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were brainwashed by Manson to shoot up their school. There is always a scapegoat for violence. And behind that scapegoat is always some political involvement. Even if it's just a tiny bit. And in some of these instances, the term "political" doesn't mean government. It's a more generic term. I don't know how to define it in words, but I'm sure everyone knows what I mean.

I think I see what you are saying. A person has the ability to know right from wrong and not commit an act of violence even if some hidden agenda is being pushed through whatever entertainment source it is. And so the blame falls onto the entertainment source if something happens and not the real culprit pulling the strings. Well I'll be! Let me put this here straw hat on my face and stand in a corn field till the crows come lickin. 

 

[Lord Saru]

I think I agree with the fact that video games and even movies and every other media bits influence us in ways we cannot fathom. 

Allow me to explain with a brief example. When I go to fairs in my locality, I notice that small kids are wanting laser guns and toys like swords. Gone are the days when children would want plastic kitchen set or even animal sets.

A lot of studies prove my point too. 

[Shagger]

1 hour ago, Lord Saru said:

I think I agree with the fact that video games and even movies and every other media bits influence us in ways we cannot fathom. 

Allow me to explain with a brief example. When I go to fairs in my locality, I notice that small kids are wanting laser guns and toys like swords. Gone are the days when children would want plastic kitchen set or even animal sets.

A lot of studies prove my point too. 

 

If so, can you provide links? Because I see some real proof, and with all due respect to both yourself and @Reality vs Adventure, I will always see the claim the entertainment media can influence an individuals' actions to such a specific and extreme level as ridiculous.

 

To me, that's nothing but a scapegoat for governments to use because they don't want to address the real problems that lead to human malice and what provides the tools for people to commit violent acts. It's the same kind of idiocy often accosted with PETA and the way the attack, for example, hunting mechanics in video game. I remember when Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag came out and PETA were trying to get the game banned because there was whaling mechanics in it, and they seemed to believe this would influence kids into killing whales in real life.

The theme and form are slightly different, but both the idea the PETA put forward and the idea that violence in video games leads to violence in real life stem from the stupid idea. Just because somebody from PETA can't psychologically detach the killing of a pixilated whale from the real thing doesn't the rest of us are that stupid, and it the same with media violence. Nobody is that easily influenced unless there is something wrong in terms of said individual's metal health that leads to a detachment from reality.

I can live in the fantasy and in the reality and know the bloody difference, that's why I've been enjoying video games for 30 years and never felt compelled to act out any violent fantasy, and we all have them, it's only natural. On the contrary, I feel violent media, video games especially as it's a role-play, I believe is a safe outlet for the violent fantasies that, again admit it or not, is simply part of our phycological makeup as we are evolved predators. If one can't discern the difference between violent fantasy and violent reality, that's an issue of their own. It's not the fault of any game, movie, piece of music or book if they act on it.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Shagger

[Reality vs Adventure]

6 hours ago, Shagger said:

The theme and form are slightly different, but both the idea the PETA put forward and the idea that violence in video games leads to violence in real life stem from the stupid idea. Just because somebody from PETA can't psychologically detach the killing of a pixilated whale from the real thing doesn't the rest of us are that stupid, and it the same with media violence. Nobody is that easily influenced unless there is something wrong in terms of said individual's metal health that leads to a detachment from reality.

I can live in the fantasy and in the reality and know the bloody difference, that's why I've been enjoying video games for 30 years and never felt compelled to act out any violent fantasy, and we all have them, it's only natural. On the contrary, I feel violent media, video games especially as it's a role-play, I believe is a safe outlet for the violent fantasies that, again admit it or not, is simply part of our phycological makeup as we are evolved predators. If one can't discern the difference between violent fantasy and violent reality, that's an issue of their own. It's not the fault of any game, movie, piece of music or book if they act on it.

That kind of reminds me of the movie 'The Hunt' which is about liberals kidnapping conservative deplorables for sport. The movie had to be postponed from being released due to the political climate in the USA. BUT it was eventually released around a year later with the same political climate if not worse. And did anyone act on it and kidnap deplorable conservatives? No. I for one would love to watch it and I fantasize about torturing an American republican in every way if I ever catch one of those low lifes. Am I gonna do it? No.   

My point is that nobody acted on a controversial movie. So @Shagger point is correct. Then again, society as a whole fears the impact entertainment can have. Especially during some kind of crisis. Having anger and then influenced to act on it does not necessarily mean a person has a mental disorder though. To exploit that anger could lead to a societal breakdown, which was part of my point in my first post where I said any entertainment can be a tool to incite violence. 

[The Blackangel]

Being a sociopath, I'm completely desensitized to violence. It doesn't phase me a bit to see someone get hurt. I actually enjoy it. But do I go out with the intent to hurt anyone? No. I don't care enough about people to waste my time on them. If I hurt someone in the process of conducting my own business, then oh well. I'm not going to stop to see if they are ok. Because I don't care. Did a video game make me do it? Did a band make me do it? Did a movie make me do it? No, no, and no.

The strong minded know where to draw the line.
The weak minded let outside forces dictate their actions.

Make damn sure you know that I am not referring to those abused as weak minded. That is a whole other set of circumstances completely unrelated to this topic.

[Lord Saru]

9 hours ago, Shagger said:

 

If so, can you provide links? Because I see some real proof, and with all due respect to both yourself and @Reality vs Adventure, I will always see the claim the entertainment media can influence an individuals' actions to such a specific and extreme level as ridiculous.

 

To me, that's nothing but a scapegoat for governments to use because they don't want to address the real problems that lead to human malice and what provides the tools for people to commit violent acts. It's the same kind of idiocy often accosted with PETA and the way the attack, for example, hunting mechanics in video game. I remember when Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag came out and PETA were trying to get the game banned because there was whaling mechanics in it, and they seemed to believe this would influence kids into killing whales in real life.

The theme and form are slightly different, but both the idea the PETA put forward and the idea that violence in video games leads to violence in real life stem from the stupid idea. Just because somebody from PETA can't psychologically detach the killing of a pixilated whale from the real thing doesn't the rest of us are that stupid, and it the same with media violence. Nobody is that easily influenced unless there is something wrong in terms of said individual's metal health that leads to a detachment from reality.

I can live in the fantasy and in the reality and know the bloody difference, that's why I've been enjoying video games for 30 years and never felt compelled to act out any violent fantasy, and we all have them, it's only natural. On the contrary, I feel violent media, video games especially as it's a role-play, I believe is a safe outlet for the violent fantasies that, again admit it or not, is simply part of our phycological makeup as we are evolved predators. If one can't discern the difference between violent fantasy and violent reality, that's an issue of their own. It's not the fault of any game, movie, piece of music or book if they act on it.

I think a simple search on Google Scholar will point you in the right direction: https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=games+influencing+child+behavior&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

If you feel that individual papers have to be quoted, I can do that too. Here is another perspective to look at: Media as a field is destined to change the way we think and do things, thats precisely why its made that way. If a certain film doesnt keep you thinking and guess, its no good. 

Every media, including games and films are made to influence you. 

[Shagger]

16 minutes ago, Lord Saru said:

I think a simple search on Google Scholar will point you in the right direction: https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=games+influencing+child+behavior&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

If you feel that individual papers have to be quoted, I can do that too. Here is another perspective to look at: Media as a field is destined to change the way we think and do things, thats precisely why its made that way. If a certain film doesnt keep you thinking and guess, its no good. 

Every media, including games and films are made to influence you. 

 

This is why if you want to prove a point, you do your own legwork instead of just linking a search page. The very first article in that list (BTW, that search is titled "games influencing child behaviour", which isn't really the point of the conversation) was written by one Christopher Freguson, a phycologist and professor from Stetson University, who is actually critical of the idea that there's a direct link between video games violent behaviour. That is much like every other expert and legitimate study I've ever looked up that have found no conclusive proof that such a thing is real, like this one, for example.

 

Besides, I don't need a study or an expert's word to know your wrong and what that you said makes no sense. Entertainment media is not a tool to sculpt a society like you say it is. If it was, it wouldn't divide option like it does, especially these days. Entertainment media is a reflection of a society, a reflection of reality and it's society that influences and inspires that media, not the other way round. It's media that has to keep up with society to remain relevant and relatable. Yes, propaganda is a thing and a creator's personal beliefs will often be reflected in their work, but not always. Even if they do try, somebody trying to influence an audience through entertainment media and actually succeeding are very different things, especially with regard to the specific, extreme and not to mention sheer scale of success that you're suggesting is possible. People are just not that stupid (OK, most of them aren't that stupid) and tend to have a greater sense of independent thinking and faith in what they already believe in to be manipulated that easily even if they are wrong, It just doesn't work like that. Even propaganda still has to convince people to be effective, something that is harder to do now that it's ever been.

 

I agree, entertainment media should make you think, make you feel and hopefully even inspire, but prompting an emotional and/or thoughtful reaction is not the same thing as manipulating people's thoughts, beliefs and certainly not physical actions or omissions in the real world. It's people themselves that are responsible for that, or in the case of children, their parents. Like I said earlier, it takes a pre-existing phycological issue to be influenced like that by entertainment media.

[m76]

No, I think it's the exact opposite. People who can let off steam by playing games even violent ones, are less likely to get aggressive in real life.

[The Blackangel]

20 hours ago, Shagger said:

People are just not that stupid (OK, most of them aren't that stupid)

Ok, I have to disagree there. If the majority wasn't stupid, I highly doubt we would even be having this conversation. There would be no need to even think about a possible correlation, let alone discuss it.

Edited September 30, 2020 by The Blackangel