Videogames and violence. (Anonymous)
The "violent videogames cause violence" debate is back in the news again. And, as usual, the moral majority and games industry blame or slippery shoulder respectively. I’m in two minds on this issue - on the one hand I think that censoring or banning violent games is ridiculous scare-mongering on the part of the “anti-gaming” groups. On the other I think that games companies and the majority of gamers are sticking their heads in the sand and need to take a bit more responsibility for their output. Take 2, despite public denial, do want kids to play the likes of GTA and Manhunt because it makes them money. And todays parents are too lazy and irresposible to actively ensure their kids are playing games that are suitable.
The majority of non-gamers I speak to think that these modern ultra-violent games are just retarded fantasies for the socially inept, and I think these games do a lot to damage our pastime in the eyes of those people. My father’s opinion of games is the “it’s just childish zapping little green men and robots… grow up and do something useful” - one I’m sure a lot of you encounter.
The outcome is that nobody wins. Publishers may make short-term profits from blockbusters but are probably limiting long-term market size, kids are exposed to images they really shouldn’t see, and parents continue to be bloody useless.
1 comment:
Mm, I realised a while ago that there are two types of people against violent videogames; those who slam the deliberatley controversial games such as Manhunt and GTA, and those who raise the issue that - gore or no gore - the majority of videogames do involve using violence as a means of progress. Personally, I would quite happily play a game if the violent consequence of neutralising an enemy was substituted for something more sedate, such as teleporting them to Norwich where they have to do a bit of community service or something.
Post a Comment