TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Social Impact of Video Games

Social Impact of Video Games

Due to the GTA:SA fiasco...



As video gaming spreads, the debate about its social impact is intensifying

IS IT a new medium on a par with film and music, a valuable educational tool, a form of harmless fun or a digital menace that turns children into violent zombies? Video gaming is all these things, depending on whom you ask.

http://www.economist.com/displaysto...tory_id=4246109

Well, the economist has clearly shown their bias... that kid looks demonic.

Personally, I played years of Counterstrike, which is arugably one of the more violent games out there, and I haven't developed the urge to coduct real-life shootings.

quote:

Originally posted by cap Personally, I played years of Counterstrike, which is arugably one of the more violent games out there, and I haven't developed the urge to coduct real-life shootings.

This is actually the argument of the article.

Cheers,
-N

Interesting and very good article, thanks

Dont really have anything to add there.

This is the same type of discussion held when questioning whether or not the type of music you listen to promotes violence. Newsflash, just because one listens to Slipknot or Marilyn Manson does not mean they are going to go kill anyone. I do believe Marilyn Manson himself provided an excellent case when Michael Moore (idiot) was questioning him about the fact that parents were pointing fingers at him for one of the reasons Columbine ever happened.

Perhaps they need to do a test of subjects who play video games and have no good moral upbringing vs. those who play the same games yet have a very good moral upbringing to see if instead of games being the cause of problems, parental influence is.

it all lies with the parents. When a kid goes crazy and kills someone the parents need to blame someone/something to cover up there own failure as a parent.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael19 it all lies with the parents. When a kid goes crazy and kills someone the parents need to blame someone/something to cover up there own failure as a parent.

Exactly. Upbringing has a lot to do with it, not music, or video games, or movies.

I see that nearly all of those Video Game Studies were inconclusive.

I can't type what I mean exactly, but I find it hard to believe that a Video Game could magically remove morals from a child and give them the ability to kill random people. I wish I could convey this thought easily, but what I'm trying to say is, the moral 'heaviness' of murdering someone is far too much for the normal person to handle.

If someone can easily kill a random person after playing a video game, they were not normal in the first place.

lol @ that cover!

quote:

Start with the demographics. Attitudes towards gaming depend to a great extent on age. In America, for example, half of the population plays computer or video games. However most players are under 40�according to Nielsen, a market-research firm, 76% of them�while most critics of gaming are over 40. An entire generation that began gaming as children has kept playing. The average age of American gamers is 30. Most are �digital natives� who grew up surrounded by technology, argues Marc Prensky of games2train, a firm that promotes the educational use of games. He describes older people as �digital immigrants� who, like newcomers anywhere, have had to adapt in various ways to their new digital surroundings.

i liked the article.

for you guys who hate all this GTA crack down, basically what the bolded text above means is it will only be a matter of time before the younger generations take the place of the older generations and you won't have so much bitching about that stuff

quote:

Originally posted by cap Well, the economist has clearly shown their bias... that kid looks demonic.

actually the bias were just the opposite. i think the picture was over emphasized to show how ridiculous the notion is. most of the article was spent providing evidence to the contrary for many of the arguments crics use

quote:

Originally posted by squirrelly Newsflash, just because one listens to Slipknot or Marilyn Manson does not mean they are going to go kill anyone. I do believe Marilyn Manson himself provided an excellent case when Michael Moore (idiot) was questioning him about the fact that parents were pointing fingers at him for one of the reasons Columbine ever happened.

Permit me to step out of character a moment...

I have seen Manson go on talk shows and make total fools of the interviewers when they tried to depict him as a freak because of his (rather obvious) stage gimmick. Quite amusing to see them cross conversational swords when the interviewer has none, so is reduced to babbling to try to keep up.

I was delighted by Manson's intelligence, the ease with which he handled e.g., Letterman, and I also enjoyed his remarks in Bowling for Columbine. It inspired me to look up his music, which I also enjoy now; highly recommended if you can get by the gimmick. The music could hardly inspire anyone to commit crazy acts if they are sane in the first place and paying attention to the messages of the songs.

I'm also guilty of enjoying GTA -- I loved driving around the fire truck causing mass carnage, ramming police cars, etc. I often started playing in order to provoke the SWAT-response APC and helicopter, which I delighted in shooting up.

Why is this considered "entertainment" nowadays? I have played a couple different video games with the kids of colleagues, friends, relatives, and can attest to the satisfaction (or lack thereof) that comes with causing serious virtual-carnage. But people that cannot differentiate reality from that fiction cannot do so due firstly to suffering from some manner of disassociative disorder to begin with; video games and movies, music etc. are only a couple of potential stimuli for violent action, where multitudes exist in society. Rhetorically, why are these in particular singled out?

Perhaps: one thing I can comment on is the legitimacy of protecting children from such stimuli, until mature enough to make the differentiation between video game and reality. Young children haven't yet the developmental cognition to do this in early life; I know this from having listened to them playing (while being astonished at how good very young children are these games and the requisite hand-eye coordination).

I wouldn't allow young children to play GTA, and I only came to this conclusion after hearing my nephew actually say to his father while driving in his car: "go faster daddy, if we crash we'll just come back!"

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu Permit me to step out of character a moment... I have seen Manson go on talk shows and make total fools of the interviewers when they tried to depict him as a freak because of his (rather obvious) stage gimmick. Quite amusing to see them cross conversational swords when the interviewer has none, so is reduced to babbling to try to keep up. I was delighted by Manson's intelligence, the ease with which he handled e.g., Letterman, and I also enjoyed his remarks in Bowling for Columbine. It inspired me to look up his music, which I also enjoy now; highly recommended if you can get by the gimmick. The music could hardly inspire anyone to commit crazy acts if they are sane in the first place and paying attention to the messages of the songs.

No need to tell me, I've seen him live eleven times.

quote:

Originally posted by squirrelly No need to tell me, I've seen him live eleven times.

I'm seriously thinking about going too; I think it would be a fun experience in social behaviour.

I'm of mixed feeling about the crowd, however. Would you say it's particularly young?

quote:

Originally posted by TheNobleEu I'm seriously thinking about going too; I think it would be a fun experience in social behaviour. I'm of mixed feeling about the crowd, however. Would you say it's particularly young?

No, it's a mixture, plus more often than not lately they've been 18+ shows

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.