Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Killing 'incited by video game'

First, I don't think anybody has laughed yet:

BAHAHAHA!

Secondly, did you guys miss this part?

"There was a similar outcry after the Columbine school shooting, when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold murdered 12 students and a teacher and wounded 23 others before shooting themselves at the high school in Littleton, Colorado, in April 1999.

They were known to enjoy playing Doom, a game licensed by the US military to train soldiers to kill."

BAHAHA! Doom sure is a hyper-realistic shooting simulation. All of my friends in the US Miltary train with Doom 12 hours a week. It's not the training they get at Basic that trains them how to fight. It's Doom.

Personally, I think we should get all of the crazies that think videogames/music/movies are brainwashing our poor, helpless, children into killing and send them on a one-way ride to the sun. ;)
 
iGAV said:
Exactly... unfortunately we're developing a 'pass the buck' culture here in the UK where some parents seemingly don't recognise their social responsibilities as parents, with many being prepared to blame everything their children does on someone or something else ANYTHING other than themselves, whether it be videos, video games or boredom and the well worn "there's nothing for our little Johnny to do on our estate" after the sh*t bag has mugged, stolen or set fire to someone or someone elses property. :rolleyes: :mad:
Click to expand...


I agree wholeheartedly. The problem with teenage mothers or any other irresponisble parents is that they just don't get it. Parenting is not a right, it is a privelage. :mad:

Parents: Games don't kill people, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE
 
Maybe video games can set things off, but there's gotta be something wrong with you in the first place (psychologically) just to go kill someone, especially for no apparent reason.
 
zoetropeuk said:
"Hhhhmmm, my son is locking himself in his room with a friend who's 3 years younger and they're playing a violent computer game for hours at a time. Yeah, that's pretty normal behaviour, I'm sure it won't have any effect on them."
Click to expand...
Kids have been locking themselves up in their rooms with a mate playing violent video games for years, nothing unusual in that.
 
I feel that censorship is a societal responsibility, not a governmental one. Parents, relatives, friends, neighbors, all share the responsibility of making sure children do not screw up their's, or others, lives.

That said, it's hard to understand how people say video games do not affect you. It's pyschological conditioning. You're living in a reality that is not real. You try to escape from true reality to one that you don't have to worry about societal constraints. Such escapism is unhealthy in that you do not learn how to work with society but fight against it. Of course you're not completely transformed by what you watch, but you can't help but be affected. Everything we take in affects our view of the world and the way we behave. To think you are not affected by your environment, especially what you choose to take in, is extremely naive. The US army uses doom for precisely that purpose, to make something that would be horrifying for most people into a routine. Soldiers aren't prone to murder because of their training, but they have to deal with their altered perspective when in civilian life.
 
Ultra-Violence in games is a good thing.

Games that contain ultra-violence are a good thing. They provide a means to express anger without harming anyone in real life. Players control the in-game avatar, not the other way around.
 
In all fairness, few mothers are even capable of thinking their kid could flip out and kill people. I'm not saying she's guiltless... perhaps other parenting crap caused the boy to grow up with no morals. More likely though, it was a chemical imbalance or something similar. I'm sure the mother is going through enough grief as it is... she doesn't need the whole internet saying she's responsible for her kid killing someone.

As for Manhunt... I bought it and sold it a week later. What a boring game.
 
edesignuk said:
Kids have been locking themselves up in their rooms with a mate playing violent video games for years, nothing unusual in that.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Hell, I did that when I was younger, and no one is dead... well, no one important anyway.

Honesty though, its not ALWAYS the parents' fault.
 
Seriously, when are they going to stop blaming the video games? If the guy had something he wasn't supposed to have, it's not the programmers fault. If someone attempts walking on water, and they drown, do people blame the Bible?

This reminds me of a quote someone said about the content of a book: "That raises of course the question: what are artists to do? Tailor their writing so that it's immune to the actions of madmen? We can't do that." Banning violent games is only a form of censorship.

That being said, I'm a pretty big fan of video games, but I think some of the violence is just unnecessary. Do people really need that to have fun playing a game?
 
MacFan26 said:
This reminds me of a quote someone said about the content of a book: "That raises of course the question: what are artists to do? Tailor their writing so that it's immune to the actions of madmen? We can't do that." Banning violent games is only a form of censorship.
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure how you consider some of that rubbish art. Art edifies the observer, it has a meaning and intention for the benefit of society. This self-gratifying express-my-own-inner-turmoil nonsense is not art. Anybody can splash paint on a canvas or create some lame video game or film, or throw a sequence of words together. An artist gives it worthwhile meaning.

And, yes, banning games is censorship. Which is not a bad thing, as long as the government is not involved. Parents and close, trusted adult figures should use censorship more often.

Sol, your suggestion that violent video games prevent real-life violence is disturbing. If you have such a rage bottled within you, you would be much better off dealing with your anger issues head-on than just expressing them in a violent game. You won't always have a game to release your anger, and it's much healthier to just deal with it anyway.
 
Kyle? said:
Sol, your suggestion that violent video games prevent real-life violence is disturbing. If you have such a rage bottled within you, you would be much better off dealing with your anger issues head-on than just expressing them in a violent game. You won't always have a game to release your anger, and it's much healthier to just deal with it anyway.
Click to expand...

Anger is one thing and rage is quite another. My suggestion is that video games can be used as a means of externalising anger in a harmless way. Dealing with the issues that make us angry is not always practical or possible. For example, if I was frustrated by something that happened to me at work it would not be wise to confront anyone about it while I was still angry. I would have to cool down and clear my head before dealing with the problem the next day. Tearing Sub-Zero's head off his body would be a good laugh under those circumstances and by the time I switch off the console I would be a relatively calm and somewhat relieved human being. My anger would have been expressed withing the space of the video game and not in the office.
 
MongoTheGeek said:
Anyone remember the same paranoia surrounding D&D 20 years ago?

The same thing happened 500 years ago when someone killed there best friend after seeing Hamlet...

You know that Shakespeare's up to no good...
Click to expand...


Wow -- D&D.

Now there's something that was a lot of fun (sometimes).
Still got my d20 somewhere although haven't played for about 12 years...

If DM'd well, could be far more entertaining than any video-game.

That's a whole new thread again...
 
strider42 said:
My roommate had this game. It looked OK, no big deal. When you kill people in it, it changes to a movie type scene, you don't really control it. If anyone relaly thinks someone killed someone because of a video game, I think they are missing the obvious, that the person still has a choice in what they do. Seeing something and doing it are too different things. I really didn't think the game was that over the top from what I saw. As a game, it was grounded within a real story at least, as opposed to fighting games where the object is merely to fight for the sake of it. Those are the games that I think kids are more likely to immitate (I mean, I can remember as a kid trying WWF wrestling moves on my little brother and things like that).

Quote from the article: "I think that I heard some of Warren's friends say that he was obsessed with this game" Hmmm, thank that might be the problem and not the game itself. I think so. If this game never existed, do you really think someone so obivously psychiotic would not have killed someone. What kind of defense is "i saw a guy in a video game bludgeon someone to death, so I thought I'd try it" This wasn't a 7 year old either. This kid was old enough to know exactly what he was doing and the consequences of it. Maybe his parents should have been paying more attention to his interests.
Click to expand...

I agree. And instead of blaming a video game or a violent movie, people should be lookin at the real culprit! Often bad parenting or a misquided youth lead to serious problems later on for some people.
 
crachoar said:
First, I don't think anybody has laughed yet:

BAHAHAHA!

Secondly, did you guys miss this part?

"There was a similar outcry after the Columbine school shooting, when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold murdered 12 students and a teacher and wounded 23 others before shooting themselves at the high school in Littleton, Colorado, in April 1999.

They were known to enjoy playing Doom, a game licensed by the US military to train soldiers to kill."

BAHAHA! Doom sure is a hyper-realistic shooting simulation. All of my friends in the US Miltary train with Doom 12 hours a week. It's not the training they get at Basic that trains them how to fight. It's Doom.

Personally, I think we should get all of the crazies that think videogames/music/movies are brainwashing our poor, helpless, children into killing and send them on a one-way ride to the sun. ;)
Click to expand...

Actually the military is using video games to help teach, among other things, basic tactics and "shooters" are used to help change pulling the trigger from a thought process into an action and to lessen the natural reluctence<sp?> to fire at a "human" target. Ever sense WWII when a study showed that, at any given time, the majority of troops in a battle were not firing their weapons the military has been trying to find ways to train troops to be less "trigger shy."

Video games will never replace field training, but there is also a lot of classroom time involved in military training and books+video games seems like a better idea than books alone while not in the field.


Lethal
 
History continues to repeat itself... there is nothing new in this thread unfortunately.

I can remember people accusing Ozzy osbourne and iron Maiden of being responsible for teen suicide... Doom for mass killings, D&D (sigh, the good ol' days), etc. Today it is video games being blamed for kids actions... tomorrow?

Manhunt, while a violent game, is nothing worse than anything those kids could see on tv any night of the week. It all comes down to values and parenting...not music, plays, video games, movies, etc.

Now, where is that D&D thread? :)
 
I think video games can actually just as well do the opposite of inciting violence. They can be used for blowing off some stress and steam.
Rather kill in a video game than in real life.
 
Kyle? said:
I'm not really sure how you consider some of that rubbish art. Art edifies the observer, it has a meaning and intention for the benefit of society. This self-gratifying express-my-own-inner-turmoil nonsense is not art. Anybody can splash paint on a canvas or create some lame video game or film, or throw a sequence of words together. An artist gives it worthwhile meaning.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you are simply not seeing the meaning? Art means different things to different people, and large amounts of art is simply incomprehensible to large amount of people. That doesn't stop it being art. If you consider making people happy an improvement to society then the so called rubbish has that intention.

They say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back