Do violent video games lead to youth violence?
12.04.06 -Dylan Baker of Los Gatos, California
NO: Violence in games helps to prevent real-life violence, not to cause it.
Violent video games provide a valuable way for players to vent their pains and frustrations on a virtual foe rather than on a real one. Studies of the long-term effects of violence in video games have recorded mixed results, and definitive answers to the effects these games have yet to be found, despite what most opponents of these games say.
>> More from Dylan
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Creating a fantasy of cruelty, violent video games give players the skewed view that violence is a positive force that results in success, as gauged by points proportional to murders. While fabricating this nightmarish dream, these games eclipse real world concerns by encouraging addicted players to kill in fiction while people die in reality.
Well-known among gamers, violent video games quickly reel players into the fury of swift cruelty and sudden victory. Inherent in their nature, this tendency is designed to empower players with the ability to kill without consequence. In fact, the power to kill comes with an incentive: more points. Carrying a positive connotation, points seem to radiate an inherent goodness regardless of the misguided means of gaining them. Despite their limited utility, precious points and the cheap thrill of murdering a fictional character seem to enrapture some youth to the point of addiction.
This infatuation with violent video games results in repeated or often continuous playing by hooked youth. Besides taking up valuable time that could be used for more productive activities, the games do more harm. By exposing teens to graphic, grotesque images on a regular basis, the games cause teens to see violence as the rule rather than the exception. Although violent entertainment does not necessarily convince exposed teens to become mass murderers, the games do send the message that violence is an effective way to win not just in a game, but also in life. While most players understand the difference between two-dimensional images on a screen and three-dimensional people in life, the subtle but nevertheless constant inculcation of violence has an indelible effect by virtue of the time spent playing the games.
Though gaming advocates may argue that the effect of video games is to provide an outlet for frustrated youth, that stance begs the question of where that frustration originated. Though socioeconomic factors and teen rebellion may serve as possible explanations, the negative effects of those issues are perpetuated by the violence demonstrated in video games. If gamers need to deal with their anger, why should they play games that promote anger through violence? Why don’t we address the root of teen frustration, rather than allowing the deeper social issues to fester? Even if we do not have the resources to solve the problem at its core, we should not create another source of aggression in teens through video games.
Though violent video games may allow players to vent, their anger is better directed at social injustices and prevalent international crises. Instead of spending hours causing the massacre of fictional enemies, young adults can direct their attention to stopping the massacre of actual human beings in war-stricken countries like Sudan, Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Preventing deaths is more difficult than causing them, but also more worthwhile. Weighing the importance of fictionalized cruelty with that of actual malice, teens can learn to save lives rather than end them.
Dylan "Violence in games helps to prevent real-life violence."
Video games have been sharing the blame for numerous acts of violence among children, including school shootings. However, critics don't seem to understand that violence in games helps to prevent real-life violence, not to cause it. Violent video games provide a valuable way for players to vent their pains and frustrations on a virtual foe rather than on a real one.
While numerous studies show that violent games can temporarily increase levels of aggression, these findings merely reflects the player's heightened level of excitement while playing. Studies of the long-term effects of violence in video games have recorded mixed results, and definitive answers to the effects these games have yet to be found, despite what most opponents of these games say.
Furthermore, a majority of people who actually run tests on the effects of violent video games have never actually played them. Therein lies the problem with modern day views of these games: most critics of violent video games have no understanding of the games that they criticize. While splattering the brains of a demonic foe may seem like senseless violence to many, it is fun and humorous to those who play the game.
Although some may take violent games more seriously than others, everyone who plays these games shares a common understanding that what is happening is fantasy. These games are not real life, but a way for somebody to experience doing things that they themselves would never dream of actually doing. A great example of this would be the disputed Grand Theft Auto series, in which a player controlled character is able to steal cars, rob banks, shoot police, and murder innocent bystanders. While the very idea of doing something of this caliber in real life is appalling to nearly everyone, why shouldn't someone be able to experience it if nobody is hurt? Aren't people a little curious as to what would happen if they perhaps stole an expensive car on the street and sped away?
Violent games merely provide a way for people to indulge in their natural curiosity and lust for adventure; they do not cause people to commit acts of violence. Although critics will say otherwise, these games are not "training" for future criminals. A criminal who thinks that they can carry four different handguns, two machine guns, ten grenades, a knife, a katakana, a rocket launcher (all of which can be equipped instantly); jump from twenty story buildings and survive; and withstand twenty bullets before dying is not going to get very far in crime. Indeed, this criminal cannot walk down the street holding a bazooka unless they plan to be tackled by the nearest policeman.
The idea that video games could be responsible for violence is one of an overbearing, overprotective society that lacks the ability to realize that there are mentally unstable children in the world who will do terrible things. Not every child has to be "corrupted" by video games to do something dangerous. Instead of focusing our efforts on finding a culprit for these violent acts, we should find these disturbed children and help them.
What do Y.o.u.t.h.I.n.k? Email opinions to fellow@nlc.org to join this discussion.
National League of Cities
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Suite 550 · Washington, DC 20004 Phone:(202) 626-3000 · Fax:(202) 626-3043 info@nlc.org · www.nlc.org Privacy Policy