Are video games harmful?

[sauronsfinger]

Eruname

and what have I done here on this thread to upset you so much?

[yovargas]

So if I read you correct, the thug nature of the game had nothing to do with these amazing gaming advances that could have been made with any subject matter.

Correct.

Why continue to defend that which threatens to bring down or to handcuff an industry and entertainment form which you clearly love?

Because what's the alternative? Censorship? Far more dangerous than a game could ever be, IMO.

[sauronsfinger]

Why cannot the industry at least try to police itself?

[yovargas]

Because different people have different standards. You can't expect Quentin Tarantino to make PG-13 films. Rockstar (the studio that produced GTA) very purposefully portray themselves as a "mature", adult-only game maker. I certainly think they should be allowed to though I might not personally enjoy their content. (Read about the concept of Manhunt if you wanna hear how far this goes. Many game critics, which usually shrug off violence in video game issues sounded like they were disturbed)

[sauronsfinger]

I understand your point.

However, if those different people are pushing standards which bring the scorn of social. educational and political critics on the entire industry, they seem to be doing more harm than the dollars are worth.

I understand your point that censorship is not good and to be avoided. But there is plenty of other room in between government imposed censorship and all out no holds barred thuglife gutter culture.

And now you tell me that Manhunt sounds even worse than GTA. How far does this have to go before the wrath of the government comes down upon the industry and then they will not be in a position to police themselves?

[yovargas]

But there is plenty of other room in between government imposed censorship and all out no holds barred thuglife gutter culture.

What do you propose? I really don't see what could be done. It's your standards (and in this case, mine too) verses theirs.

Oh, and if you didn't know, I'm pretty sure GTA3 was the best selling video game of all time (if it wasn't #1 it was pretty close). The consumers voted with their dollars in favor of it.

[sauronsfinger]

yovargas
I do not propose anything because I am not in this industry and do not know it well enough to propose anything of substance. I would hope that people within the industry and people like yourself who are devoted gamers, come up with something that preserves your enjoyment of your entertainment and is socially responsible at the same time.

Otherwise, this will get worse and eventually you and others will not like the government and others who will get involved.

I understand the popularity of these games and the dollars they bring in. That seems to be to be even more of a stinging indictment on the industry.

There are things that are right and there are things that are wrong. We could legalize and sell drugs from vending machines in public schools and that would bring in tons of profit. But we do not always do what is just based on dollars..... or at least we should consider not doing it.

[Hachimitsu]

Uh, I have only started to read this thread. I am not a gamer but I do admire gamers who find new or applicable talents with gaming. There really are. I usually look at the masquarade at sci conventions (yes I am geek). All those costumes in a masqurade are all made by the wearer. You know how many guys learn how to sew for a sake of a video game? Quite a few surprisingly. Also, it's not just sewing since they actually have to study pictures and design something to look similar (down to hand painting and embroidering to match a look).

But there is a flip side. Recently in Toronto 2 18 year old teens killed a taxi driver by racing down a major street. The poor man was 2 days away from gaining citizenship and was about to bring his wife over. In one of the teenagers vehicles the video game need for speed was found.
Linky
Recently their well off parents bailed them both out of jail.

I think there does need to be some form of regulation, but I also think video games when enjoyed responsibly can lead to positive hobbies and projects. ( I don't one can play a video game and cut patterns at the same time. )

[The Angel]

While I lack the time for a longer post, I'd just like to point out that the video game industry is self regulated, in precisely the same way the film industry is. Games in the US can be rated:

• E - suitable for Everyone. Analogous to a G rating.
  T - suitable only for Teenagers and older. Analogous to a PG-13 rating.
  M - suitable only for Mature people, above the age of 18. Analagous to an R rating.
  AO - suitable for Adults Only. Analagous to (you guessed it) NC-17.

Just like the MPAA ratings, these are entirely voluntary -- there is no legal restriction on the sale of AO games for minors, but most shops will refuse to do so.

In the UK game rating falls under the remit of the BBFC, so the game ratings are exactly the same as the film ratings.

The problem is that even with such a rating system, if a parent does not pay attention to the system there is nothing to stop them buying an adult rated game for the child. But is that a problem with the rating or the parent?

[Alatar]

The interesting thing here is that nobody talks about Manhunt. Manhunt is a game where you play a serial killer and hunt down your victims so you can garrotte them and urinate on their bodies. I'm not kidding.

The reason nobody is discussing that game is because it's a crap game and nobody played it. GTA, on the other hand, is a very good game. We may not like the content but the game itself is very good. To clarify, you don't have to like War to enjoy a war game. You don't have to play sport to enjoy a sports game. You don't have to enjoy or glorify violence to enjoy GTA. The majority of gamers can seperate fantasy from reality. Those that can't will have an equal problem with seperating fantasy from reality in Movies and TV also.

I suppose the question really is, how do we educate our kids such that these games do not appeal to them? Gaming companies will make what sells well. There have been numerous versions of GTA, but I never heard of a sequel to Manhunt.

[anthriel]

But is that a problem with the rating or the parent?

It's always the parent's fault.

We parents know that.

[sauronsfinger]

The Angel said

I'd just like to point out that the video game industry is self regulated, in precisely the same way the film industry is. Games in the US can be rated:

E - suitable for Everyone. Analogous to a G rating.
T - suitable only for Teenagers and older. Analogous to a PG-13 rating.
M - suitable only for Mature people, above the age of 18. Analagous to an R rating.
AO - suitable for Adults Only. Analagous to (you guessed it) NC-17.

Just like the MPAA ratings, these are entirely voluntary -- there is no legal restriction on the sale of AO games for minors, but most shops will refuse to do so.

Yes, I have heard this previously but thank you for pointing it out. My response to that is that a journey of a thousand miles does indeed begin with a single step. So the industry has taken this step. And they have a long way still to go. It is obviously not effective.

And yovargas did mention MANHUNT is a post last night.

GTA may be a best seller and bring tons of revenue into the industry but it is also a rallying point for industry and game critics. At what point do the over-all neagatives of the game begin to override the monetary gain for one company?

Are dollars going to be the only determining factor in this entire issue? Deeper question -- should they be?

[sauronsfinger]

Wilma
Thank you for the link to that tragic story. I found it interesting that many here have attempted to label this only as an American problem. The incident you linked to is in Canada.

Thanks again.

[Alatar]

That's pretty flimsy evidence in fairness. 2 guys were racing cars and they had a racing car game, so therefore the game is to blame? That's a hell of a stretch. Granted, it makes nice copy, but it would be thrown out of court in an instant! Isn't it more likely that two teenagers who like fast cars (and what teenager doesn't) would be attracted to a game that allows them to play out that fantasy in a safer way?

Incidentally, I only made the point that obesity seems to be a problem in the US. This has no relation to that point.

On a side note...

We don't get much snow and ice here in Ireland, and as a result I'm not used to driving in it. A couple of years ago we had a cold snap and it froze hard. As I came round a bend, doing fairly low speed, the back end of my car lost traction. I instantly steered into the skid and acccelerated out of it. This was pure reaction, no thought involved. It was only after the fact that I realised my reactions had been honed from playing Colin McRae Rally. Without the practice I got from playing that game I could have ended up with costly repairs, or possibly I may even have injured someone.

[The Angel]

I've just about said all that I care to say on this topic, so unless this discussion changes dramatically, I shall risk SF's ire and bow out of this thread after this post.

I do not propose anything because I am not in this industry and do not know it well enough to propose anything of substance. I would hope that people within the industry and people like yourself who are devoted gamers, come up with something that preserves your enjoyment of your entertainment and is socially responsible at the same time.

I outlined in my last post the measures the game industry itself has taken to try to prevent inappropriate getting into the hands of minors and then SF replied:

Yes, I have heard this previously but thank you for pointing it out. My response to that is that a journey of a thousand miles does indeed begin with a single step. So the industry has taken this step. And they have a long way still to go. It is obviously not effective.

Here I have to confess a misunderstanding. The game industry is, in exactly the same way as the film industry, slapping a big label on their product saying "Do not sell this to children!" If a retailer chooses to ignore that label and proceed to sell that product to a minor, I fail to see how the fault lies with the game industry. Could you perhaps clarify?

Two analogies occur to me here -- children getting into cinemas to see films rated for older people and minors buying alcohol. In both cases the fault is deemed to lie with the cinema or bar. Why is gaming so different? Are protests often directed at Budweiser and Miller due to under-age drinking in the US?

To summarize, if I may, the main arguments that we have seen so far in this thread;

Violent games lead to violent people.
Perhaps I wasn't specific enough when I discussed this before, so let me explicit now: There is no scientific consensus behind this theory whatsoever. There is no hard, statistical evidence proving this theory.. Yes, one can find studies where there appears to be a rough correlation, but likewise one can find studies where this no correlation. And as any good scientist knows -- correlation does not imply causality. To address TH's points earlier in this thread (which I neglected to do before, I'm sorry):

That's very true - but, as I said, the problem is simply that these things can't be proved without doubt.
Maybe rap music is harmful. Maybe The Driller Killer is harmful.
[...]
But proving this is (as I said before) like proving that CO2 emissions are the reason for the Greenhouse effect - if it's in someone's interest not to believe this, there is nothing irrefutable enough to change that.

I would venture to disagree. There is a far more prominent correlation between CO2 emissions and climate change than there is between violent games and violent people. And I stand by my statements about rap music and video nasties -- at some point I think we can step back and say "Enough people have been exposed to these things for enough time and there has been no negative effect." The Driller Killer did not lead to a rash of power drill wielding serial killers. Rap music is not brainwashing people into violent, misogynistic "gangstas". Yes, there is a good deal of crime in urban areas in the US, but I'd postulate that rap music and the crime are branches from the same root -- extreme poverty -- than cause and effect. A huge number of people who listen to rap are comfortable middle class kids. These kids are not turning to crime in significant numbers, why do you think that is?

Violent video games fall into the wrong (i.e. children's hands).
I addressed this above, but I'd just like to say that Anthriel, please don't think that I'm entirely blaming you, as a representative of parents everywhere for kids getting their hands on unsuitable games -- if a kid is allowed by the parent to buy a game and the retailer sells the kid an inappropriate game, I think the blame can be distributed amongst quite a few parties, including the retailer and the kid him or herself, for buying content that is clearly unsuitable for him. But I do think that parents can have more influence on their own children that just about anyone else, and they should use that influence, as good parents, like the ones posting in this thread, do.

Video games are addictive, and dangerous as a result.
As I said above, in the case of game addiction, the same kind of help given to other addicts can be provided. Certainly it would be a sign of responsibility for the game industries to donate to such programs, but I don't know how common it is for casinos to support gambling addiction rehab programs, or brewers and distillers to fund AA programs, so I think it's somewhat unfair to expect different standards from the game industry.

Video games are a wasteful, impractical pursuit in general.
And here we reach the end of the road. As has been frequently pointed out, they are no more wasteful and impractical than other pursuits that are widely acceptable. It seems to me that when all the arguments for and against have been made, video game detractors can just come back with "I just don't like 'em!" and those of us who think they have their good side are basically stuck. There's nothing we can do except civilly agree to disagree and respectfully ask that our rights to enjoy ourselves in the ways we choose are not trampled because of other peoples' prejudices, just as we would not trample on the rights of others to do likewise. Which is what I am doing now.

PS: I have ignored the GTA controversy, as I feel that GTA is no different from some music, some TV and some films. The glamorizing and acceptance of violence is a bizarre aspect of Western culture, but is a separate issue in it's own right.

PPS: Alatar is bang right in his post above.

[Jnyusa]

Haven't been into this thread since it started. Hope everyone's all right in here?

I'm not a gamer and see no particular use in them, but then, when I tried to play Super Mario Brothers on my daughters' first Nintendo I couldn't keep the little guys from falling off the cliff in level one. So it's probably a generational thing.

But generally I prefer that an industry self-regulate and I agree that labelling is an important first step. However, Angel you made two comments that struck me regarding the difference between Alcohol/Tobacco/Movies and Games:

The game industry is, in exactly the same way as the film industry, slapping a big label on their product saying "Do not sell this to children!" If a retailer chooses to ignore that label and proceed to sell that product to a minor, I fail to see how the fault lies with the game industry.

If the product is labelled for adults only, then the fault does not lie with the gaming industry. But in the case of movies the labels are enforced. At least I don't think that the movie theatres are complying voluntarily, because they are vigorous in their enforcement and that is not usually the case unless some punishment attaches.

Thinking back to the days before we got serious about cigarettes (to the tiny extent that has happened in the U.S.), stores would indeed wink at under-16 years olds who bought cigarettes ... and then at the under-18 years olds when the law changed ... until they started prosecuting the store owners. Now you have to show I.D. or gray hair to buy cigarettes.

I was carded for beer until I was nearly forty years old.

So when sf says that society as a whole has a stake in this issue and needs to provide regulation, I'm thinking that the best regulation they can provide is to criminalize and prosecute selling over-18 games to under-18 year old people. Presumably the rating is done by some independent industry body, as it is with movies. And it should also be as it is with cigarettes and alcohol - an adult who buys these things on behalf of children should also be prosecuted.

Are protests often directed at Budweiser and Miller due to under-age drinking in the US?

There is protest, because the beer companies advertise vigorously to young people. Most of us, I think, would like to see that stop; as it is now illegal to aim cigarette advertising at people too young to buy cigarettes legally. The tobacco companies did it, of course - future customers at stake - and the beer companies still do. My guess is that the gaming industry does as well.

Jn

[The Angel]

To briefly reply to Jny, I would agree that aiming advertising for anything intended for adults at minors is highly irresponsible and should have some degree of restriction placed on it.

However, my instincts were right about the MPAA ratings:

HOW THE RATING SYSTEM IS USED BY THEATER OWNERS AND VIDEO RETAILERS

Motion picture theater owners, who co-founded the rating system in 1968, were the first group in the entertainment industry to voluntarily enforce its guidelines. NATO estimates that the majority of the theater owners in the nation observe the rating system. In the mid 1980s as home video grew in popularity, video retailers joined theater owners in embracing the voluntary guidelines of the rating system. Parents who relied on the rating system found that the information provided by the rating classifications were equally helpful in home video. To facilitate its use, ratings are displayed on both the entire home entertainment package and the videocassettes and DVDs themselves.

The Video Software Dealers Association (VSDA), which is the major trade association for video retailers in the United States, has adopted a policy which strongly endorses the observance of the voluntary movie rating system by video retailers.

I would suspect they seem enforced because the distribution channels, in this case video shops and cinemas have learned that the value of self regulation. Now the video game distributors need to learn the same lesson, and, in fairness, most have.

[yovargas]

I'm pretty sure theaters follow the ratings voluntarily. If I'm right, I suspect the "punishment" is pissed off parents.

[Jnyusa]

The video store owners are not as dilligent ... and there are some problems with edited x-rated material being re-inserted into the videos of r-rated films without the rating being changed appropriately. But you're right that the only enforcement done in that area is by angry parents. I objected to a film's rating at a video store once and they sent me straight to the distributor.

There was some attempted legislation about this, but I've forgotten the details now and I don't believe it was ever passed.

Personally, I would like to see the ratings enforced as strenuously as possible.

Jn

[yovargas]

Personally, I would like to see the ratings enforced as strenuously as possible.

Wouldn't that mean requiring the MPAA's and ESRB's judgements to be legally binding? I'm not at all comfortable with that. (Many people disagree with their methods and they can often seem arbitrary or biased).