The Controversy Of Violent Video Games

Video games and their impacts have been hotly debated for a number of years, particularly violent video games. Games such as Grand Theft Auto appear to promote everything from carjacking to randomly murdering an innocent bystander just because you can, sparking debate that seems to renew itself every time a new game is released in the series. The most general form of this argument simply asks if video games are good or bad for their players. On one side, there is the belief that video games, and particularly those that are violent, are bad, especially for children. On the other, it is believed that video games are relatively harmless in the long run, and potentially even beneficial. The importance

The main argument of this article is that video games have a direct link to short term and long term aggression. The author presents this argument by providing studies from peer reviewed articles that all conclude that video games do cause an increase of aggression. The main point of this article is to answer the question, “Do violent video games lead to aggression.” The article is about the effects of violent video games leading to aggression. The author uses recent examples, like the Sandy Hook and Washington Navy Yard shooting. In both of these examples, the author cites that both shooters had a history with playing violent video games. The author uses a study which selected individuals to play violent video games for a certain period of time. The study would then compare the results to a group who played non-violent video games. The study concluded that violent video games cause a direct link in aggression due to humans reenacting the actions the characters within the video games perform.

In society, video games have been criticized as an inducer for violent in children. The ongoing debate instigates research on the correlation between video games and violence. In Craig Anderson’s article, “Violent Video Games and Other Media Violence, Part II”, the author criticizes the opposing side and states that violence in media reflects violent behaviors in children. John Glynn’s article, “Guns and Games”, reasons on the benefits of video games and points out the true perpetrator for violent behaviors of youth in the United States to be the gun culture.; While Glynn’s article contains some form of pathos, there is a lack of pathos in Anderson’s. Both articles utilize logos and ethos. However, Glynn offers a more well-rounded argument to support that video games are beneficial and are not the true cause of aggression in children.

Are violent video games directly correlated to teen violence? This is the burning question many researchers are dedicated to answering. The common form of the question is “Is the increase in violence in games creating killer kids?” The simple answer is no. Instead the opposite has occurred, as games became more violent, the players became calmer. The games create a “safe” outlet for any anger or angst that young people possess. Crime rates in the teen population have lowered and violent teens admit to having little to no interest in violent video games. The games that most people fear are destroying the youth may actually be one of the things helping them grow and become “normal” members in society.

Does playing a video game make you prone to commit real-life violence? This question has been an issue since the very early 90's when violent games like Doom and Wolfenstein were released, but only in the last half a decade or so (mainly since the incident at Columbine, Colorado, 1999 – when it was revealed that the teenage shooters were avid video game players) has it really come to the majority's attention. The key issue that both sides can't agree on is whether people should be allowed to play violent games or not. I think both sides agree that extremely violent video games should not be played by young children, who have a harder time separating reality from fiction; also, the media does indeed only report one side of the

Lately, it seems that there has been an abundance of horrible mass shootings and brutal violence in our world. In today’s seemingly dangerous world, parents are yearning to protect their children from getting involved in these savage crimes. Now, a great deal of people, especially parents, accuse violent video games as the cause of this growing epidemic. The controversy of video game induced violence has a long history, but it didn’t appear in the spotlight until the disturbing Columbine shooting in 1999, when the gunmen were said to have been addicted to violent video games. Since 1999, there have been more mass shootings and vicious crimes that have been accursed on video games. While siding with the belief that video games create violence

Violent video games have been being created since the first console. Yet only recently have we been blaming them for aggression in the player. We as humans have a tendency to blame our violent behavior on other things rather thin ourselves. Now aggression is being defined in many ways in this situation but mainly people point to the anger that’s brought out in the real world after the game or maybe it’s the gamers’ tendency to have outburst will playing the game. Both these thing show anger but do they really show that the game is what caused it. This same situation could be put in the place of me eating a potato and getting angry right after is it really the potatoes fault no.

In recent years, we have seen many video games criticized and bashed in the public eye for their disputable content. However, the game industry has been subjected to controversy since the creation of its first adult themed games such as Death Race 1976 or Custer 's Revenge 1982. These two graphics limited games have introduced video game violence to the public and since then debate about morals and ethics of video games evolved over the years together with the game experience thanks to modern technologies. Violence is one aspect of many that can cause great controversy that’s why it is important to create a suitable ethical, cultural and legal context as it can determine its failure or its success. In this paper, I will present an example

The violent video game controversy never ends, and even if it does, the monster in the console will awaken and run amok swinging its pendulum to hypnotize and gain control over the minds of kids, teens, and most adults alike to become aggressive, rabid animals. But you can tame it. There is a way to control the one that roams the box.

There has been a long-standing debate that violent video games are harmful to the rising generations. The article that was selected to be critiqued is, “Are Violent Video Games Harmful to Children and Adolescents?”. The purpose of this paper is to analyze and critique the research methods and conclusions included by the author of the article.

The issue of video game violence seems to be a hot topic right now after several shootings have occurred and made a connection to the shooters being video gamers. In looking at past research it is apparent that there seems to large amounts of research that contradict one work to another. Although I would have been interested in conducting a poll of the publics opinion regarding the use of violent video games and their connection to mass shootings I was not able to conduct the research. However, for this paper I chose to conduct a literature analysis to see what research has been conducted and to seek out gaps and themes in this research.

One characteristic that distinguishes video games from other forms of media outlets is that it allows players to feel apart of the video game world. In other words, “active participation of videogames increase the likelihood that one will learn from the video game due to greater identification and immersion”(Morawitz).

As the video games industry grows larger in popularity by the day, it becomes a subject of objection more and more and people split into two teams as a result. On the first hand, a group claims that video games are harmful and should be banned because of their connection with aggression, while on the other hand, a group believes that video games have a positive impact on young people. An article titled” Why We Need Violent Video Games” was written by Ethan Gilsdorf in order to persuade readers that violent video games are beneficial and show the flaws in the opposing group’s arguments. The author states that virtual games have considerable advantages while responding to some of the arguments that are against the violent video games industry by comparing the results between violent video game killings and actual real life massacres. The text shows the perspective of those who support the virtual violent games industry by presenting supporting examples and comparisons that offer another viewing angle on the issue. Overall, the article introduces the author’s way of thinking about violent video games and protests against some of the counter arguments in addition to offering solutions to

The evolution of video games has taken a drastic change since the 1970’s when video games were first introduced. Since then every decade video games have become more violent in nature with strong language and realistic to suit society today. Craig Anderson states that with more violence in video games they would sell better than games with less violence (Anderson, Gentile, and Beckley pg.5). Violent video games really became popular when the first person shooter games were invented so that we could see through the eyes of the player, as if we were really experiencing it. Society wanted better graphics and games as time went on new technology was invented and society matured in electronics. This meant that for game creators would have to come up with something better selling than the last. Creators would make the games more violent and more realistic each time so that way they can keep the interest of their consumers. Each game would increase in blood or gore slowly, but what really got consumers to buy their games would be the update of graphics in the consoles or games. This is due to the drastic changing of technology and the maturing of consumers wanting better and newer violent video games. Violent video games can cause children to behave violently if not correctly supervised.

Playing video games does not cause violent behavior. Don’t get me wrong, some video games show horrific acts of violence. “A recent survey found that 92 percent of U.S. kids--ages 2 to 17--play video games, and their parents bought 225 million of them last year to the tune of $6.4 billion.” (Sider 79).What’s here to argue is that violent video games do not cause violence among children, but the blame for violence should be on the individual and people who should have taught the individual better. If kids are not able to see the difference between reality and fantasy, then they really can’t be blamed for committing acts they see in a game and then imitating, not fully understanding the consequences of doing it in the real world.