I do think violent video games are bad for kids

Dis · December 22, 2002, 04:38

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/fun.gam...ngs/index.html

Now the argument I usually hear is I played violent video games as a kid and I turned out Okay. Well Apolyton represents a minority of the population- specifically the american population where we have easy access to guns. When we were kids (or at least old folks like me) we didn't have violent video games. Games like Bard's Tale only showed text that you did 86 damage to a monster with Thor's hammer and he died. You didn't actually see it. In Autoduel you could attack other cars, but you saw no blood.

Moving on to more recent times even games like X-com really didn't have realistic violence. Doom was probably the first in this regard. But at least they were monsters and not humans being killed.

In any case I think violent video games are OK for kids over age 14. But kids 13 and under should not be playing them for the most part.

Why is it stores still sell games to children despite the warnings?

Skanky Burns · December 22, 2002, 04:44

It can be a good way to release stress / built - up anger, without the need to actually hurt someone else irl.
The warnings are there so parents don't sure the game publisher, or to allow parents to make a decision on games they will allow their children to play, depending on your point of view.

Harry Seldon · December 22, 2002, 04:47

If a kid can understand the problems with violence in society, I say let 'em have it. I've played violent video games and I've never had the inclination to pick up a gun and start shooting people.

Dis · December 22, 2002, 04:52

what stress do kids have? I never had any stress as a kid. Being a kid was easy.

As an adult I can feel the need to blow away a few bad guys, but not as a 10 year old kid.

spartak · December 22, 2002, 04:52

Good.

Ming · December 22, 2002, 06:19

When we were little kids, and we didn't have video games, we played war and other violent make believe games. It's a part of growing up. If video games made people violent, everybody would be a mass murderer. It's not the games...

Skanky Burns · December 22, 2002, 06:27

You didn't go to school, Dissident?

School is generally stressful for children at the time. Not as stressful as everyday adult life, but its still there.

Adagio · December 22, 2002, 06:36

I'd say it has little negative impact, but only for few people. It doesn't change much for the general player, but there's still a few people out there, who has the risk to "learn" from games...

But for me, it had no impact... but that might be because I don't play many violence games... I play SimCity type games, but I haven't grown up to became mayor (Is that the right word?) for a city yet

Bereta_Eder · December 22, 2002, 06:42

negative impact if they isolate kids (like with everything that isolates kids)

lets face it the days of the little devils playing all together in the plaza is less and less happening.

as long as parents can keep their kids away from monitors, the more the better

but if they are in front of them they might as well play with a friend

Traianvs · December 22, 2002, 08:21

Well, isolated kids now have a nice place to have fun: computer

I can't imagine how boring life must have been 50 years ago if I were an isolated kid (some ppl just have lesser social capabilities than others!)

I can't imagine hanging around all day behind my desk, studying circa 10-12 hours a day... I've got trouble already to study for more than 2 hours, and that's in exam period

Bereta_Eder · December 22, 2002, 08:24

yep but now some kids instead of going out and play they stay inside and stick their noses to the monitor....

whereas if there wasn't a PC or a PS2 they would get out and play...

Of course if a kid was to be isolated for whatever reason then I agree with you

Traianvs · December 22, 2002, 08:42

Nah man, in my younger (uh-uh) days nintendo and that sort of stuff was totally "in" already, and we didn't stay home for that...

Maybe it is so that kids now are more spoiled than before, they get more toys etc, so kids went out to play because there wasn't anything fun at home...

I also find that more really young kids get mature earlier! Well not mature, but they give the impression... Parents dress them like 17 year olds and all... THeir hair nicely done with gel etc, and also, I find that kids are more arrogant than they used to be!! Maybe that's simply an impression but well... when i see all those kids with €500 nokia mobile phones... ****!

There are already toys based on mobile phones: fake ones so 7 year olds already get addicted to it

it's all the Toy Developers' fault!!!

Bereta_Eder · December 22, 2002, 08:52

I totally agree with that arrogant part!
Plus if they don't have the latest mobile phone model, they feel "deprived".

But on the nintendo part I don't know...

PCs and PS2s are much more addictive I'd think.

And kids do stay inside and play alone whereas they could join the local junior football team at their municipality or something.

The second is definitely more healthy if you ask me. But it also weights on the parents I think.

Traianvs · December 22, 2002, 09:02

Quote:

PCs and PS2s are much more addictive I'd think.

Yes but 10-12 years ago that was THE gaming console

I don't know whether people do less sports now than before... I did a big deal of it anyway, and all my friends as well, i can't imagine it declining in such a short notice... People actually have more money to have their kids do things

(my spoiled nephew does carting (!! mucho dinero !!) and plays hockey (it's a rich ppl's sport...not ice-hockey, that's the exact opposite

) - he's 10
Of course, he is hyperactive and it's hard to handle him so it's easier to give him what he wants

)

General Ludd · December 22, 2002, 10:01

I wouldn't say that it is a negative impact, just a negative influence.

That is, playing mortal Kombat isn't going to turn a kid into a serial killer, but it might turn him into a brat. Although, it might turn an already troubled kid into a serial killer.

And I don't think that it is neccisarily the violence that does it, more of the mentality that comes along with that sort of game. I mean, look at Counter-Strike, 99% of the people who play it are a bunch of terminally stressed out brats. On the other hand, a game with more subtle and "easy-going" violence - Tropico, for instance - isn't going to have an effect on anyone...

...unless they are already deeply disturbed - Fez, for instance.

loinburger · December 22, 2002, 11:33

I didn't play many video games growing up (especially until Wolfenstein came out), and the ones I did play weren't particularly realistic (Raid Over Moscow never gave me the urge to, say, bomb Moscow, because I realized that Moscow probably wasn't quite that pixellated in real life).

The game I played most often growing up was "Guns." It consisted of me and some of the other neighborhood kids having mock wars with plastic guns. The typical penalty for being shot was that you'd be frozen for twenty seconds, which gave a major tactical advantage to the other side. The second most popular game was "G.I. Joe," in which me and the other neighborhood kids would set up mock battles with our G.I. Joe figures, vehicles, and playsets (or "fortresses").

In other words, I didn't need video games to play ultra-violent games as a kid. All I needed was my imagination. If you'd taken away my plastic guns and my plastic G.I. Joe's in order to "help" me, then I'd probably have whittled my own gun out of wood and gone right back to playing Guns.

Giancarlo · December 22, 2002, 11:37

I am a teenager, and I play video games. Got a problem with that? I like Allied Assault where i can drive a tank through Berlin and blow up other things.

So what?

For kids who can't make the difference between reality and fantasy, shouldn't be playing any games. Period.

Kids younger my age can also play them if they know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Urban Ranger · December 22, 2002, 12:34

Gotta be bad, look at Fez.

Odin · December 22, 2002, 12:48

Video Games are good for children because it builds thier eye-hand coordination. I think kids can play violent games if the storyline gives a realistic reason for the violence. Wolfenstien 3-D, the origional 1st person shooter has you as a POW in Nazi prison. you have a reason to shoot those soldiers. In Grand theft Auto you are killing for the fun of it and for criminal reasons, thats why that game is bad.

Jaguar · December 22, 2002, 12:51

Video games can't cause violence by themselves. But they help.

VJ · December 22, 2002, 13:27

Depends, how do you define 'violent'? Playing Serious Sam = Wasted time = Negative impact.
Playing MOO2 = Positive impact. IMHO.

Kontiki · December 22, 2002, 13:34

I'd say a slight negative impact, only because young children are very impressionable and anything that is especially violent can have some negative consequences. However, this should be mitigated by proper parenting and a decent education, whereby kids learn that the computer violence isn't real and shouldn't be imitated in real life. Unfortunately, what should happen doesn't always occur.

Dis · December 22, 2002, 14:26

There was a day when sports improved hand-eye coordination.

If computer games did that, why are computer geeks so uncoordinated?

And again I stress the difference between tennagers and children. As a teen I didn't want to be called a child, and you shouldn't call them children either.

A 7 year old kid playing Soldier of Fortune2 I have problems with. Well really I have problems with their parents not the kid. Parents just don't raise their children properly.

Obviously I hate to see the goverment involved. The goverment sucks!

:

. I wish parents would take the time to learn what kinds of games their kids are playing and explain to them that in real life that is not acceptable beharviour etc.etc.

Sava · December 22, 2002, 14:32

There's not a damn shred of proof that says video games make people violent. In fact, there's about ten thousand years of human history that say humans are violent regardless of video games.

It's the parents' responsiblity to say what their kids can or can't do. These stupid social conservatives have no right playing parent to the entire country.

Actually, I think its good to expose children to the reality of violence and sex. That way they are used to it and not surprised or shocked by things that they learn in adulthood. Sheltering children from reality is not good. That's why so many Americans are pounding the war drums. They don't understand the reality of war and think that its clean and simple. That's why veterans and those who know the horrors of war are the ones who don't want to jump into such matters.

Being exposed to the horrors of violence and the reality of sex gives people a greater appreciation of the importance and seriousness of both. If you want to prevent your kids from playing violent games, that's fine... you do that. But the government does not have the right interfere in this matter.

Giancarlo · December 22, 2002, 14:45

This is one of the few times I have to agree with Sava.

A video game does not make people violent.

I have seen violence in the streets before... I have watched the news and saw people get shot to death by the police here a year ago when De La Rua was thrown out of office... the reality is best not to be hidden because the future generations will not learn why it is bad.

Video games should not be banned or even censored.

Maybe if parents don't want their kids to play violent games, they should talk with the kids about the reality instead of covering what it really is.

Dis · December 22, 2002, 14:48

actually there is evidence that says violent video games affect kids.

Giancarlo · December 22, 2002, 14:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
actually there is evidence that says violent video games affect kids.

That evidence doesn't prove anything. Infact I wouldn't even call it evidence, none less than an assumptions done by some watchdog group.

Shi Huangdi · December 22, 2002, 15:35

I think Fez is a good example of the dangers of what violent video games can do to children.

SKILORD · December 22, 2002, 17:06

This poll is posted on a fansite for a videogame.

GePap · December 22, 2002, 17:10

A few things: the type of violence in the game matters: realism increases the effects on the psyche. In MOO2, in theory, I could blow up entire planets and commit mass genocide, but the violence is very abstracted, and the fact is that i will never have the ability to control a multi-system star empire and the ability to play out the game. Some of the current class of video games feature explicit vilence of the 'realistic sort', such as Grand Theft Auto 3 or Vice city where you commit theft, rae, murder and so forth.

Now, I think that console games are getting more violent because the demographics have changed and the playing audience is now mostly men in their 20's, not little kids, so it makes bussiness sense to make more adult games. That stores fail to warn parents is not the fault of game makers, but stores, which have a reason to seel to kids, profit.

Now, as for the effects of violent games. By themselves they have no effect, I believe. But they can have a cumulitive effect on children with other problems at home and at school. They help fill voids left by the lack of better role models from parents and educators. Which means that the 'solution' lies not with confronting the video games but presenting positive influences.