I came across this topic in my english textbook, and it got me thinking. I've read about it a bit and it seems that while some are against this statement, research has proven it to be true. Right now, the results are 50/50 and there is no precise answer to the question.

So what do you think: does playing violent games influence people to become more aggressive?

The video games were so much better before then. How could we have ever performed World War I without Grand Theft: Trench Warfare?

I don't think so, at least, not in my experience. You'd have to be pretty mentally unstable to go out and hurt people in real life in the first place. "Violent video games" to me, is just an excuse. And I don't think video games desensitize you, either. I've watched a lot of gory shows and played gory video games, but the idea of seeing an actual person killed makes me shudder.

There's a difference between killing a made up character that isn't real and killing someone who's an actual person with a family, friends, and a life's goal.

If anything, violent video games have helped me vent my anger.

Oh this discussion again.

I think we had this discussion some time ago. I said my opinion there and will say it now: no.
Violence has always existed, even before video games existed (*shock*), even before books existed, etc. It has always been there as a part of humankind.
People who don't have problems telling the difference between reality and fictions (be it video games, films, books, etc.) will not become violent just because they play shooting games.
I'm way more concerned about the exposure kids have to real violence than about their exposure to fictional violence, which has been proven as quite fascinating for most people when they know it's fake.

To be brutally honest.. No I think that research is total bull, no offense it's just I think unless you are mentally unstable, violet games can help in a way, people take out their anger on little pixies and fictional characters, rather then taking it out on a real living and breathing creature or person. Sometimes I play GTA when I am angry, and it helps takes some of that off, but I never have or will get violet urges to go kill people (Sure, sometimes want to punch anyone but I hardly, and really doubt there isn't one single person, in all of humanity, in all of their lives that just once, wanted to punch someone for their actions, words or personality).

People need to stop blaming games on everything, hoping that instead of blaming the person's actions, the game gets blamed and has to be ruined for the rest of us who wouldn't go on a murder rampage because we did in Liberty City of GTA..

I think it's the other way round - violent society leads to violent video games.

Yes, I think it can. If someone is already a sociopath and unable to empathize with others, a violent video game could very well give this individual ideas that he may very well attempt to act out in order to bring the thrill and rush he experiences in the game, into real life. The game series I've seen blamed most often is GTA, and sure enough, if you search for the phrase, "blamed grand theft auto", you get 9,110 hits. In several articles, the perp himself blamed the game. However, if it wasn't GTA, it would be another game, or TV show, movie, book, friend, or whatever.

Fortunately, the majority of people aren't sociopaths and do empathize with others, so I don't believe the majority of people can be influenced by violence in video games.

People were all ready violent before video games came into existence. So, no, games aren't to blame. There were school shootings before violent games. Kids were killing each other long before. The only difference is that then they were forced to blame those responsible.

Does not compute.


Said perp generally has very good motivation to try taking some of the blame off himself. (And those reasons generally aren't 'for the betterment of psychological understanding.')


If they were already planning on being violent-- or at least had the capacity and interest to become so, if not consciously "planning" anything-- does it really matter if they decide to copy a scene from a book/movie/video game instead of devise their own attack? That's not the video game causing violence; that's the video game inspiring the direction of violence that, arguably, was inevitable.

---
I'll also point out the example of The Sims Online. Can't be more peaceful than a Sims game, right? No murder, sex generally requires love, etc. And yet people still managed to turn it into a weird mafia-style protection racket and prostitution ring.

I do'nt think that games induce violence even if they do have violence as I play violent games and I am not one of those murderer children. Most children who murder people have there murder blamed on games they've played. It is the person who plays them as it is them that do it not some game.

While I generally agree with your overall point, this in particular is a fallacy. If the claim were "smart people are more likely to enjoy ice cream," stating that you didn't like ice cream but did well in school (or vice versa...though I don't know who would come right out and say they were an ice cream-loving dummy...) doesn't refute the overall trend seen across the group. You'd just be an outlier. Of course, if it then turns out that actually there are many, many "outliers," then it gets interesting again (and I'd say that's the case regarding violent video games, where most people's testable aggression is measured not in RL murders but, e.g. aggressive driving).

I talked adout this for my corsework in BTEC ICT along with other socail impacts of games and conversations with my father adout it. These days many people blame games or other forms of computer realted stuff for murders or other cases like a mother letting her young child drowned in the bath while she did stuff on face book.

The simple point is, people weren't also "also" violent before "the time period of video games" - as a race we were much more violent. Anyone who thinks the past was this polite, well behaved place just isn't paying attention or getting the big picture. Human beings are hyper aggressive almost by default - it's possibly why we have social structures and language and video games in the first place. Without these sorts of demonstrations of violence sans violence and aggression, we might even just be another extinct ape that picked up a stick and torched out in magnificent fashion. I have alternatives to actual violence available to me that other animals don't, and as a society we're continually inventing more alternatives that satisfy these sorts of base instinctual urges (whether it's porn or stuffing our faces with pie, or jet skies and base jumping) in ways that aren't actually beating the crap out of each other and engaging in serial rape or warfare.

Now, if you reject that (which is pretty much to reject history and biology in my opinion) you might imagine that we're nothing but a bundle of learned behaviors, and absent these teaching tools of aggression I can see how you might propose that we'd all be peacenik kumbayah sorts that sit around engaging in entirely polite discussions all day or something. Which ignores how utterly hostile language can be too, right?

Nearly everyone have has violent thoughts that are not caused by playing games. I think that it is all depedent on the player than the game wither they do become violent things and not the game they play.

Yes, but the original question was does it influence the violence, not does it cause it. I believe video games can influence it, in that they use it for ideas and then subsequently blame it. I wasn't saying video games, books, movies, etc. cause the violence. Lack of empathy, a sociopathic personality, and a need for gratification through thrill-seeking behavior would be the cause.

Imho pc games can influence the violence.

For example it influences MY violence in a *shock* POSITIVE way. When I'm angry, I'll start Assassins Creed, steel from passers-by, kill some of my opponents, climb the houses and let my emotions go. The scenery usually calms me down sooner or later - and I'm "reasonable" (as reasonable as a female can get) again.

Imho a definitively better way, than throwing dishes at my fiancee.

Same but I use different games to get rid of my anger such as skyrim or sims.

The game doesn't matter, as long as the output is _relaxation_. That's what games should be for, right?

Games can be for anything that any other form of communication or art is "for". There's no one way, no proper form, for how people interpret games. Theoretically a game can make you feel like any other conversation you might have, any other form of art might make you experience.

Video Games are just another one of society's scapegoats. People will blame all their violent problems on Video Games, despite the fact that they know nothing about the video game they're questioning.

Violent videogames will make you violent as much as Skyrim made me the Dragonborn.

It's more like - video games allow people to demonstrate that they're violent in the same way not punching people in the face, instead saying hello to them, demonstrates that people are peaceful. It's communicative, not provoking action; unless the argument is that people will fight over stupid things they say to each other/games they play... which has always been true.

Maybe violent video games do not lead to violence, but does it make one less sensitive? What I'm getting at is, does seeing violent images frequently, through a video games or other visual media, make it seem more acceptable and normal? I was shocked when viewing The Hunger Games in an audience of teens who laughed when bad things happened to the characters.

I think it might be depending on the person consuming the media.

In my case: I couldn't finish watching Disneys "The Black Cauldron" and still can't, cos it's too dark, too vivid. After reading a wikia article about the Hunger games I realized: Not going to read the book, not going to watch the movie, cos I'll sooner or later throw up. I generally don't watch horror movies, thrillers and the likes - I do not read them either, cos they all make me sick. Videos with real people (non-animated-stuff) looks too much like reality and I struggle with telling my brains "it's only a movie". With books, well, same dilemma, cos through reading I automatically visualize and at certain stuff it's simply too much for me to cope.

Video games usually are pixelated enough for me to be easily reckognized as "non-reality". The quality in Assassins Creed might be good, but not good enough to scare me. The setting is long long in the past, cos for most scenes the nowerdays folks aren't involved. Due to these two factors, playing this game, no matter how violent it is in-between does not hurt me / scare me or make me more violent.

Some people can't differ between game and reality anymore, but I wouldn't blame the game / game designers, but the whole environment of that person plus the person itself. There are more options to spend a day than just gaming. And if you can't divide reality from in-game anymore, therapy can help.

Whoever now might reckognize: This chick suggests therapy for the gamers who can't keep rl from in-game, but what about herself? Well, I love my therapist, I've learned quite some new stuff with her - and I was relieved when she agreed, that AC does in no way make me more violent. I've been working with her for years, so I guess she's able to judge well enough. ;P