I'm not a gamer but I caould see such games can provide entertainment. Some of my wonkier colleagues like to play the non-video wargames and such games aren't just entertainment but educational.
As with most things, one has to have the maturity to understand games are just that--games. They don't represent reality.
think about it.
Take the board game "Monopoly." We've all played it; the object of the game isn't just to accrue wealth and property--it is to financially destroy your fellow players. In the real world, it doesn't work for a number of reasons. First, it's against the law. Second, by wiping out everyone financially, you wind up hurting your own interests.
It's NOT just fantasy. There has long been a specific matrix for a successful game. It includes leveling achievements, resource gathering and character/equipment modification. While there is certainly a fantasy element the fantasy itself is player specific. Role playing games confer benefit to killing but also to "questing" and map exploring, while first person shooters often just use kill counts. The difference is the how the player specifically wants to arrive at the same destination (the level up, the modification allowance or resource).
Thinking that there is one and only one reason people play any type of game denies the fact that both Sony and Microsoft (Playstation and X-Box, respectively) have paid a lot of money for studies that have led them and their partners to create more interesting and, regrettably, addicting games.
B8ovin, Thanks for you thoughtful and informative comment. I see what you mean that there's no one-size-fits-all in the gaming world.
What I'm curious about, I guess, and even suggesting, is that some of the older teenagers and young adults who play first-person shooting games are getting off on the violence, the idea of violence, the fantasy of violence. Then, I wonder how this is reflected in their real lives, in such areas as road rage, bullying and domestic violence.
Shooter/war games are alluring because guns and explosions are fun. And when you lack the money, space, and/or freedom to shoot and blow things up in the real world, the virtual world is the next best thing.
Why do you think the exposure of children to violent images training them to kill with body count as a score is a joke? I sure do not.
That's the difference between you and me. I believe that our culture and violent society is breeding killers while you believe the gun is a magical device that causes people to want to kill.
"What I'm curious about, I guess, and even suggesting, is that some of the older teenagers and young adults who play first-person shooting games are getting off on the violence, the idea of violence, the fantasy of violence. Then, I wonder how this is reflected in their real lives, in such areas as road rage, bullying and domestic violence."
Yes but it is starting much younger than older teen and young adult. Increased exposure to violence in media has been numbing children to violence and some of these games even train them.
These types of games are neat for adults and can be argued that they are even good training--for adults, not little children.
They need a new tagline:
ReplyDelete"For those of us who aren't allowed to shoot everbody we hate--YET!"
I'm not a gamer but I caould see such games can provide entertainment. Some of my wonkier colleagues like to play the non-video wargames and such games aren't just entertainment but educational.
ReplyDeleteAs with most things, one has to have the maturity to understand games are just that--games. They don't represent reality.
think about it.
Take the board game "Monopoly." We've all played it; the object of the game isn't just to accrue wealth and property--it is to financially destroy your fellow players. In the real world, it doesn't work for a number of reasons. First, it's against the law. Second, by wiping out everyone financially, you wind up hurting your own interests.
It's NOT just fantasy. There has long been a specific matrix for a successful game. It includes leveling achievements, resource gathering and character/equipment modification. While there is certainly a fantasy element the fantasy itself is player specific. Role playing games confer benefit to killing but also to "questing" and map exploring, while first person shooters often just use kill counts. The difference is the how the player specifically wants to arrive at the same destination (the level up, the modification allowance or resource).
ReplyDeleteThinking that there is one and only one reason people play any type of game denies the fact that both Sony and Microsoft (Playstation and X-Box, respectively) have paid a lot of money for studies that have led them and their partners to create more interesting and, regrettably, addicting games.
I think these types of violent video games are bad for children and should be better restricted by parents.
ReplyDeleteFWM, was that a joke?
ReplyDeleteB8ovin, Thanks for you thoughtful and informative comment. I see what you mean that there's no one-size-fits-all in the gaming world.
What I'm curious about, I guess, and even suggesting, is that some of the older teenagers and young adults who play first-person shooting games are getting off on the violence, the idea of violence, the fantasy of violence. Then, I wonder how this is reflected in their real lives, in such areas as road rage, bullying and domestic violence.
Shooter/war games are alluring because guns and explosions are fun. And when you lack the money, space, and/or freedom to shoot and blow things up in the real world, the virtual world is the next best thing.
ReplyDeleteMikeB,
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think the exposure of children to violent images training them to kill with body count as a score is a joke? I sure do not.
That's the difference between you and me. I believe that our culture and violent society is breeding killers while you believe the gun is a magical device that causes people to want to kill.
"What I'm curious about, I guess, and even suggesting, is that some of the older teenagers and young adults who play first-person shooting games are getting off on the violence, the idea of violence, the fantasy of violence. Then, I wonder how this is reflected in their real lives, in such areas as road rage, bullying and domestic violence."
ReplyDeleteYes but it is starting much younger than older teen and young adult. Increased exposure to violence in media has been numbing children to violence and some of these games even train them.
These types of games are neat for adults and can be argued that they are even good training--for adults, not little children.
FWM, You said that's the difference between you and me, but actually this is something we agree on. Violent video games are not good for kids.
ReplyDelete