Violence in Games

In the email below, the issue to which I was speaking was violence in computer gaming, specifically in “first-person shooters” of which I had been such a fan. When the Columbine high-school shootings occurred, many fingers were pointed at the gaming industry, with id software’s Doom being the scapegoat. In a way that I found strikingly similar to the defense I made of Dungeons and Dragons all those years ago, the “gaming community” raged at the press for inferring that their harmless pastime could be in any way related to what happened.

And then we have video clips where the killers made overt references to how their bombing and shooting spree was going to be “just like <censored> Doom!”

Oops.

Time for some more mature analysis than to just say “No way,” and point a finger at the killers’ parents.

So I tried to make some points about how the games cannot be held harmless, but that it was incumbent upon all of us who might like to play them to determine for ourselves, critically and honestly, if they were “good” for us. Because, let’s face it, they are not for children.

Someone had written into Blue’s News saying that they were initially disturbed at the groanings that the tortured Marines made in Quake II. He then went on to say that that reaction was basically foolish, and that we should all get over it. Well, it bothered me too, and my wife was so bothered by it that I would wear headphones when I played the game lest she hear it. It was sick. Plain and simple. I maintain that there’s no arguing against the fact that that sort of thing does affect people who play the game, and that that effect is negative.

That said, I also say that adults who choose to play the game are free to do so. I turn off the horrible gore. That’s my prerogative. I like to have fun with my friends over the LAN, and it is fun. I get to decide that the fun I have with my friends outweighs the violence in the game. But even as I write this, I wonder: will that always be the case? I don’t know. Hasbro has released an Unreal Tournament total conversion called Nerf Arena. Instead of blowing people to bits, you hit them with Nerf darts. That seems pretty cool, actually…

On a school bus with a shotgun?!?!
From: David Krider

No way. I won’t forget it. This is extremely relevant. I had the same experience with Quake II (in reaction to the Marines being tortured.) Furthermore, my wife didn’t even want me to play the game anymore as it disturbed her so much. Admittedly, she is extremely sensitive to torture in “entertainment.” We watched the first part of some popular video release not long ago and shut it off after a couple minutes because there was graphic torture in the scene. Mind you this movie was rated PG-13, and this guy is being drugged and dunked in water (somehow Captain Picard springs to mind though I can’t remember the title.) [Ed. note: Conspiracy Theory.] We thought about it a minute, then turned it back on, fast-forwarded the section (satisfied to skip that part’s dubious additions to the plot) and watched the rest of the movie.

It was a stupid movie. The rest of it was commensurately violent and useless. Whatever happened to entertainment that wasn’t grotesque, grisly, or vulgar? Star Wars is a great example of good entertainment which relies on a story, not violence, though action is certainly a (central) part of the film. Why must the trend be towards graphic realism in the case of killing? There was an incredible amount of time given to making Quake II’s deaths messy. Was that really necessary? How many of us would shut that off in favor of the framerate boost? How many of us would sleep better at night after an 8 hour LAN party if we could? I could. You know why? Because it IS disturbing, and it SHOULD be.

Seeing people’s entrails splattered across a Q2 level isn’t in our natural frames of reference, and I maintain that causing it to be DOES desensitize us to violence. Completely idiotic and brutal crimes are now being committed for the sake of nothing more than convenience. Can anyone honestly say that they don’t think that the increase in the graphical depiction of violence in the media (including video games) doesn’t have something to do with that? Bottom line: what’s to be done? Give me the option to turn off the unnecessary visuals in Quake III, like I could do in Duke Nukem. You know, shooting creatures in Unreal is not bad. There’s a little blood, and they fall over. But when you can blow them to bits, then blow the bits into smaller bits, that’s excessive.

Understand that I know some people want that. That’s fine. I may want to see it myself once or twice. But… You know you’ve had too much Quake II when you have dreams of blowing people away on a school bus point blank with a shotgun. I have. Mind you, they were all smiling and we were having a great time, but doesn’t that disturb the rest of you as well as me? I laid off for awhile and my dreams cleared up. Doesn’t that tell us a little something about the effects of the game? Now I simply don’t play the game that much. The problem is that Quake III, which I am eagerly awaiting, will focus on making the characters MUCH more realistic, to the point of being able to scan in, and paste onto the models, your very own skin. Now how disturbing will it be to blow your friends to bits on the network? Say what you will: your mind is in there watching and reacting regardless.

The preceeding only serves to underscore a completely-forgotten point in this day and age. The fact is that we all must develop `filters’ in this life. We need to filter all kinds of media. Not just video games. And we can’t do that by simply eliminating the totality of that medium, because where would we draw the line? Are all video games evil? No, of course not. As a toddler, my daughter had a computer game that taught letters, numbers, colors, etc. That’s certainly a good thing. Are some games `evil’? Yes, of course. There are several I won’t buy because I think they’re either too violent (imagine that!) or deal with things like witchcraft. I have limits, too, but I’m talking about filters.

Some people, particularly in my faith, describe television seemingly as the root of all evil in this world. Has it helped the cause in general? I think so. Definitely. But can we eliminate it as a valid form of entertainment or education based on that alone? I think it would be silly, but probably not for the reason you’re currently thinking. See, I think that there is an equal amount of `evil’ in radio, newspapers, magazines, movies, professional sports games, and basically anything that we as Americans find entertaining today. If it draws eyeballs, someone has got their fingers in it, trying to subvert it to their desires, and by that, I mean ungodly desires.

So we need limits and filters. There are some things that just won’t pass muster. Some things are sufficiently devoid of value that you can avoid them entirely. Casinos. Bars. (Hey, I may be religious now, but I’ve been around the block. I gave it up for a reason. I can count the number of honest-to-goodness good times I’ve had while drunk on about one hand.) But the vast majority of things that you can partake of in this world has varying degrees of utility, and that requires one to filter the garbage and take the good for what it’s worth. I watch `R’-rated movies, but I fast-forward the gratuitous scenes, sexual and otherwise. Some movies have so much foul language that I simply stop the tape, rewind it, and take it back unwatched. The $3 or $4 dollars I’ve paid for the privilege doesn’t mean much compared to having peace in my mind and spirit.

Everyone has to determine where their comfort level is in this regard. Some people won’t have problems playing violent video games; some people will. The problem is that we as a society have lost track that not everyone should be allowed access to everything that this world has to offer. It comes down to good, old-fashioned `responsibility’. Imagine that! Taking responsibility for ones actions and decisions. Actually determining – for oneself – what’s profitable and what’s not. Another word for this is censorship. I whole-heartedly disagree with state-sponsored censorship, but I also think that – like `separation of church and state’ – the government has gone too far in guaranteeing that censorship is prevented. It’s gotten to the point where you’re guaranteed that you will see garbage.

So it’s up to you. It’s up to each one of us to ensure that we see what we are personally responsible enough to see. You and you alone can make that determination, and you and you alone must make those decisions.

And as a final note: