Category: Video games

The year was 1976. The video game company Exidy released an arcade video game known as Death Race. In this game, the player takes control of a car and is tasked to run over fleeing stick figures, known as gremlins. Running a gremlin over would result in a screaming sound effect, and the gremlin would turn into a cross-shaped gravestone. This is the first video game to be the center of the still-running controversy, revolving around a single question; do video games cause violence?

Death Race is not the only game to be the cause of public outcry. Games such as the driving game Carmaggedon, the open-world sandbox Grand Theft Auto, and the fighting game Mortal Kombat have all been brought to the attention of the public for their violent content. Lawmakers, worried about the effects of the depictions of gore seen in these games began to act. Threats of legal action would give way to the Entertainment Software Rating Board, or ESRB, which was founded to give an official age rating to video games. News aggregates release stories about school shooters being gamers, whether it was true or not. Politicians from both sides of the political spectrum are weighing in on the argument. Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have expressed their distaste for violent video games. This is a debate that people are passionate about, for better or worse.

The bases of both arguments are simple. Violent video games contain graphic depictions of stabbings, shootings, and worse. Repeated exposure to these scenes could get a person used to the idea of killing and want to recreate these violent acts in real life. On the other hand, all the gore is limited to the other side of the screen. If a mature brain can tell the difference between what is real and what is fake, it should also know what is right and wrong. Both sides have their points.

As a fan of video games and a student of criminology, I find this to be a fascinating subject. I have seen firsthand how graphic video games can get, and I know what can inspire people to do horrible things. I have performed background research on some of the most well-known moments in the “Games Causing Violence” debate, the shootings blamed on games, the games released to poke fun at the controversy, and the laws made to inhibit the creation of these games.

However, this argument is not an easy one to cover. Arguments on both sides often devolve into name-calling and unfair generalizations. There is also plenty of misinformation surrounding the subject as well. The Sandy Hook shooting, for example, was initially correlated with the first-person shooter video game Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. However, the perpetrator’s roommate revealed that he never played this game. This will also be a problem for me on a personal level. As somebody who enjoys video games, it is hard for me to read headlines linking my favorite form of media to acts of violence without getting mad. In order to come to a decisive conclusion, I have to determine what is fact and what is opinion.

The best ways to find whether there is a link between video games and violence are previous data, interviews with gamers, and looking at the history of criminals connected to video games. If violent crimes have gone up along with the increased sales of M-rated video games, there may be a correlation. However, it is not as simple as that. There are many factors that can lead to crime, so a more personal approach may be another route to take. Interviewing players of both violent and non-violent video games may lead to some insight into the inner workings of the mind while immersed in a game. Finally, it might be fruitful to look at people incarcerated for violent crimes who play video games. I might be able to find other common trends that may be more likely to be the inspiration for their acts. With these research methods, I feel like I can find a conclusion to this investigation.

In order to fully grasp this subject, there are still things I need to learn. First, there is the mental reaction that accompanies playing a violent video game. Second, I want to know what makes violent video games popular. Third, it will help to know how accurate video game portrayals of violence are, and if said accuracy matters. Finally, I want to investigate the people who create these violent video games. If playing these games make people more aggressive, then that must also be true for the people who develop them. With these questions answered, I will have a firmer idea of where to go with my research.

This is an argument that is long and drawn out, as well as one I am well familiarized with. I am interested in it both as a gamer and as a person who studies the criminal mind. I have a clear plan to continue my research. I am aware of what I do and do not know about the subject. I am ready to answer the question; “Do video games cause violence?”

Video games can be defined as interactive electronic games that aim to entertain players. According to Quwaider et al. (2019), video games allow players to access virtual 2D or 3D environments within specific rules and conditions. There are different categories of video games ranging from action to sports games, strategy, shooting, racing or adventure. Recent years have shown an increase in what are termed violent video games. Quwaider et al. state that fighting games such as Tekken or Mortal Combat risk hostile and aggressive behavior, as do shooting games like Counterstrike or Hallo. Is this the case do violent video games make those who play them more violent?

Historically, children have always played violent games: Cowboys vs. Indians, Superheroes vs. Villains, war games, and Star Wars to name a few. However, violence in children’s games has reached a whole new level in recent years as video games have come to the fore. Boys no longer wanted a new plastic gun for their birthday or Christmas, they asked for a new video game that involved killing X amount of virtual characters; the rougher the game, the more fun it would be. A selection of such games includes Bulletstorm, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Postal, Splatterhouse and Soldier of Fortune.

A video game is an abstraction where a player gets abstract tasks and acts according to abstract rules. According to John Riccitiello, the head of Electronic Arts, research has shown that video gaming can have positive effects upon the development of the brain and it can Improve eye-hand co-ordination, multi-tasking skills, focus and decision-making processes. Video games are a form of escapism whereby the player can escape momentarily from the outside world. A psychologically healthy person will never confuse this virtual world with the real world.

Video games are created with various themes some of which promote the killing of people and animals, use of drugs, disrespect for authority, racial, sexual and gender discrimination and the use of vulgar language and obscenities, all of which have a negative impact on the player. Some studies conducted recently show that children and adolescents who play violent video games excessively tend to lose their sensitivity to violence. Such children start to feel that violence solves many problems and may result to it to handle or settle their issues. If the child or adolescent has emotional or behavioral problems or they are slow learners, they are very quickly impacted by the violence depicted in the video games. In addition, playing video games for excessive periods of time means that gamers, no matter their age, are losing out on other activities – there’s a real world outside the screens and other ways to spend time and be entertained socializing with friends, keeping fit by taking part in varied outdoor activities or discovering new places to visit.

Computer games are, first and foremost, entertainment and are enjoyed by children and adults alike. Parents should ‘police’ carefully which games their children and teenagers play to prevent them being exposed to violent images. We are all influenced by the environment that surrounds us and children’s minds can take all impressions for granted. It is the parents’ responsibility to control which video games their children watch by making sure that they check the rating of violence before purchasing. In addition, video game equipment should not be installed in children’s bedrooms. But, what type of adult would choose to play violent video games for entertainment? Adults prone to aggressive behavior may enjoy playing such games but the inclination to these games is a result, not the cause, of the problem.

Violent video games have been blamed for school shootings, juvenile crime and sexist violence. In recent times the causal connection between video games and violence has been accepted by parents and the media. But is it true? There have been many studies claiming to find a link between violence in video games and real-world aggression but other studies have found no persuasive link. Although video games have spread throughout the world the only country which seems to prove this link is in the USA, where there have been mass shootings in recent years. Concern about video game violence rose after the 1999 Columbine High School shooting when it was learned that the teen shooters played the first-person shooting computer game ‘Doom’. Former President, Donald Trump, held a Video Game Summit after the February 2018 Parkland, Florida shooting that killed 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and blamed video games as a potential factor in shootings by decrying ‘the glorification of violence in our society. This includes the gruesome and grisly video games that are now commonplace’. However, former Secretary of State and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, took to Twitter to dispel the video game-violence conceit by stating: ‘People suffer from mental illness in every other country on earth; people play video games in virtually every other country on earth. The difference is the guns’.

The coronavirus pandemic has put a damper on many traditional outdoor activities. This gave more opportunity for children to socialize with friends virtually through online gaming. This extra screen time worried parents, especially in view of a report published by the American Psychological Association (APA) in 2015 linking violent video games with aggressive behavior in children. However, a recent reanalysis of these findings published in the journal ‘Perspectives on Psychological Science’ 2020 came to a very different conclusion, finding no clear link between video game violence and aggression in children. Christopher J. Ferguson, lead author on this new paper, stated, “Our new meta-analysis found that the evidence base was not sufficient to make the conclusions outlined in the 2015 report. We found that violent video games do not appear to be linked to aggression”. In addition, Patrick Kierkegaard, a PhD student at Nottingham University, researched the subject of video games and violence and published his findings in the magazine International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry. He stated that there was no proof to show that there was a relationship between juvenile violence and the increasing sales of violent video games.

In conclusion, it is evident that violent video games do not make those who play them more violent. While I believe that parents should supervise what video games their children watch, the majority of gamers who play violent video games are of an age where they know the difference between make believe and real life. They are not likely to copy the actions of the game characters by robbing banks, killing etc. As Eric Kain noted in Forbes in 2013, “some studies have shown that video games increase aggression, others show the opposite. No study has ever shown that violent video games result directly in actual violence, let alone mass shootings. That doesn’t mean it isn’t possible, though the numbers suggest it’s very unlikely”.

Video games are overwhelmingly popular nowadays and with every year this trend only rises. The first video games came out in early 1970s, and they were rather simple and mostly nonviolent, but it all has changed in the 1990s, when very brutal games have started appearing, such as Doom, Mortal Kombat, Duke Nukem 3D, Wolfenstein 3D, Postal and Grant theft Auto. All of those listed games relied practically completely on hurting, killing, mutilating other people or animals and stealing. According to Jędrzejko (2011), those games with violent acts are hugely popular with young people in school age and selling of them grows by about a dozen percent annually. It is often claimed that such games cause a significant amount of violence and behavior related problems among practically all younger age groups, but are there only bad effects of them, and if no, what are the positive ones? Are most of the aggression problems related to young people fault of video games? This essay is aimed to answer what are the real effects of violence in video games and what impact do they have on young people.

‘Kill him! Kill him!’, these words were shouted by a 7-year-old daughter when testing a new game ‘Pirates’ with her 10-year-old brother. “It’s a bit unnerving to hear your seven-year-old daughter shout those words” (Wolock, 2004). People are fascinated by violence. In the past it was common to attend public executions and nowadays it is normal to see violence in television and video games. It is fascinating that people like to see it, and yet they are scared that those bad things might happen to them in reality. According to Buchman and Funk (1996), 63% of boys and 59% of girls voted that their favorite video game contain violence and the most popular ones in eyes of young people are Grant Theft Auto (86%), Painkiller (53%) and Max Pain (37%) (all of those with high levels of violence). The accessibility of violent games is huge and age restrictions usually do not work as they were intended. Despite the fact that there are many different types of games in shops including strategy, sport, logic, races, simulations and economic, the majority of them are action and FPS (First Person Shooter), so it means that they are most often bought by customers. Playing video games is currently one of the most common forms of spending free time so it can have huge impact on the players, especially younger ones. According to Jędrzejko (2011, p.175), the world shown in games is much more brutal than in reality and the amount of violent situation that the player takes part in them is disproportionate to real dangers. The most common features in video games are killing as a form of entertainment no matter what is the target (it can be anything from a soldier, man and warrior to woman, police officer and animals), virtual character does not die for real, it can reappear with just one key on the keyboard, the game can be modified however we want, we do not feel the pain and smell of blood, all values and norms are relative and everything can be a weapon. This is all imaginary in a certain sense but the most important aspect is that players take part in all of this, and he or she is getting used to such behaviors, also often observed that players choose more violent ways of playing.

Watching programs that contain violence in television is also some sort of taking part in violent acts. The audience does not do it actively but the fact that they are watching, means they want to see it and usually find it interesting. Similar to games it is out choice what we play or watch and ‘just watching’ can encourage violence as well. The most common killing and harming means we see in these two forms of entertainment are guns of all sort (from pistols and revolvers to automatic weapons and grenade launchers), saws, construction equipment and machines, knife, torture tools, cars, planes, baseball bats, tools, dangerous animals, science fiction creatures and forms of torture of all sorts (hanging, crushing, drowning and similar) (Jędrzejko, 2011). The amount of these means is overwhelming and for most people seeing harm usually is not even disturbing. It can be easily observed that people in general got used to violence in television and video games. It is also important to pay attention on how characters in video games are presented. For male characters the most frequently observed behaviors are being powerful, aggressive and with hostile attitude, and for female characters wearing provocative dresses, having a curvaceous figure, being thin and sexualized. Also, content of game magazines shows that for males 82.6% are aggressive, 31.6% glamorize violence, 41.9% wear armor and 33.1% are sex role stereotypes. For female characters the behaviors are being sex role stereotype 62.6%, being aggressive 62.2%, being sexualized 59.9%. Many different characterizations also overlap, for female it was being sexualized, scantily clad and beauty pattern, as for male characters it was being aggressive and hyper masculine (Dill, 2007). It is important to notice that after seeing such behaviors and norms in games once it should not have big impact on players but if they look at it and take part in all of this many times it becomes some sort of a norm and they are getting used to it. It is no longer shocking or disturbing, it starts to be normal for them, and they might try to look for such behaviors and actions in real life. According to Fedorov (2005) research, almost all of the games accessible in computer rooms contain violence (82.75%). Those included scenes of killing (55,17%), fighting (39.08%), scenes of disasters (35.63%). It is astonishing that only 17.24% of games did not contain any form of violence and those mostly had a sport theme. It is important to note that it was not restricted or controlled by age of the players. This research shows that the most common users were children between 10 and 16 years old which means that they mostly were under the recommended age to play those games and in ages between 8 and 17 the numbers of favorite games that contained violence was much higher compared to number of favorite games that did not contain violence. Those research show that video games that contain violence and characters having negative behavior are much more interesting and popular among young people. It could also mean that it can only lead to negative behaviors but is it really the case?

There are many games on the market that are educational, help learn new languages, teach critical thinking, train imagination and make it easier to actively get involved in learning process. This means that they can also have positive impact in daily life of young people. Brosch (2006) says, there are 2 main theories about playing violent video games: catharsis and stimulation. The first one means that playing games that contain violent behaviors and situation can help the players get rid of negative emotions and the anger that they keep inside. Most of the games are single player, that means they play alone, only with computer and are not going to hurt any other people. In the end, it is much better to pour out emotions in this way than start a fight with someone or being impolite which can have huge consequences and, in some cases, may even lead to death. The second theory, stimulation, says that constant contact with negative and violent behaviors can lead to recreating them in real life and it often means hurting others or animals, as players see those situations in games it is becoming natural to them. According to Jędrzejko (2011) research, there is a clear correlation between pupils that play video games and represent negative behavior. Among students that play 6 or more hours a week 21-28% took part in a fight in last month, 31-43% were rudely talking to teachers, 59-67% were unkind to peers and 29-43% hit a person that is younger than them. In comparison to pupils that play from 0 to 5 hours a week only 5-10% took part in a fight, 6-16% were unkind to teachers, 11-32% were rude to peers and 6-27% hit a younger person. I clearly show that young people who play games more than the others much more frequently take part in acts of violence or behave in a bad way. It is also shown that in average there are about 100 acts of violence and physical attack in video games and in cases of experienced players the number of ‘kills’ can be about 500 or even higher. Different negative effects of players are poorer academic performance, they more often late for school or miss classes without justification, they are more often unprepared for classes, are impatient, they have less interpersonal contact with peers, they less often engage in extracurricular activities with other students (Wolock, 2004) (Jędrzejko, 2011). The amount of negative effects is astonishing and it seems to be a serious problem because of the impact on the young people. But there are also positive effects of playing those games, survey taken in 2002 for the Interactive Digital Software Association showed that 42% of families like video games and enjoy them as they encourage to play them together with friends or family, research conducted by Washington State Department of Health that contained 59 studies showed that brutal games do not lead to violence in real life (Wolock, 2004). Those research show that violent video games do not always have bad impact on the young people that actively play them. It can even mean that games are not bad overall and do not fully lead to violent and negative behaviors in real life but the people who play them are overall aggressive and unkind to others. It is also important to not forget about games that do not contain violence and can be really helpful in developing brain of young players.

In conclusion, it is not possible to clearly connect violent video games with negative and aggressive behaviors among young people. It is important to remember that every individual is different and reacts in another way when playing games that contain violence, some of them may feel encouraged to negative or even illegal things, for some of the players it can have neutral effects and for some of them it can be helpful to discharge from negative emotions. However, it is important to control if children are old enough to play certain games, because age restrictions are not without reason. Also, companies that produce such violent games should not be treated as the root of the problem, as they only produce that the market demand, and the players choose to play them. Friedrich Nietzsche words are perfect to summarize this topic, “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster… for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you”. Young people need to be aware of their behavior and how they change when playing violent games, as in short term it probably will not have negative effects, but after more time if those violent behaviors will become normal for young people, they might start to imitate the characters from video games which obviously is not a good thing.

The 1970’s saw the evolution of Video games which were played out initially in the public domain, but it wasn’t until the 1980’s that consumers were able to play games at home via Nintendo and Atari consoles (Wardyga, 2018). The 1990’s saw violent video games such as Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter and Double Dragon hit the scene with the “first-person shooter games” Wolfenstein 3D and Doom released in 1992 and 1993 respectively (Wardyga, 2018). Wolfenstein 3D was credited as being the First shooter video game whereby the player is the main character who experiences combat first hand with weapons of choice, mainly a gun or other weapons (Wardyga, 2018). As these violent video games grew increasingly popularity the debate with researchers also grew as they investigated the effects of violence and aggressive behaviour starting back in the 1980’s (Wardyga, 2018).

Violent Media (includes Violent Video Games) is defined as “those that depict intentional attempts by individuals to inflict harm on others. An “individual” can be a nonhuman cartoon character, a real person, or anything in between (Anderson & Bushman, 2001). Definition for Aggression is “behavior intended to harm another individual who is motivated to avoid that harm, it is not an affect, emotion, or aggressive thought, plan, or wish and excludes accidental acts that lead to harm, such as losing control of an auto and accidentally killing a pedestrian, but includes behaviors intended to harm even if the attempt fails, such as when a bullet fired from a gun misses its human target.” (Anderson & Bushman, 2001). Violence is defined as” extreme forms of aggression, such as physical assault and murder. All violence is aggression, but not all aggression is violence “(Anderson & Bushman, 2001). There has been a magnitude of studies conducted over time that challenge and support the theory that violent video games (VVG) leads to aggressive and violent behavior. This report will present evidence from both sides of the debate. A study by Ferguson et al., (2008) which challenged this theory and found there was no difference in aggression for randomized exposure to VVG or previous real-life exposure to VVG Furthermore genetic tendency, gender and family violence were more predictive of violent behavior. On the other side of the debate Engelhardt et al., (2011) indicated that neural desensitization towards violent images in VVG was associated with aggressive behavior and neural markers provided a causal link between VVG exposure and aggression. Key points from both studies will be critically analyzed with concluding comments and possible future directions in research studies.

One underlying theory of VVG and its subsequent violent behavior that can help us understand this relationship is a social learning theory, the General Aggression Model (AGM) framework (Allen, Anderson & Bushman, 2018). It encompasses different factors such as biological, developmental, social, and cognitive and personality traits (Allen, Anderson & Bushman, 2018). It provides insight into how situations influence a person’s cognitive feelings and arousal which then affects their processes of appraisal and decision making and in turn influences their aggressive or nonaggressive behavior (Allen, Anderson & Bushman, 2018). This repeated cycle develops scaffolding for a ready-made aggressive knowledge structure and furthermore, personality can be influenced through these changed knowledge structures (Allen et al., 2018). Challenging this theory Ferguson, Rueda, Cruz, Ferguson, Fritz and Smith (2008) suggested that it is more of a biological/innate theory behind this relationship. It suggested there is no causal link between VVG and violent behavior but only correlational and that violent behavior is more representative of genetic factors and environment that come into play, the catalyst model. It relates more to biological and genetic predisposition that leads to a person’s aggressive personality and environmental factors such as family violence which act as an agent for violent behaviour.

Ferguson et al (2008) study was supportive of this belief and challenged the VVG and subsequent violent behavior effect. The aim of this study was to examine the above theory models and to see which one supports the experimental data. Study (1), one hundred and one undergraduate student volunteers were measured on trait aggression and video game habits via questionnaires in the laboratory. Then aggressive behavior was measured by playing a reaction time game against a fictional opponent setting a noise blast as punishment for that competitor. Students were then randomly assigned to one of three groups. Group one played VVG (a first shooter game), group two played a matched nonviolent video game and group three were given limited written about violent contents. They then selected VVG or non VVG to play. A follow up survey was also administered after all tasks were completed. Results indicated that people who preferred VVG were not more innately aggressive compared those who do not prefer VVG and that playing VVG did not causes short-term aggression in the lab environment. These results do not concur with the AGM that predicts after playing VVR aggressive behavior follows. Study (2) examined violent crime in real life to see if aggressive personality would correlate with VVG. Participants were 428 university undergraduates filled out questionnaires in relation to Trait aggression, Video game habits, Family violence exposure and violent criminal behavior with results having a structural equation model applied to examine the best fit between data and GAMand Catalyst theories. Results indicated that trait aggression was predictive of violent crime but not to exposure of VVG and dispels the belief that VVG exposure causes violent acts. This supports the Catalyst theory, violent behaviour is more related to biological and genetic disposition than outside influences. A strength in this study is the finding that VVG playing is not predictive of violent crimes and a limitation is that it doesn’t examine the link between aggressive behaviour and parent physical abuse.

Engelhardt, Bartholow, Kerr and Bushman (2011) study demonstrates a casual link between VVG exposure and desensitization to violence which in turn leads to an increase of aggression. Participants were chosen from over 2000 undergraduates who completed a video game usage questionnaire that was part of several measures tested in a web-based survey. 35 participants were randomly selected who scored above the 75th percentile and another 35 who scored below the 25th percentile in testing results. They were told visual perception and reaction time to videos was being measured. Brain activity was measured via scalp electrodes for electroencephalogram (EEG) while they played VVG and non VVG and while viewing violent pictures and nonviolent pictures followed by a very unpleasant noise blast. For participants who had very little prior exposure to VVG and played a violent game they showed physiological desensitization (a reduction in P3 component of the event-related brain potential) to the violent images which then mediated the effect on subsequent aggressive behavior. This neural marker is the first experimental evidence that provides a causal link between violence desensitization with increased aggression. This supports the GAM theory and how other processes (such as physiological in this case) effect appraisal and decision making and in turn influences their aggressive behavior. A strength in this study is that it is the first study to an experimental causal link with a limitation being that they need to explore more to see if there are additional mechanisms at play.

There is a large body of evidence supporting the effects of VVG and subsequent aggressive behavior in comparison to studies that challenge the theory. The desensitization effect found in the Englehardt et al., (2011) study was also demonstrated by Bushman and Anderson’s (2009) study which found that participants took longer to render assistance to a person injured after a fight or even hear the fight in the first place as they had become accustomed to violent noise associated with VVG usage and desensitized to pain and suffering of others. Grietemeyer’s (2017) study wasn’t just individuals that were impacted by the effects of VVG but also the player’s social network. This spread of aggression within the player’s social network even effected the individuals that didn’t even play VVG. It was reported that if there were only a few individuals who played VVG within a social network there was still more aggression within the group. Numerous studies have investigated VVG and violent behavior with adolescents but what about the effects on children. This was addressed in a study by Coker et al. (2014) whereby 5,147 fifth graders and their parents were surveyed about media violence exposure (including video games) and associated aggression. Results showed a significant link between media time for video games and physical aggression and being vigorous and unwavering. Another school study by Gentile , Lynch, Linder and Walsh (2004) involved six hundred and seven 8th and 9th grade students which showed a strong correlation between the amount of VVG and getting into more arguments with teachers , physical fights at school and poor school performance.

The effects of VVG and violent behavior has also been honed by some institutions, for example the Military uses VVG, especially first-person shooter games to recruit, train and keep soldiers combat ready who are not on active duty. The year 2009 saw a vigorous marketing campaign by the US military targeting teenagers with the release of a free video game Americas Army. It has been downloaded over 40million since its release (Holmes, 2009).

The key point here is that there is more evidence that supports VVG and subsequent violent behavior than evidence that challenges it. There are strong correlations and even the first causal link between VVG and violent behavior. Evidence also shows that VVG violence is not just limited to effects on adolescents but extends to children, teachers, schools, social networks and even the military. Although studies that challenge the theory state there is no causal link only correlational there are varying factors that come into play as demonstrated in the studies that cannot be ignored. Also finding correlations links does not mean it reduces the concern or related risks, for example strong correlations have been found between smoking and lung cancer exposure but that does not mean you can ignore it. Methodology and sampling size in supporting studies cannot be overlooked either, in the Coker et al., (2014) study there were 5,174 Fifth Graders measured, Gentile et al., (2004) measured 607 students in their study and Englehardt et al., (2011) drew participants from over 2000 university students. Methodology applied to Coker et al., (2014) was a population based cross-sectional survey in three US metropolitan areas. An Anonymous Survey across urban and suburban private and public schools, pretested and administered by trained teachers was utilized in Gentile et al., (2004) and a web-based questionnaire as part of extensive measures applied in Englehardt et al., (2011). Overall an overarching range of methods were used by supporting studies to obtain quality data and results. In terms of research design there needs to be more longitudinal studies with large sample sizes, over a longer period and be inclusive of moderators such as cultural differences and real life versus non real life experiments account there is not enough on either side of debate

In conclusion there is strong evidence that supports the effects of VVG and subsequent violent behavior which I personally support. The evidence is simply overwhelming and shows how the effects of VVG and violent behavior are varied and far reaching. Are we grooming a new generation of children to become so desensitized to violent media that by the time they reach adolescence the impact then on the health system will be overbearing? Will it manifest itself in other ways such as a rise in mental health conditions? Will it ultimately become a public health issue, and do we have the resources to cope with the demands? These are questions that can’t be ignored but with the help of social-cognitive theories an understanding can gained on how to manage this into the future. Furthermore, this framework can be utilized to form debate around future public policy and regulations and develop intervention programs. Future directions should focus this and on educating society about the effects of VVG and violent behaviour.

References

1. Allen, J.J., Anderson, C. A. & Bradman, B.J. (2018). The general aggression model. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/science/article/pii/S2352250X17300830
2. Anderson, C & Bushman, B. (2001) ‘Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, Aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353- 354. Retrieved from https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1111/1467-9280.00366
3. Bushman, J.B. & Anderson, C.A. (2009). Comfortably numb: Desensitizing effects of violent media on helping others. Psychological Science, 20, 273-277.Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02287.x
4. Coker, T.R., Elliott, M.N., Schwebel, D.C., Windle, M., Toomey, S.L., Tortolero, S.R., Hertz, M.F. Peskin, M.F. & Schutster, M.A. ( 2014). Media violence and physical aggression in fifth-grade children. Academic Pediatric Association, 15, 82-87. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/science/article/pii/S1876285914003325
5. Engelhardt, C.R., Bartholow , B. D., Kerr J.T. & Bushman, J.B. (2011). This is your brain on violent video games: neural desensitization to violence predicts increased aggression following violent video game exposure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1033–1036.Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0022103111000928
6. Ferguson, C.J., Rueda, S.M., Cruz, A.M., Ferguson, D.E., Fritz, S & Smith, S.M. (2018). Violent video games and aggression. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 3. Retrieved from https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1177/0093854807311719 doi:10.1177/0093854807311719
7. Gentile, D.A., Lynch, P.J., Linder, J.R. & Walsh, D.A. (2004). The effects of violent video games habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance. Journal of Adolescence, 27, 5-22. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0140197103000927
8. Greitemeyer, T. (2017). The spreading of playing violent video games on aggression. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 216-219. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect- com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/science/article/pii/S074756321730660X?via%3Dihub
9. Greitemeyer, T. (2018). The spread of playing video games on aggression. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 16-219. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect- com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/science/article/pii/S074756321730660X
10. Holmes, J. (2009). US military is meeting recruitment goals with video games – but at what cost? Amid a soaring suicide rate among soldiers, it’s worth looking at how Army’s aggressive video games distort our impressions of war. The Christian Science Monitor, 18. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/docview/405579157?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=14723
11. Johnson, J.G., Cohen, P, Smailes, E.M. Kasen, S. & Brook, J.S. Television viewing and aggressive behavior during adolescence and adulthood. (2002). Science, 295, 2468-2471. Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/stable/pdf/3076178.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A5b75f0fff9447e1af075fdd33bb78d65
12. Wardyga, B, J, (2018). The video games textbook: history*business*technology. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/lib/UQL/detail.action?docID=5477702

The first video game to ever exist, known as ‘Pong’ which was released in 1972 is a far cry from the standards of video games now which make the most of the technological advancements in the last thirty years. The game was a table tennis sports game which featured plain and simplistic graphics. Three years after the release of ‘Pong’, the first violent video game was released. Known as ‘Death Race’, this game featured the same simplistic 8-bit graphics, and the player would find themselves playing as a car, with the objective of the game being to run over as many human-resembling pixels on the screen as possible while a timer counted down. The game had a terrible reception at launch, causing outrage from the public due to its violent content which had not been seen in any video games at the time. The developers eventually took the game off the market after the backlash of its release became so severe, with newspapers and other organisations attacking the game for promoting violence in a playable virtual form.

Seventeen years later in 1993, the game ‘Mortal Kombat’ was released and had one of the largest video game launches ever, with advertisements all over the TV, and the date of the release being called ‘Mortal Monday’. The game was the first to feature lifelike and realistic violence, being called the “most violent video game ever” at the time, as players could horrifically “finish” opponents with ripping the heart out of the fallen enemy, or tearing their head off, and hold it up as a trophy being just a few examples. Even though ‘Mortal Kombat’ was intended for mature audiences, there was no law which prohibited minors from playing or accessing the game which led to denunciations of the game by politicians and many news outlets. On December 1st 1993, American Senator Joe Lieberman gathered the Washington press corps and showed them recorded tapes of the most gory elements of the game, announcing his intentions to introduce a game age-ratings body to prevent what he believed to be the corrupting influence of video games on young minds. A week after the press conference, the senator chaired a subcommittee on violent video games, insisting that the industry needed to introduce a system of self-regulation if it wanted to avoid state regulation. Within five months of that, the games industry established the ‘Entertainment Software Rating Board’, a self-regulating entity which now determines the age ratings for video games. One of its first acts was to give ‘Mortal Kombat’ a “mature” rating making it illegal for people under the age of 18 to purchase it.

The trend of violent video game releases continued, with “Grand Theft Auto” emerging onto the market in 1998. The game caused controversy almost immediately after its release, due to the main missions of the game being for the player to drive prostitutes around town, smuggle drugs, kill lots of people and try to evade the police. The games industry took a major hit one year later when tragedy struck and the Columbine Massacre took place. The students who opened fire had been known to be fans of violent video games including “Doom”, a first-person shooter game released in 1993, and “Grand Theft Auto”. The panic revolving around violent games reached new heights after the shooting, and the families of the victims filed a lawsuit against 25 different entertainment companies, alleging that video games induce violence which in turn caused the deaths of the victims, however in 2002 the case was dropped.

In a ‘Los Angeles Times’ article, Scot Osterweil, creative director for MIT’s Education Arcade said that “there isn’t a lot of evidence to support theories that video games, particularly violent video games, foster antisocial or violent tendencies in young people.” Arguing that while it is true that prolonged exposure to screens can cause negative side effects due to blue light, there isn’t any reason why playing violent games should correlate with violent actions in the future. He then commented that violent crimes in the US have decreased by almost a third in the three decades that video games have existed. In 1991, there were almost 25,000 murders in the US which was the worst it had been. And in 2016, there were substantially less, with a total of 17,250 which is still very high. Osterweil noted that video games are a better hobby than picking up and playing an instrument as they challenge the player to find creative solutions to problems and to exercise their cognitive potential, with the skills that people learn in games helping to become skills that are key in the outside world. A view shared by president Ronald Reagan who once said in an interview on August 8th 1983 that, “I recently learned something quite interesting about video games. Many young people have developed incredible hand, eye, and brain coordination in playing these games. The air force believes that these kids will be our outstanding pilots should they fly our jets.”

Video games can also have positive impacts on people of all ages who play them. In the book ‘The Video Game Debate’, the writers argue that people who play video games show results of a larger and more diverse variety of cognitive and perceptual measures, whether it is from simple low-level visual abilities, to more complex quick decision making and task switching. Scientific investigations which looked into the potential effects of playing video games began in the early 1980s and have shown very evident enhancements in areas such as spatial selective attention, which essentially means processing visual information by prioritising different areas in one’s visual field. This is due to video games giving the player different points of interest on their screen, including the HUD (Heads Up Display) where they can see and interact with key game mechanics such as player health quickly while also keeping their attention focused on what is actively happening in the game.

Video games have become their own industry that have revolutionized every part of entertainment ranging from television all the way to sports. Through all the different companies and organizations, it generates about 19 billion dollars in revenue annually, which is much more compared to Hollywood or any other competing form of entertainment. This industry was created and is still evolving from products that are so mesmerizing that people of all ages stay up all night in front of a store before it opens to receive them. How did the miniscule and intense arcade games transform into the high-tech and high definition games out today such as Counter Strike, World of Warcraft, and League of Legends? It is not just about the circuit boards and wiring in the technology, but it is about the people who were all driven by at least one thing: whether it was an obsession, dreams, family, goals, etc. It is mainly about the programmers and developers or masterminds behind the games such as Kim Taek-Jin who specializes in the creation of MMORPG’s, the creator of Minecraft Markus “Notch” Persson, and Gabe Newell the owner of valve corporation.These programmers and developers created the entire entity of “gaming culture” and later helped lead the swarm of people to the internet and the modern game industry we see today – the one people tend to blame for violence, lack of social relationships, and poor academic performance in adolescents. These people and many more discovered how to get a whole generation of young people to grab a controller and get hooked on video gaming, and the effects of this addiction to video games has had a profound impact on this generation.

Violence in adolescents, specifically young males, has many people convinced that this aggressive behavior derives from video games or them spending too much time behind a screen. In their article, “Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior”, Craig Anderson and Brad J. Bushman provide statistics on how much time young men play video games claiming that “Among 8- to 13-year old boys, the average is more than 7.5 hrs per week …13.3% of men entering college played at least 6 hours per week as high school seniors. By 1999, that figure has increased to 14.8%.” (par. 10) Clearly this number has gone up significantly since the late nineties due to the increase in the quality and quantity of technology. The violent material that this new form of technology has brought up in violent video games affects the cognitive abilities of young males.

Depending on the circumstances, it is possible that aggressive actions can take place in nonviolent games as well if a person becomes aggravated and the game turns from being entertaining to being a nuisance. These nonviolent games that can cause players to have these emotions develop aggressive symptoms through the thoughts and feelings in the players’ mind. However, violent video games only engage a person’s aggressive side through long term use. According to Anderson and Bushman the “long-term effects of exposure to violent media result primarily from the development, rehearsal, and eventual automatization of aggressive knowledge structures such as perceptual schemata, social expectations, and behavioral scripts.” (par. 25)

Whether the content of a video game or media someone consumes seems violent or not through long term exposure it can cause aggressive thoughts which in turn will eventually lead to aggressive behavior and actions unless people can find a way to balance the time spent on video games with other activities.

As more and more video games are produced with more and more technology, online communication becomes the norm for adolescent conversation. This young generation have developed multiple methods for communicating with friends, strangers, and everything between. The most common instant messaging apps or platforms such as snapchat, Imessage, instagram, and many more are used when people want to communicate and keep in contact with offline or disconnected friends, Whether it be with friends that they see on an everyday basis or friends that they have not seen for a while. The exact details of their daily lives are placed on these different media platforms for practically everyone to see. In the same way, video games have become increasingly popular for online communication as can be seen In the article “Online Communication and Adolescent Relationships” by Kaveri Subrahmanyam and Patricia Greenfield. Subrahmanyam and Greenfield explain how “The digital landscape continues to be populated with anonymous online contexts such as bulletin boards, massively multiplayer online games (MMOG), massively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPG), and chat rooms where users can look for information, find support, play games, role play, or simply engage in conversation.” (par. 15) The expansion of these new forms of communication has an impact on adolescent relationships with their friends, family, and acquaintances.

Video games have grown this young generation’s existing friendships and will continue to do so. However, while friendships continue to grow in video games, it may not be the best option for the mental health of those who play video games. According to Greenfield and Subrahmanyam “teens feel less psychologically close to their

partners than to their partners in phone and face-to-face interactions.” (par. 21) The better option for people who play video games would be to communicate with friends face-to-face or in person to create meaningful relationships that will last for a while. Online friendships can easily disband unless the two people have known each other for multiple years or are actually friends in real life. It depends on the type of relationship two people have, but if online communication in video games is used to maintain current friendships or friendships where the two individuals know each other, their relationship will continue and grow. Nonetheless, if an individual is communicating with a person they hardly know or feels like a stranger to them, the connection will fall off, probably for the best.

When it comes to family relationships in adolescents through video games, there is very clear evidence that playing video games damages adolescents’ relationships with their parents and siblings, more so the connection of the parent with his/her child. In a study about the effect of technology in the modern family explained in Greenfield and Subrahmanyam’s article, it was found that “when the working spouse, usually the father, came through the door at the end of the day, the other spouse and children were often so absorbed in what they were doing that they greeted him only about one-third of the time, usually with a perfunctory “hi”.” (par. 34) The video game gadgets and gaming systems hooked the children which led to their parents being unable to get their attention. These online worlds cause family relations between parents and sibling to crumble unless adolescents can find a balance or have been disciplined enough to know how much time spent on video games is enough.

The third and the most unsafe relationship affected through video games is that with acquaintances or people that hardly know each other. Due to the fact that online relationships do not have the same face-to-face aspect of communicating in person, such as tone of voice, body language, and the overall mood, online communication in video games is not as fulfilling as a conversation someone could have in person. When adolescents communicate with strangers or people that are not a part of their daily lives or part of the offline group of friends, this creates a weak bond between the two, eventually leading to the conversation to crumble and the slow deterioration of the relationship. Adolescents in video games should question their relationships with people, especially those that they do not know too well. Greenfield and Subrahmanyam provided a statistic stating “that 40 percent of fourteen- to twenty-two-year-olds…contacted online by a stranger whom they did not know before.” (par. 42) There is a huge risk that the online stranger could be a predator or a troll as well, so If the relationship continues to grow, teenagers should always be weary of the questions they are being asked and the information they give out because the impact that these weaker interactions can have on their lives can be just as critical as the impact of the connections with family and friends.

The third area where video games can influence an adolescents’ life is through their academic activities and their performance on them. Many school districts have begun blocking electronic media in schools, as well as limit the wifi to allow the students use to only a very select number of educational websites, in hopes of improving academic performance in the school. However, the problem is mainly at home, so anything the school does will provide close to no results. In the article “Does Recreational Computer use affects High School Achievement” written by Alex J. Bowers and Matthew Berland, Bowers and Berland describe a study that “consisted of 482 middle school students from across 20 Michigan schools…internet use and video game use were unrelated to mathematics and visual space skills.” (par. 12) The positive aspect of video games would be a boost in reading abilities for younger students, the downside would be the negative connection between time spent on video games and the students’ GPA. More time spent on video games and internet use cuts into the students’ time for academic activities. Mathematical skills were not influenced in any way. On the other hand each student is different and their computer use can have different impacts on their academic performance levels.

The level of student achievement can not only be based off of the amount of time a student stays behind a screen playing video games, there are many more conditions to take into consideration. Contrary to the study explained above, In another study conducted on around four thousand-five hundred 15 year olds, It was discovered that there is a relationship between video game use and academic achievement. Bowers and Berland analyzed “the relationship between having a computer in the home…no longer significantly related to achievement. The study demonstrated that academic performance increased only in the students who considered themselves “smart” users, whose who do not use computers just for gaming, but for other aspects as well, like using discussion boards, watching videos on youtube, etc. These students were seen to have an overall increase in academic levels, specifically in math. Those who spent most of the time gaming on computers were seen to have no increase in academic levels. There needs to be a balance between video games and other activities done on the gaming system if adolescent performance levels in school want to increase.

Video games have long been seen to have a negative effect on many teenagers’ lives. Nonetheless, the industry will continue to grow at an alarming rate. The violent material that this new form of technology has brought up in video games affects the cognitive abilities of teenagers (specifically young males) in violent video games. Depending on the circumstances, it is possible that aggressive actions can take place in nonviolent games as well if a person becomes aggravated and the game turns from being entertaining to being a nuisance. The only solution to help adolescents would be to limit the time spent on games with violent content and find an interest in a different game or genre. Communication through video games can either have a positive or negative effect on social relationships. Relationships with friends can improve and grow, while relationships with family can weaken unless time spent on video games is supervised and under control. Connections with acquaintances or strangers in video games are risky and can turn out to be good, but it can turn out to be a predator or a troll in most cases. These types of interactions should be watched out for since their impact is just as important as those of a friend or family member. Finally, Academic performance is not just based on the amount of time spent on video games, plenty of other conditions need to be taken into account. The academic performance of an adolescent could be improved through video games if they use them wisely and limit time to other activities on their gaming systems as well. Video games have both a positive and negative aspect, but if adolescents use them wisely, balance them with other activities, and are wary of the consequences they can have on their social relationships, they can continue to use them.

Introduction: Misconceptions About Video Games and Violence

There have been many things to come from the 20th century and one of the most notable ones was video games. Video games are a form of digital media used for entertainment. One of the most common tropes in video games is violence. Violence is usually looked down upon in our society minus a few exceptions like video games. This explains why some people are against video games. Those people believe that video games cause children to become more violent. They usually never let their children touch a video game because they believe it is right. Now, parents not wanting their kids to play video games and preventing them from playing video games is fine, but believing that video games are causing violence is an issue because they will usually spread their idea to others. Video games causing violence is a misconception when in reality, it reduces violence, acts as a way to help people, and have little to do with whether someone will commit a crime.

The Data Against the Misconception: Analyzing Violent Games

Video games causing violence is a misconception because of the data that has been created and spread. This idea that video games cause violence is something that a lot of people believe and it is not entirely their fault. There are some games that can be seen as morally wrong like Grand Theft Auto. This game allows the player to commit a multitude of crimes whether it be for fun or not. Games with this range of violence found within them have caused people to question the morality of this kind of game. Just because there are violent activities in games, does not mean that these are the causes of violent activities in people. According to the APA,

“4 time-series analyses investigated the associations among violent crime (homicides and aggravated assaults), video game sales, Internet keyword searches for violent video game guides, and the release dates of popular violent video games (both annually and monthly). Contrary to the claims that violent video games are linked to aggressive assaults and homicides, no evidence was found to suggest that this medium was positively related to real-world violence in the United States. Unexpectedly, many of the results were suggestive of a decrease in violent crime in response to violent video games. Possible explanations for these unforeseen findings are discussed and researchers are cautioned about generalizing the results from laboratory and correlational studies to severe forms of violent behavior.”

From this research, there is no evidence to suggest any direct correlation to an increased scale of violent video games that lead to a spike in violent crimes. This misconception is not completely unwarranted though, since people are committing violent acts in video games, one can assume that the same behavior would transfer into real life. So, it is not inherently bad to think this way, but that still does not make it right either because the information is incorrect. Parents also do not look at the contexts of these violent games. With Call of Duty, you are usually playing as a soldier who tries to save the world or defeat the game’s antagonist(s). You are usually playing as a hero or a good person who will try to do what is right. Companies try to make likable protagonists because people are more likely to enjoy the game. Most video game protagonists can be looked at as some kind of role model. Video game protagonists like Mario, Sonic, Link, and Master Chief come from different genres of video games but are all considered heroes in them. They all have different traits that are considered desirable, this can be seen with Master Chief’s willing self-sacrifice, to Link’s tremendous amount of courage. Even then, not all video games are violent. Some video games allow you to do different activities like golfing or dancing. Since most video games are associated with violence, all games are being blamed even though they have nothing to do with violence. What all of this does, is spread misinformation that hurts the gaming industry and other industries that work with it while preventing kids from playing good games.

Video Games as a Preventive Measure: Reducing Violence and Aggression

Video games have helped prevent violence because of the different ways people have used them. Whether people are aware of it or not, people are becoming more aggressive. First-person shooters are one of the biggest gaming genres to blame for this increased aggression. Call of Duty is one of the biggest named first-person shooter series to come up that has led to this belief. In Call of Duty, you play as a wide range of soldiers with having the task of killing people. Even though this gaming genre is believed to create violence, it is the opposite: “First-person shooter video game players are 67 percent less likely to produce hate materials than are non-players(Virginia Tech, 2018).” This is important because first-person shooters are probably the single most contributor to this video game misconception. Then there is the fact that the internet produces so much content that has a wide range of material for the general public. A lot of the material on the platforms of the internet involves some form of hate, “This research shows not only are more Americans being exposed to online extremism but more is also involved in producing and disseminating it(Virginia Tech, 2018).” What all of this data suggests, is that people who play first-person shooters are actually less likely to create hate-centered material even though they are exposed to so much of it online. While video games are helping prevent violence, studies also show that “Males are 1.76 times more likely than women to produce hate material online(Virginia Tech, 2018). What this study is showing is that video games are acting as an outlet for pent-up aggression and this information saying that males are producing more hate material than women is suggesting males are letting out much more aggressive than women. Video games allow people to do things that normally cannot be done in real life, video games can give people this sense of freedom that only they can give. There are even games that are meant to help people relax From everything that I have shown, we can see how people are using gaming as a way of letting out aggression and that video games help with stopping real-world violence along with online violence.

The Illusion of Increased Violence: How Video Games Help Prevent Crimes

A lot of people believe that violence has increased over time and video games are the ones to be blamed, but it actually has helped to prevent crimes. Some people might think there is more violence now than there was in the past, but that is incorrect. The idea of crimes increasing is an illusion. According to the Brennan Center For Justice,

“The national crime rate peaked in 1991 at 5,856 crimes per 100,000 people and has generally been declining ever since. In 2015, crime fell for the 14th year in a row. Estimates based on preliminary data for 2016 indicate that the overall crime rate will remain stable at 2,857 offenses per 100,000, rising less than 1 percent from 2015. Today’s crime rate is less than half of what it was in 1991.”

The reason this has happened can be somewhat credited to the internet and how it has allowed media to be spread so easily. When something extremely bad happens, the media will see it and report it. A lot of these violent actions occur, and people will hear about it, when unlike in the past if something happened, it would be spread far less quickly if at all. So that can be another reason for this misconception, but it is just an illusion. For actually preventing violence, there are many reasons for this to happen, but there is one very simple answer that no one really thinks about, which is, “Violent video games may actually reduce crime as aggressive players are “too busy” shooting virtual enemies to cause trouble in the real world, experts claim(Violent Video Games Reduce Crime, 2011).” This is something that I do not really see is brung up in most conversations regarding video game violence, but it is true. If someone is playing video games, that means there is less time for those people to cause problems like committing crimes. So, going from this logic, video games do affect crime, just in a positive way,

“It states that rather than violent crime rates soaring when new violent video games are released, they actually drop as gamers are ‘too busy at home playing the games, adding: ‘Time spent gaming cannot be spent on other activities, both legitimate activities and illicit violent activities(Violent Video Games Reduce Crime, 2011).”

This can be seen when popular releases like GTA or FallOut release and a bunch of people play it. Data shows that,

“When violent video game sales increased by 10%, the crime rate decreased 0.3% – a decrease that was not found when comparing to non-violent video game sales. This effect was actually not only shown in video game sales, but also in violent movies. Crime rates decreased by 1.1% for every 1 million people that watched a violent movie. (Winchester, 2017)

So many people are attracted to this kind of media, but it does not inherently make them more violent or aggressive. There are people who love killing people in games but that does not mean that they will do that in real life because most people have some moral compass that keeps them on the right path. These games act as a way to help vent this feeling that people have when it comes to violence. Video games can take up a lot of time, so people need to be careful not to spend too much time playing them, but this addiction is preventing crimes.

The Integration of Gaming in Society: A Deeper Look at School Shootings and Crime Rates

Video games have become so common in our lives that makes it seem really hard to believe that it causes so many problems. According to the ESA, “Sixty-five percent of American households are home to someone who plays video games regularly, and 67 percent of American households own a device used to play video games” and “Gamers age 18 or older represent 72 percent of the video game-playing population, and the average gamer is 35 years old.” This data shows that pretty much everyone is aware of video games. Even then, a lot of families play video games with each other or share consoles which makes you think about how gaming has really been integrated into most first-world societies. Almost everyone has a console in their household or at least some device that allows them to play video games. Consoles are not even the only way to play video games, you can use computers or even phones to game. But there is something that everyone looks down upon and many blame video games, which is school shootings. Now, school shootings are an extremely touchy subject and many people like to blame video games for these terrible acts of violence because you can kill people in video games which can lead to people becoming desensitized, but it is untrue. “…about 20% of school shooters played violent video games, compared to close to 70% of their nonviolent peers(Loria, 2018),” which means that not even half of the shooters play video games. Even then, the amount of nonaggressive people who play video games outweighs the number of people who act aggressive and violent. These games only seem to help decrease crime but are constantly being blamed for these problems.

Another reason why video games do not create violence is that gaming has very little to do with whether someone will commit a crime. Henry Jenkins, an MIT Professor found that “According to federal crime statistics, the rate of juvenile violent crime in the United States is at a 30-year low. Researchers find that people serving time for violent crimes typically consume fewer media before committing their crimes than the average person in the general population.” When someone is going to commit a crime, it would make sense for that person to look at fewer media. Most criminals would usually have a plan before committing a crime which would in turn make them use less media because they would not want to risk going to jail if they make a mistake. It’s not even just in America,

“In Japan, about 60 percent of the population played video games in 2016, according to NewZoo, a gaming market research company. But almost no one is killed by a gun in the country, which bans possessing, carrying, selling, or buying handguns or rifles. There were only six gun deaths in Japan in 2014, compared with over 33,000 in the United States, according to GunPolicy.org, which tracks published reports on armed violence, firearm law, and gun control(Salam, 2018).”

First-person shooters are one of the most prominent gaming genres out there and there seems to be no correlation between the people who play them and the gun crimes there are nowadays. It does not seem to matter whether someone plays a game and then decides to commit a crime or not. Most people are rational thinkers and know what is right and what is wrong which is why not everyone commits crimes. Even with the people who cannot think as properly as others, they still have people who try and help them stay on the right track. It more or so has to deal with people who are alone and are not able to keep themselves on the right path.

Conclusion: The Positive Impact of Video Games on Society

Even though video games are believed to make children more aggressive and violent, it actually helps prevent it. Video games act as different ways of dealing with anger and other emotions. Video games can be somewhat cathartic in relieving stress because you are doing something you normally cannot do in real life. Even if it is not for the freedom that it allows in games, it can allow someone to vent stress because they are doing something. It does not even have to be someone venting and helping with distressing because of the different activities you can do in gaming. There is also the fact that if someone is spending time playing a game, that means that they are not spending that time committing crimes. This is information that most people tend to look over when accusing video games of causing real-world crimes. So many revolutionary inventions have risen in the 20th century and some have increased the ability to be more violent, but video games are not one of them. Video games have done so much for this world. It has created millions of jobs, used to increase creativity, to help teach kids and adults alike, and has created so much enjoyment in people’s lives that without them, would be far less happy. It is a shame that video games are being blamed for problems that are not occurring and are actually making better.

Annotated Bibliography

Friedman, Matthew, et al. Crime Trends:1900-2016. New York University School of Law, 2017. Brennan Center For Justice. Scribd, www.brennancenter.org/publication/crime-trends1990-2016. Accessed 8 May 2019.

This is a report that examines crime trends at the city and national levels for the last quarter of this century. It analyzes data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and from police departments in America’s 30 largest cities to find that crime rates have dropped over the last quarter-century. I used this data because it gives factual evidence of the decrease in crimes. I believe that this article is extremely reliable because it uses data collected from police departments in the largest cities in the nation along with data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI) which is a national security organization that deals with law enforcement. The audience for this seems to be aimed towards people with law enforcement backgrounds and government employees because this uses data from many government agencies and focuses on the crime rates in the United States which these people would require or have.

Salam, Maya, and Liam Stack. “Do Video Games Lead to Mass Shootings? Researchers Say No.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Feb. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/02/23/us/politics/trump-video-games-shootings.html.

This article talks about how many people believe the reasons for school shootings are because of video games. The article then brings up multiple studies that disprove this notion. I used this article for the extra data that I could get from this article. Even though the two people do not have anything special, because they are only journalists and not scientists, they are talking about events that have happened in the past and using different studies to talk about what they found which is why I find this article reliable. The audience is aimed at parents who are trying to figure out more about the effects of video games. This is probably the case because this person takes a relatively unbiased position and gives data that she found on the matter.

Sirwinchester, et al. “Do Violent Video Games Actually REDUCE Violence and Crimes?!” Steemit, steemit.com/sirwinchester/@sirwinchester/do-violent-video-games-actually-reduce-violence-and-crimes.

Sir Winchester talks about there is a misconception about video game violence and how it is understandable while trying to find points that support video games through different analysts and charts with data that puts video games in a better light. He concludes that you can find arguments for both sides, but the inconsistent data makes it extremely difficult to get a definitive answer. I used this article because of the chart and data Winchester uses throughout it and from his neutral standpoint. While Winchester is just a journalist, he acts calm and reasonable throughout the article, so I believe he is reliable enough for my essay. The audience this is aimed towards seems to be towards people who are not necessarily for or against video games but are trying to find more information on the subject and then make an answer for themselves rather than being told what to think by an article.

“Do Violent Video Games Make Kids More Violent?” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 17 July 2018, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evidence-based-living/201807/do-violent-video-games-make-kids-more-violent.

This article is about how research about video game violence shows that video games help prevent violence. It uses multiple points taken from different articles and shows how inconsistent the data is towards violent video games leading to aggressive behavior. But also that, not all video games are suitable for every child and that it is best to understand each child’s needs and set up rules to keep them safe. I used this article because of the facts that it had and because it also lead to another article with even more information on the subject. There seems to be no author for this article but I think that this article is still somewhat reliable because it gave me a link to another article that had an author with valid information and statistics. This article’s targeted audience is parents because the main idea of it is whether violent video games make kids more violent or not which would grab the attention of parents who are wondering whether to let their children play video games.

Markey, Patrick, et al. “2017 Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry.” The Entertainment Software Association, APA PsycNet, October 2015, www.theesa.com/article/2017-essential-facts-computer-video-game-industry/.

This article is about the different behaviors that are found to be linked to aggressive behaviors and whether or not video games affect them. This article comes to the conclusion that there is no evidence found when looking at data within the United States and that results show a decrease in violent crimes in response to violent video games. I used this article because the journalist who used this information left out certain parts and only gave a brief summary of some of the statements within the article and I think it would be more effective to get better statistics from the people who actually published the data. The authors of this article are professors in Psychology who have earned PhDs in that subject which is why I believe that they are reliable authors. The audience aimed towards this would probably be other scientists who are looking into the subject as well because they are finding and collecting the data so it can be published.

Loria, Kevin. “How Playing Video Games Affects Your Body and Brain.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 19 June 2018, www.businessinsider.com/video-games-and-violence-2018-3.

Kevin Loria is a journalist at Business Insider who made an article talking about the correlation between people playing video games and aggression. Loria uses surveys from organizations aimed at video games causing violence to find whether there is a correlation between the two. It concludes that video games are making people become less aggressive and are being used to deal with things like depression. I used this article for the data from the collected surveys and put them into it. Loria is a lead journalist in Business Insider which gives him more merit than a normal journalist and used a wide range of data to get his answer.

Jenkins, Henry. “Reality Bytes: Eight Myths About Video Games Debunked .” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 2005, www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/impact/myths.html.

This article is by Henry Jenkins, the Provost’s Professor of Communication, Journalism, and Cinematic Arts at the University of Southern California. It goes over multiple myths about video game violence and goes over why each myth is false. I used this article because the journalist who was using some of Jenkin’s information left out certain parts and I thought that it would be more effective to get information from the source of the journalist’s information. I believe that Jenkins is a reliable resource because he is a professor that focuses on culture and has written around 17 books on pop culture. This article is aimed at parents because this is published by PBS and talks about many myths that parents would have heard about video games and separates what is and what is not really about them.

“Violent Video Games May Serve as an Outlet for Aggression, Not a Precursor, Says Virginia Tech Expert.” Virginia Tech Daily | Virginia Tech, Medicalpress, 22 Feb. 2018, vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2018/02/videgamesviolence.html.

Jim Hawdon and the Virginia Tech Center use multiple sources and surveys to show whether or not people produce hate material if they play video games. They found that people more specifically Americans from ages 15 to 35 are producing more hate materials that have increased over time but are being used as a way to relieve aggression and are less violent in real life. This is used for the data and how many people are becoming more aggressive. This article seems to be aimed at people who are against video games and uses many points and data to try and persuade them not to hate video games.

“Violent Video Games ‘Reduce Crime’.” The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group, 30 Sept. 2011, www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/video-games/8798927/Violent-video-games-reduce-crime.html.

This article is about how games like Grand Theft Auto that are extremely violent reduce crimes. The author uses multiple reports to show that crimes are reduced when reducing crimes and comes to the conclusion that people are too busy playing video games to commit crimes. I used this article because of some of the points that were in it and also because of the main idea that was presented in it. People who are playing games are not spending that time committing crimes, which makes sense, but I never thought of it until this article. This article also does not have an author’s name attached to it, but I still believe there is some credibility in it because it brings up the names of other people that made the data that was in the article. This article’s targeted audience is people who can vote because the article brings up parts about regulations on video games.

The video game industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, expanding exponentially on the web and mobile devices so it can be a bit overwhelming at times when formulating a strategy for your video game, whether you are a developer or a publisher.

The first thing to look at is your budget, and using already created established sites to promote your game. There are numerous places to get your games listed such as Free Website Directories. Of course you can also write a quality article on what makes you game different and submit to the top Article Directories.

Social websites will help spread your game the easiest, such as Digg, Stumbleupon, Facebook, GameFriends, and Reddit. The goal here is to get your website listed on as many free social bookmarking / networking sites available. YouTube is the second largest search engine on the web, yet many ignore it, or simply underestimate its power. Make sure you create trailers, ingame footage, and perhaps an interview with the development team to ensure your game is talked about with thousands of targeted gamers.

Top sites are also a great way to share traffic, where you add a banner on your website, because they add yours; this is best served for indie games as big budget developers and publishers will want to focus mainly on Social Media. If the game is going to be in existence for more than five years, such as an MMORPG it’s best to also invest in SEO (search engine optimization).

The combination of Search Engine visitors and Social media will make any pre and post launch successful. It doesn’t hurt to make friends in the video game industry either (to submit your press releases and blog about you).

Video Games and Violence

From Congressman Joe Baca (D) of California, to the Halo 3 Murder Trial of Daniel Petric, violence and video games seem to be intertwined, with or without the help of a congressman, parents, the media or very disturbed individuals, seriously.

From video game forums, blogs, articles and other media outlets, I’ve read many thoughts on violence in video games and how it effects, or better yet, how much it effects human behavior. Some gamers believe that violence adds realism to the game and is needed, and some enjoy it also, but wouldn’t kill their mom or shoot their dad in the head for taking away their Halo 3 game a la Daniel Petric.

Congressman Joe Baca of California would like to have Health Warnings on video games stating “WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior.” For real Joe? And for all the studies in the past, and those to come in the future of violent video games being the link to belligerent behavior, their has never been one unanimous agreement of this being so. And for every study you find saying there is a link between the two, you’ll another saying differently.

A lot of things, if not everything is imitated reality. You see it on tv and movies, hear it in music, read it in newspapers. If all you watched was the news, cable or local, you would think the damn world was coming to an end tomorrow. The first mentioned above outlets do have warnings or ratings, hell, the news should also. And in my own personal study, I came to the conclusion that I could pick a number of things in ones life and say that’s the link. I’m joking, but very serious.

Look, I know that video game related cases like the Columbine killings which had the Doom reference, Daniel Petric with Halo 3 and a couple of cases where Grand Theft Auto was the culprit are made larger than life. Each of these cases goes way deeper than video games. We don’t know exactly what was going through these individuals head’s when they did what they did. We don’t know the kind of household these people were raised in. Some people really don’t have it all mentally, and if that’s the case a movie, a song, the news or anything else that could have been encountered MAY be the trigger but not the link.

Reality is violence, violence is reality, both are copied in many forms of entertainment. And in my opinion they are one in the same, which is why video game developers try there best to make certain games mimic reality to the tee, violence included, just like in the movies. It’s almost as though it’s a necessary evil, without those certain types of games you lose a big base of your consumers, lose that base lose more jobs.

Violence is and always will be around. Violence in video games is no more of a link to militant behavior than any other media outlet entertainment. Violence is intertwined with many things, the state of ones mental capacity and actions leading up to an tragic event is another article for another day. To say this or that is the link is apples and oranges. Video games, with or without violence continues to be a favorite home pastime, yearly revenues worldwide continue to show that. Life is unpredictable, people do crazy things, and the problem is deeper than violence in video games.

House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, says video games lead to future mass shootings (Wu). However, The New York Times reports that there is little evidence to suggest there was any link between video games and mass shootings and youth violence (Wu). Research has shown that violent video games can cause violent behavior in youth, but those studies are exaggerating the results without examining other possible causes. Video games are not harmful, they are helpful because they increase reaction time and cognitive activity. Many gamers will argue that video games serve as an outlet for stress and anxiety, and also creates happiness when they play. Even though some research tries to claim that video games are addictive as a drug, mass shootings are not caused by playing violent video games, there are many other factors that should be considered. Many people in America are convinced by their own assumption that video games are harmful, but in fact, they are not as bad as some people believe.

“More than half of the top 50 selling games contain violence” (“History of Video Games”). Video games are popular with many youths today, but people that are looking for a scapegoat are quick to blame games for violent youth. In 1999, the controversy of video games resurfaced after the massacre of 13 people at Columbine High School. On June 27, 2011, the US Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Association that the California law banning the sale of violent video games to minors violated free speech rights (“History of Video Games”).

Violent video games all started with a game called “death race” released in 1976, a game that is about hitting gremlins with a small-pixelated car. People protested the game by burning the machines in the parking lots of the arcades that had them and ceased their existence and manufacture. In 1993, public outcry following the release of violent video games Mortal Kombat and Night Trap prompted Congress to hold hearings on regulating the sale of video games (“History of Video Games”).

Many gamers will argue that the use of video games acts as an outlet for stress, anxiety, and does not create violence. Video game advocates contend that a majority of the research on the topic is deeply flawed and that no causal relationship has been found between video games and social violence (“History of Video games”). Video games have more positive effects on the brain than negative. Studies show video games having a positive effect on attention, visual, and motor skills, but a negative effect that is similar to addiction. Video games allow you to explore and do things you can not in real life without ever having to leave your bedroom. With first-person shooter games, the player usually has to attack and defeat the enemy or reach an objective more times than the opposing team; therefore, players plan, practice, and play. This type of gaming trains the brain to think and process faster. That’s right, video games are not bad as some people claim. In fact, studies show that games can be powerful brain-training tools that can improve such cognitive skills as visual attention, concentration, navigation, multitasking, and task switching while simultaneously increasing speed and accuracy.

Video games are like any other hobby, some people do it for fun, but some are more avid gamers. People that say video games are addictive are most likely referring to studies that show dopamine being released while playing video games. These researchers claim that the addiction is no different than doing drugs, such as heroin because drugs cause a similar reaction. In reality, dopamine is released as a pleasure hormone when one is actively doing something they enjoy (Gray). In further studies, it was discovered that video games have a positive effect on the brain because it helps to develop certain parts of the brain. Most games with violence require a lot of strategy and planning. Playing video games for longer durations can improve regions of your brain that help you to solve problems and make reasonable decisions (Gray). A recent research study by Neuroscientist Marc Palaus states “video games may increase the volume of the right hippocampus and the entorhinal cortex, which are involved in spatial memory and navigation” (Gray).

Many factors contribute to mass shootings and violent youth, but violent video games are not one that should be worried about. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, wrote in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, ‘Psychological studies purporting to show a connection between exposure to violent video games and harmful effects on children do not prove that such exposure causes minors to act aggressively” (Nicholas Wu). The two teenage shooters of Columbine played violent video games so people tried to blame video games, but there was no link to the video games and actual shootings (“History of Video Games”). When it comes to violent behavior you have to look at all of the facts. Everyone is subjected to different lifestyles and environments that affect their personalities and the way they react to events during the course of their lives. Video games are not to blame!

The real truth is that video games may desensitize our brains to violence, but it also allows people to relieve their stress and blow-off anger. Video game advocates argue that violent video games may provide a safe outlet for aggressive and angry feelings, and may reduce crime (“History of Video Games”). Some research will exaggerate to the extent of saying video games are addictive like a drug (Gray). The argument that video games cause violence and mass shootings is over-exaggerated. “If video games do cause youth to be violent, then one would expect juvenile violent crime to increase as more youth play violent video games. Instead, US computer and video game software sales increased 204% from 1994 to 2014, reaching $13.1 billion in 2014, while murders by juveniles acting alone fell 76% and violent crime rates dropped 37% during that same period” (“History of Video Games”).

There is no legitimate proof to show that violence in video games causes violence in youth. California tried to ban the sale of violent video games in 2011 and failed when it went to the Supreme Court and Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, “A state possesses legitimate power to protect children from harm… but that does not include a free-floating power to restrict the ideas to which children may be exposed”. Meaning you can protect kids from harm by limiting guns and raising the age to be able to purchase weapons, but you can not limit what they see.