Those Against Violent Video Games Should Hang Out With Gamers
from the no-scratches dept
For all the stories of parents and lawyers trying to blame video games for violence, here’s a good response article, suggesting that all those anti-gamers hang out with the kids at QuakeCon. The writer points out that, unlike a high school football game, none of the kids at QuakeCon left with any scratches or bruises. While anti-gamers would have you believe that gaming is anti-social, it often brings people together, and teaches them about teamwork, similar to sports. He also takes issue with a study saying that kids who played Wolfenstein 3D were more aggressive immediately afterwards than kids playing Myst. He points out that this is just due to adrenaline, and is unlikely to be a lasting phenomenon. He says that anyone involved with higher adrenaline is going to act that way. While he doesn’t suggest it, it would be interesting to do a comparison study to people playing sports, against those playing some sort of musical instrument. Those playing sports will also be pumping adrenaline and likely to be more aggressive for a bit, but it doesn’t mean they’re any more likely to go out and shoot up a school.
Comments on “Those Against Violent Video Games Should Hang Out With Gamers”
Violent games: sports vs music is a wrong comparis
If you ever looked at the kids after they played a big symphonical piece with their (high-school) orchestra, you will see the same pumped up adrenaline behaviour you see in sports or gaming kids. Or in a kid that just played an intense chess match.
Playing violent games is part of a bigger sociological picture of kids that have a certain problems. But it is a possible symptom, and certainly not a cause. It may enforce a certain alienation and lack of morality, but only if other conditions are met first.
Re: Violent games: sports vs music is a wrong comp
“Playing violent games is part of a bigger sociological picture of kids that have a certain problems”
Are you saying that kids who play “violent games” have certain problems? If so, that’s a pretty sweeping (and rather unfair) generalization. However I may have misunderstood the intent of your statement.
article
TRUE DAT HOMMIE!!!