A recent study by researchers at Iowa State University suggests kids who play violent video games will have more aggressive behavior and keep aggressive thoughts regardless of age, gender or parental involvement.
Isn't that conditioning? Kids need to be made aware of the differences between fantasy and reality otherwise that kind of violent imagery can have a lasting impact.
TLDR: Children exposed to violent games without proper context retain aggressive behaviour. Children treated with maturity and responsibility grow up to be so called "geniuses". ELSE: Many volumes of historical data offer explanation in form of supernatural(fallen angels) and mere low psychological level of humanity(greed, pettyness), but most of this stems from ancient Egipt and transfers to Roman empire. During that time Europe was pretty damn illuminated about this stuff, and it wasn't tolerated until (known today as)Roman assault took over parts of the free world from west and south producing falseness, turning brother against brother. There's a lot of evidence that before rise of certain religious movement most of Europe was pretty damn awesome living according to Holy Laws embracing the differences in quite mature manner. Don't read this in pink colours but white dude lived in peace with black dude, black dude with yellow dude, hell, it was pretty much one world, one empire, despite the petty colour differences. Chinese lived as friends with siberian Dinglings on the same land, Slavs with Indos, this has given the rise of amazing Indo culture for example. There was no BS politics, writing was simple, consisting of the only true, holy runes used as bridge, multinational language(which then later were subjected to degradation and pushed into occult, for example among many: names of God in Kaballah). The main focus of the society was a family, which definition was later bastardized into barbaric tribes. Temples were open to anyone, reason was more important than complex and deceptive contracts, and if someone didn't like it, could just go somewhere else. But world wasn't perfect back then, because it'll always be exactly the way we are making it or allowing it to be shaped by others. Original humans were pushed from the point of origin(home), lost touch with their roots which was gradually leading to the engineered divide. </nurd mode off> Human brain works like a machine, synaptic links are created and strengthen with each exposure, without prioritization of concepts we're prone to do dumb shit. But we're not able to do this correctly from within our perception. Our peers are responsible for that, specially during first 5 years of our lives, when human brain is in soak mode, does not question a thing, absorbs all, and then starts to rationalize the world with all this data.
you need to check your facts fool dang maybe 1 to 2 kids have vilent thauths
@aari: You need to learn to read with comprehension.
parents need to take a more active role in what video games they allow their parents to play. Back when I was a manager at a Blockbuster too many times I would see a parent renting a game like Saints Row for their 12 year old son. As a new father, I will be sure to monitor what my son plays as he grows up, and ensure that the titles I am playing in his presence are age appropriate as well.
Yeah man, I saw a lot of that back when Blockbuster was still a thing. Lots of times kids walked out with copies of Grand Theft Auto games. It was dumb because the parents seemed so blissfully unaware or uncaring of the mature content.
"parents need to take a more active role in what video games they allow their parents to play" LOL, I know what you meant, but this still made me laugh.
Oh wow, I didn't even catch that lol. Hey Neonridr, don't feel badly. Honest mistake. XD
Yet, somehow, children who grew up watching violent movies are fine. Children who grew up listening to violent stories and reading violent books are OK. We can trace this back to the days that violent stories were told and sung by travelers. Frick, Now we are back when everyday life was a violent struggle and kids saw death first hand almost all the time... somehow we managed to grow up and become the people in society we are today. 7 billion kids growing up living life with death and violence all around us, how come only a handful are violent?
Well you have to admit games are more immersive than those examples you given. You almost feel like your actully that person especially with crazy stuff like the oculus coming out! I doubt it makes you violent though. Maybe if you play it when your 5 years old but older than that any normal person would not be changed by it. At most you could say is that it makes you less bothered and effects the way you react by violence and violent acts that you see in real life.
I was trying to say that violence has been around since birth of man. Obviously, violence can alter behavior. What pisses me off though, is how every media and study wants to point out games, while completely ignoring every other source of violence in life. In most cases, sources of violence that are by far more impressionable than a video game.
The problem is not all kids can determine the difference between reality and fantasy and everyone responds differently to different things. If a kid is conditioned to think violence is normal in real life, it could have a really bad effect later in their life.
Age restrictions should be legally enforced. It's the parents' (or legal guardian's) job to raise the kid, not society at large. (EDIT: I say this because I want to enjoy multiplayer without people squeal "gayn****rf*g" thinking they're all BAMF.
No offense but that idea is worth jack shit. 1.) It is against free speech, video games are protected by free speech. 2.) If your saying you ONLY watched R rated movies and played M rated games when you were 17, I wouldn't believe you. 3.) Parents are supposed to be the ones parenting not the government. 4.) Dont be a dic*head who ruins peoples fun, some mature teens who are 14 or 15 can easily handle an M rated game and dont shout into the mic. 5.) Your generalizations and stereotyping show to me you shouldnt be playing M rated games or watching R rated movies as you are generalized a few million teens into only a few that youve heard on cod (shows you dont even have the maturity to mute them , it takes 3 seconds dont lie to me and say you cant.) 6.) A law cant be imposed just for your comfort, it would also cost too much money and would be impossible to enforce(i.e. A kid could just buy a PSN card as those are unrestricted and then buy cod, or their parents could still buy it for them, or they could buy it online, or they could get their older brother to buy it for them.) A reference from GTA V "Tell me what you want and Ill tell you exactly why that cannot be" End of story dont be a buzzkill
Sounds like somebody is a minor... BTW free speech means the government can't arrest or prosecute you for what you say, meaning people can put violence or nudity in video games without facing any charges. It has nothing to do with who can purchase the material. Porn is protected but minors can't purchase it legally.
Freedom of speech applies to government and public forums (i.e. tv, magazines). Videogames, by extension, are expressions and yes they are legal. What I mean is, restrict the ACCESS, not the publishing, to mature audiences. I've seen R rated movies and yes, adult stuff. However, those are vastly different from videogames. Videogames are immersive, where you are in control. I never played online shooter, or any FPS, until I was 20 (in 2008). Only exception is Golden Eye 007 (Rated T by ESRB). Only M rated games I played were horror games. None of that should matter in the bigger picture. My experience is my own. What we are talking about is a scientific study published in a peer-reviewed journal. Of course, there are variables not listed in the abstract. They only said "violent games" but what type of 'violent is it? Does it revolve around killing human AI, or killing non-human (zombies, monsters.. etc)? Also, was it online or offline gaming? What game(s) did they use? I'm not a doomsayer. I'm not saying playing videogames leads mass shooting. It's about behaviour and thought, not direct violent actions. I agree about parents but also retailers should be required by law to ask for proof of age. I hope I explained my point clearly.
This can only happen if they think it's appropriate behaviour, ie; when they don't recieve proper parenting.
Religion is far more dangerous to kids then Video Games, no one complains about that.
Agreed, I couldn't even begin to give an accurate number of people that have been killed in the name of religion. Death isn't even the only danger. The Vatican just passed a "law" stating that child molestation doesn't even have to be reported anymore. Only child molesters would pass that law. So there is also that danger as well.
Well there have been studies showing that moods can be affected by music. When I listen to classical or something like Enya I get relaxed. When I listen to heavy stuff I get pumped up or sometimes I can even start feeling angry. Moods are just chemical reactions and your body can produce these chemicals with all types of stimuli, including video games. BTW these chemicals can make people more likely to act aggressively or peacefully, it has nothing to do with realizing games are fiction, it's about getting "into it" and the changes in brain patterns.
If a child doesn't know the difference between reality and fiction, then the parents are to be blamed for it, not video games. Personally, I believe maturity level should be the gauge for allowing certain games to be played by children, not age.
This article has nothing about the study ! Are they on medications? What kind of foods they eat! Where they live, do they exercise, which all play a big part in child behavior!
parents need to parent their children and stop blaming everything else for bad behavior.
Exactly. It's far easier to blame everyone else than yourself.
Lets fix this title shal we? Kids with pre-existing aggressive tendencies play violent video games.
Violent video games do have the potential to leave a child more desensitised to violence (e.g. Sees blood and is more likely to say "meh" rather then scream in terror). But so do violent films, TV shows, music etc. However, they do not make children more violent themselves. At worst they simply cause frustration that might lead to a thrown controller or insult others. But that is purely due to human nature itself and the desire to prove oneself. E.g. in an under 18s game if a striker repeatedly was blocked by a goalie and never managed to score then it wouldn't surprise you to hear him cursing the goalie either under his breath during or out loud afterwards. Because that goalie denied the striker his moment. At the end of the day any form of violent media will vary in influence between different individuals. Therefore the only way forward is for parents to simply monitor what their child is exposed to growing up. This doesn't necessarily mean that a 14yr old should be banned from playing a 15+ rated game but instead the parents should judge the level of mature content within that game and decide whether that content is or is not appropriate for their child.
My question is, why are their parents buying violent games for them?
My question is how many of you saying "parents this, parents that" have kids? If you don't have any I'm not sure how your opinion could possibly hold any weight, as it isn't based off of experience what so ever. Another question, how many of you played something like Goldeneye when you were 10? I know I did. Pretty much everyone of my friends did. Yeah my parents bought it for me. My dad played it with me. Just like I play splitscreen COD with my 10 year old son. Which I can guarantee, is more mature and intelligent than half the people that will comment on this article. Yes he play COD with me, but his favorite game is Pokemon. Where violence against animals takes place. Fictional animals, but animals none the less. Should I be watching him playing Pokemon, in worry that he will take a ball out to the pond and start throwing them at ducks or frogs in hopes of catching one and becoming the very best, like no one ever was? edit: To this day I haven't had a single friend go to jail for murder. Nor have I ever been a violent person unless provoked.
I think that you are taking the "parents..." comments a little personally, when people are speaking in generalities. We've all seen THOSE parents that I believe most of the comments are referring to. You know...the ones that use video games as babysitters. They buy anything and everything that their kids want...without question. Then, act surprised when little Jimmy is standing in front of digital boobies. My mother, who was a single parent, never played games with me. HOWEVER, what she DID do was to impart a sense of respect and morality in me to the point where I KNEW better than to try to pull anything silly. I played plenty of so-called "violent" games in my day. Watched many "violent" movies. Listened to music that contained "violent" content. But, the important factor is that my mother was ALWAYS there for answering questions and keeping me in line when I might veer off course. You seem like a "good" parent. As a good parent, I am sure that you have talked with your child about right and wrong...about what is real and what is not. Basically, you've given him an idea of what is acceptable and what is not. This is the foundation of responsibly dealing with this issue.
You're missing the intent of the comments. What people are saying is that it's up to parents to provide context. You don't just give your child a violent game and walk away, do you? You're not handing him Grand Theft and then leaving the house, right? Then you're not the type of parent being discussed. Pokemon isn't quite the same. Kids can more easily tell it's fantasy, since they've never run across any Pokemon in real life. They haven't seen or heard of anybody outside the games or shows using a pokeball. It's more easy to recognize that game and many others as fantasy. Call of Duty is a different beast entirely, and I'm certain you know that. But the point is that, in the end, a kid can play a violent game and be better able to handle it if their parents have given him a foundation for handling that violence.
I agree with both of you, and maybe I did take the comments a little too personally. I get a little defensive on this issue obviously. I have to think that kids that are violent after video games, were likely that way before hand. It just hadn't surfaced yet. I do not think in any way, that I am turning my child into a violent person by playing games with him. Which I know neither of you are saying. BTW, no GTA lol. I know enough about the series to keep that to myself. I have definitely taught him right from wrong, as I know it. Hopefully that's enough to hold back the aggressive behavior and thoughts he will undoubtedly retain regardless of my parental involvement according to the article. (This article is BS.)
Golden eye is rated T, not M.
In 1998. It would definitely be rated M now days. But that's besides the fact, I wasn't a teen when playing it either. Neither were any of my friends.
Played a ton of violent games as a kid. Guess I am borderline psychotic.
ahmistly this is all a bunch of bull frikin crap so tjis artical is bc
ahnistly and this. sorry
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.