BBC Article: Games permit virtual war crimes

[Rugal09]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8373794.stm

Cliffs:
-basically some researchers are saying that interactive video games are allowing people to commit virtual war crimes that go against international humanitarian law.

-they argue that even though it is virtual, it desensitizes people to atrocities and war crimes that can lead to real life consequences.

ex. killing civilians, destroying civilian infrastructure, torture, executions etc.

your thoughts? Do video game developers need to comply with Geneva conventions as well when designing games???

[therifleman]

Pixels

/thread

[Maine Finn]

What about all those drama/action movies where the plot essentially revolves around one guy who goes around shooting people, blowing things up, et cetera? Those have been coming out for years without having to 'comply' with the Geneva Conventions.

[Rugal09]

What about all those drama/action movies where the plot essentially revolves around one guy who goes around shooting people, blowing things up, et cetera? Those have been coming out for years without having to 'comply' with the Geneva Conventions.

The researchers focus more on video games because of their "interactive" nature.

[Havoc345]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8373794.stm

Cliffs:
-basically some researchers are saying that interactive video games are allowing people to commit virtual war crimes that go against international humanitarian law.

-they argue that even though it is virtual, it desensitizes people to atrocities and war crimes that can lead to real life consequences.

ex. killing civilians, destroying civilian infrastructure, torture, executions etc.

your thoughts? Do video game developers need to comply with Geneva conventions as well when designing games???


This is ****ing beyond idiotic and a serious violation of free speech and expression

[Maine Finn]

The researchers focus more on video games because of their "interactive" nature.

I get that, but if they're claiming that video games 'desensitize' people to war crimes, they're only getting half a signal. Violent movies - and to an extent, violent literature - have a lot of sway over impressionable folks too.

[Rugal09]

I get that, but if they're claiming that video games 'desensitize' people to war crimes, they're only getting half a signal. Violent movies - and to an extent, violent literature - have a lot of sway over impressionable folks too.

Ah yes, but in movies you have to absorb what you see. The only control you have is to turn the movie on or off. In video games, you have a choice of making or taking certain actions. You create your own story.

[Roids]

Crap, the mindless killing in video games they use to support their claims actually debunks it. In order to have "dehumanization" there needs to be some ideology for a person to actually consider their fellow human inferior to them. If anything, movies and literature can actually change how people view their fellow man much more then some video games where the most thinking power is moving point A to point B. Do we call an exterminator a mass murderer because he extinguishes a bee hive? The bees have more life value then the pixels yet they are not ostracized by society. Even if you argue that when what I am saying only applies to rational thinking people and does not include those who cannot distinguish the game from reality(IMO very few), do you really think the game is going to set off these much deeper psychological problems by itself?

Even the anti-game posterchilds, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, besides the psychological speculation, had a deep inbred ideology that what they were doing was "natural selection". I have yet to see a game that promotes any ideology that realistically promotes and shows that violence is what should be used to excel in society. Even the GTA games cannot even come minutely close to shaping a person's view on the world as redbeard's "Might is Right" in that regard.

[TheKiwi]

If this was the case, you would have seen a massive upsurge in shooting violence in the places where video games are most popular since the mid-1990's when they first came on the scene in a major way. Instead, you will note that the atrocities tend to take place where video games (and indeed electricity) are non-existent.

Researchers - 0, Reality - 1

[bono]

Typical virtual war criminal

http://i48.tinypic.com/1r89e1.jpg

[budgie]

As an avid gamer I have to defend the industry. There are several reasons why violence in games is not just 'mindless':

1) In-game consequences. Sure you can kill civilians or prisoners in some war games, or go on a rampage in GTAIV, but if you do, you get penalized, not rewarded.

2) In action games as in action movies, conflict drives the story. It can even be sensible, tactical and educational as in strategy crossovers like BIA or Rogue Spear. Some games give you a mental workout not unlike chess and other strategy board games.

3) As in action movies and anything else with objectionable content - there are ratings. Not all games are for kids and it says so clearly on the box.

And this is the main point. Once the naysayers accept that games are not just for children, they'll stop worring about the negative effects some games may have on a market that shouldn't even be playing them. Young adults and mature gamers know the difference between reality and fantasy. In fact so do most children over the age of ten.

[LineDoggie]

Jesus, I can see it now


Today in the dock at the Hague, Bobby Jones, 11 from Dayton is accused of murdering 123 villagers during a particularly nasty bit of genocide in CoD2 Modern Warfare.

Time to re-open/re-build Spandau?

[LineDoggie]

I get that, but if they're claiming that video games 'desensitize' people to war crimes, they're only getting half a signal. Violent movies - and to an extent, violent literature - have a lot of sway over impressionable folks too.It's all Bull****, I grew up on Wyle E. Coyote and Never dropped an Acme safe on anyone, I think?

[Shurik SST]

Who is the victim of virtual crime?

[Mastermind]

It's all Bull****, I grew up on Wyle E. Coyote and Never dropped an Acme safe on anyone, I think?
Ha...same with me...well, not on purpose, anyway.

[Jippo]

Cliffs:
-basically some researchers are saying that interactive video games are allowing people to commit virtual war crimes that go against international humanitarian law.

-they argue that even though it is virtual, it desensitizes people to atrocities and war crimes that can lead to real life consequences.

ex. killing civilians, destroying civilian infrastructure, torture, executions etc.

your thoughts? Do video game developers need to comply with Geneva conventions as well when designing games???

It is a well published area of research. I suggest reading David Grossman (Lt Col, shrink) and the likes.

It is quite clearly presented that people can be and are desinsitized by such games. In fact military uses such games as a training aid, which in itself speaks a lot.

People don't flip & go kill everyone because they play. But for people who are on the verge, or have gone over, they will have an influence.

Dave Grossman:

http://www.killology.com/bio.htm

Read about the man. I can also recommend his books "On killing" and "On combat". First one goes about this matter, civilian side and cops mostly. Latter is about psychological aspects of combat.

[Mastermind]

So...woudl there be a vidoe game called, "War Crimes Tribunal"?

If the game designers are ultimately forced by the PC Nazis to institute "Civilized Rules of War" into their games, would those rules apply to the virtual enemy when the virtual enemy are Taliban types, who so far, have not exhibited adherence to even the most rudimentary rules of humanity, much less rules of "civilized" warfare.

Seriously, war is inhumane...it is hell released on earth and has no limits as to potential for cruelty and destruction.

You can not fight a war without barbarity....unless, you fight it in highly stylized ways. (some primitive societies have actually adopted such high minded bloodless fighting).

This "rules" fighting is utter nonsense...Modern war with such incredible high stakes is going to continue to be released horror.

When you are faced with a blood thirsty, barbaric, beast of an enemy, such as we face today, you must fight on his level...or fail in your resistance.

You might as well save the lives of your soldiers and surrender to the will of the enemy....you have chosen to suffer the consequences rather than lower yourself to the barbarian's level...this is obviously equivalent to insanity.

In my opinion, the reasons we are involved in these long, endless, bloody wars of today is because we have lost the primary principles of warfare. We choose, as a society, to fight wars in a fantasy of moralistic virtues that have no place what-so-ever on any battlefield.

[PeterG]

So...woudl there be a vidoe game called, "War Crimes Tribunal"?

If the game designers are ultimately forced by the PC Nazis to institute "Civilized Rules of War" into their games, would those rules apply to the virtual enemy when the virtual enemy are Taliban types, who so far, have not exhibited adherence to even the most rudimentary rules of humanity, much less rules of "civilized" warfare.

Seriously, war is inhumane...it is hell released on earth and has no limits as to potential for cruelty and destruction.

You can not fight a war without barbarity....unless, you fight it in highly stylized ways. (some primitive societies have actually adopted such high minded bloodless fighting).

This "rules" fighting is utter nonsense...Modern war with such incredible high stakes is going to continue to be released horror.

When you are faced with a blood thirsty, barbaric, beast of an enemy, such as we face today, you must fight on his level...or fail in your resistance.

You might as well save the lives of your soldiers and surrender to the will of the enemy....you have chosen to suffer the consequences rather than lower yourself to the barbarian's level...this is obviously equivalent to insanity.

In my opinion, the reasons we are involved in these long, endless, bloody wars of today is because we have lost the primary principles of warfare. We choose, as a society, to fight wars in a fantasy of moralistic virtues that have no place what-so-ever on any battlefield.



QFT! If i was a CIC and faced with constant attacks - like from villages in south Lebanon, or tribal areas in Pakistan, i would have made it very, very clear that i would be willing to go far to have a fair, lasting political solution. If the other party still insisted on war - i would have wiped them out, even if they hid behind the skirts of their women.

You should be honest and honorable politically, and always prepared to do what is right. Not wage war on behalf of greedy corporations and corrupt dictators. But if someone forces you to fight - than fight in the spirit of Genghiz Khan and Curtis LeMay!

We will never 'win hearts and minds' of fundamentalist islamists. That is wishful thinking.

[Mastermind]

QFT! If i was a CIC and faced with constant attacks - like from villages in south Lebanon, or tribal areas in Pakistan, i would have made it very, very clear that i would be willing to go far to have a fair, lasting political solution. If the other party still insisted on war - i would have wiped them out, even if they hid behind the skirts of their women.

You should be honest and honorable politically, and always prepared to do what is right. Not wage war on behalf of greedy corporations and corrupt dictators. But if someone forces you to fight - than fight in the spirit of Genghiz Khan and Curtis LeMay!

We will never 'win hearts and minds' of fundamentalist islamists. That is wishful thinking.
Exactly...this is the way Caesar fought in Gaul. An offer..."Meet my demands." Then, upon refusal, a release of absolute horror...saving but a few witnesses....to send on to the next tribe to recite the events...then, a visit from Caesar..."Meet my demands or suffer the consequences.".

He made sure his initial demands were not totally repugnant...in fact, he often made them quite appealing, really. But, any enemy that refused him was annihilated. Soon, his reputation was winning battles for him. That saved countless lives of both his soldiers and his potential enemies.

[Jippo]

Laws are what they are, and until they are changed they are there to be obeyed.

But how does this relate to videogames?

[Uglymug]

Ah yes, but in movies you have to absorb what you see. The only control you have is to turn the movie on or off. In video games, you have a choice of making or taking certain actions. You create your own story.

No, you are not creating your own story. Maybe with games like GTA, but the main targets of the anti-gaming/violence industry has been focus on FPS games, and most certainly MW2 in the latest of times. Regardless, all games have a linear content in which the story is already made-out for you. You are essentially participating in a movie, only the difference is you decide when someones dies and how, with the movement of a mouse and keyboard. The old farts and green-peace poofters who are against violent video games will die off soon anyway, time is on my side.

Mouses and keyboards it seems have violated my liberties which allow me to slay an airport full of Russians in a game consisting of moving pixels. Awesome.

[Timmy!]

1) In-game consequences. Sure you can kill civilians or prisoners in some war games, or go on a rampage in GTAIV, but if you do, you get penalized, not rewarded.
Postal and MW2 come to my mind

[tluassa]

Lets all stop drinking, listening to loud music, smoking, having ***, driving Cars, eating Meat, watching TV, playing PC games, (at best ban all electrical devices to be sure !) and instead start enjoying only prescribed activities that have the "Greenpeace", "Amnesty International" and "UN Human rights friendly thing" stamp.

Believe me, our lives will be funny as hell, entertaining, and full of exiting action ...

[Arnie100]

Some of these "researchers" seriously have no lives...

[Jippo]

There is no way that violent games could be banned, it is too mainstream.

But it is quite important to understand what percieved violence does to humans and act accordingly. Hiding problems with violence exposure serves no purpose. It is far better to have a sensible discussion about it, admit that violence does affect people, and accept the negative that comes with it. It is clear that smoking or drinking will cause grown-ups always muuuuch more health problems than playing games.

The issue is minors who are still vulnerable to bad influence. It is the same as with movies, society accepts violence as part of the movies. Yet there are PG-ratings.

This is quite important issue about raising kids IMHO. Unfortunately there is too little information around and no proper discussion can be had. Gamers do not accept that there could be anything wrong or harmful in their hobby and soccer mums want to ban everything. There seems to be nothing in the middle.

[Astaran]

Uh yeah, I'm a bad, bad man because I destroyed entire planets in Master of Orion II, nuked cities just for fun in Civilization, slaughtered complete armies in Empire: Total war and massacered prisoners in Medieval: Total War.

I accept it: I don't deserve to live, because I enjoy those games. The Human Rights guys convinced me :(







:cantbeli:

[AgentX]

I loved Manhunt.

/thread

[PsihoKeke]

Those who violate international humanitarian law end up as war criminals, not as winners
Bull****, only losers get prosecuted.

Games are games, but there are people that would like to sanitise and regulate all aspects of our lives so it wouldn't offend them. It's for the children offcourse.

[Uglymug]

There is no way that violent games could be banned, it is too mainstream.

But it is quite important to understand what percieved violence does to humans and act accordingly. Hiding problems with violence exposure serves no purpose. It is far better to have a sensible discussion about it, admit that violence does affect people, and accept the negative that comes with it. It is clear that smoking or drinking will cause grown-ups always muuuuch more health problems than playing games.

The issue is minors who are still vulnerable to bad influence. It is the same as with movies, society accepts violence as part of the movies. Yet there are PG-ratings.

This is quite important issue about raising kids IMHO. Unfortunately there is too little information around and no proper discussion can be had. Gamers do not accept that there could be anything wrong or harmful in their hobby and soccer mums want to ban everything. There seems to be nothing in the middle.

Gamers don't accept that violent videogames produce violence because they believe that because it doesn't desensitize them. It is not because they are biased, but why does there need to be a 'middle ground'? Because you said so?

According to you, Japanese children who have some sort of mental illness must have striking similarities to characters in Stalker and Manhunt, and whatever other violent rubbish that comes up in the video game industry.

I suggest Penn & Tellers episode on this subject.

[Jippo]

It is quite an established fact that seeing violence de-sensitises humans.

Games are worse because it is active participation instead of passive. What makes it worse is the fact that in many games violent reaction is rewarded instantly (in the form of points etc.) Such a action-reaction can be and is used every day in every developed military to train soldiers to kill, and is very useful in that too. All of the above are facts, and you can read about them in studies and books (I gave a link in one of the previous posts). These things are human psyche and will not go away no matter how much you cry and stomp your feet.

Another fact is that 99,5% people are able to deal with such violence just fine. For many people violent fantasies may well reduce the actual violent tendencies as they offer a way to relieve real-life stress. I enjoy violent games, and I don't think I will pop into Sheremetyevo and slaughter 100 innocent bystanders, even though I just played that scene in a game few days ago. You may be the same, but not everyone is.

I am desensitised by the games I play, and so are you if you play such games. It doesn't mean you will go on a rampage, you are just a tad less sensitive to violence, real violence and imaginary violence all the same. That in itself is not harmful, especially so if you realise that it is happening to you.

Kids are a different matter as their brain and identity are still developing. Thus the PG limits etc. And yes I watched rated 18 movies whilst underage, and no I didn't kill anyone. But it is better for everyone to pick up reading on the matter since it is there. There is no point in myself trying to write another book on the matter here.

[Dercius]

This is so stupid that even trying to understand the way this retards came up with this theory is killing my brain cells at a speedy rate. Yeaaah, after I saw King Kong for the first time I have being killing every single ape that has crossed my path, same applies to sharks and anacondas, few times a year I go down there to make this planet a safer place.

[Jippo]

"Teaching Kids To Kill":
http://www.killology.com/article_teachkid.htm

And from there onwards few snippets.

Brutalisation:
http://www.killology.com/art_teach_methods.htm

Operant Conditioning:
http://www.killology.com/art_teach_operant.htm


In some instances brutalisation, desensitising and operant conditioning are useful tools and true lifesavers. Namely in police and military training, where they can be used to form a better fighter. But in these institutions they come in framework of strict discipline and control, in which failure to do right is severely punished. Also people how subjected to this kind of training are more or less grown ups who are able to (mostly) deal with it.

[Manc]

Last videogame I saw was pacman, I suppose.
AND I clearly recall going out and eating myself to death (nasty feallas those marshmallows).

[Motukka]

This is so stupid that even trying to understand the way this retards came up with this theory is killing my brain cells at a speedy rate. Yeaaah, after I saw King Kong for the first time I have being killing every single ape that has crossed my path, same applies to sharks and anacondas, few times a year I go down there to make this planet a safer place.

No one would argue that smoking a single cigarrette will kill you instantly, rather that prolonged smoking over the years will increase your risk of developing lung cancer. Likewise, nobody is claiming you turn into a Hitler reincarnate after a few hours of MW2. The question here is more along the lines of: will your exposure to violence cause you to resort to it, in a situation where you would otherwise had maybe stayed your hand.

In my mind this area needs more research. To just shrug everything off because you intellectually know that this is wrong, and therefore can "choose" not to be affected by it, is folly. The environment in which we live in, has a profound effect on our development.

[Siddar]

You cant idiot proof freedom, some people are just going to fail at it.

[PsihoKeke]

Games are convenient scapegoat for violence amongst youth, most people prefer to blame one thing than to actualy look at the myraid of factors that contribute to it. The main factor is shrinking role of parents in primary and secondary socialisation of children, their role increasingly overtaken by popular media that children are exposed to without parental guidence. Thus games are one of the many contributing factors, but media loves to make them look like fifth rider of the apocalypse.

[Astaran]

In my experience it's the other way round:

There are mental ill people who "live" their violent fantasies in computer games. Without games, these persons would torture animals or weaker children like they did in the past when no computer games were around.

It's not like video games "produce" such people. Such people exist and use everything they can find to satisfy their "needs". May it be video games, movies or "real life action".


Concerning militaries or police departments using video games for training:

Of course they use it! Because it's cheaper to put some trainees infront of a PC than let them cruise around in the field for training general tactics etc. Video games can never prepare someone for real life combat or the images he will see there...

[Jippo]

Of course they use it! Because it's cheaper to put some trainees infront of a PC than let them cruise around in the field for training general tactics etc.

I mostly agree with you but I just wanted to add that similar training methodology is used on the field too in the form of pop-up reactive targets (on the shooting range) and MILES gear and equivalents. Especially so with systems like simunition which add also the stress of being actually hit with something that hurts. Pain is a good tool.

[budgie]

Last videogame I saw was pacman, I suppose.
AND I clearly recall going out and eating myself to death (nasty feallas those marshmallows).

Sh!t you too huh? I'm still waiting for that hand to grow back.

[vryhpyammoadded]

I’ve read too much of Niven’s Known Space to see how bad going this ultra paranoid fascist pacification route will be.

Linedoggie… How about I code up a virtual Spandau level for the virtual players making virtual war crimes?

Why do pacifists hate freedom? p-)

[Rayber]

I support the suggestion about watching the Penn&Teller episode on the subject , a really good one actually

[IraGlacialis]

Uh yeah, I'm a bad, bad man because I destroyed entire planets in Master of Orion II, nuked cities just for fun in Civilization, slaughtered complete armies in Empire: Total war and massacered prisoners in Medieval: Total War.Yeah, if they want to talk about human rights, they should be looking at strategy games, especially those that are history-based.
There I can run down surrendering armies, uproot religions that don't follow those of my state, assasinate figures (especially unarmed religious ones), level and repopulate cities to make them more docile, support/put down (harshly) anarchic rebellions, partake in piracy, and be an all-around **** of a dictator. If that is not violation of human rights, I don't know what is.
...
Fun games aren't they? :)

[welshmann]

Yeah, if they want to talk about human rights, they should be looking at strategy games, especially those that are history-based.
There I can run down surrendering armies, uproot religions that don't follow those of my state, assasinate figures (especially unarmed religious ones), level and repopulate cities to make them more docile, support/put down (harshly) anarchic rebellions, partake in piracy, and be an all-around **** of a dictator. If that is not violation of human rights, I don't know what is.
...
Fun games aren't they? :)

check ure in box,i just give u a firbe opic headbutt!!!(joke by the way)


oh come on guys,its a bloody game,how many mil places/collages etc run past battles through officers,tactics etc learned this way....anyway.

[Mastermind]

Bull****, only losers get prosecuted.

Games are games, but there are people that would like to sanitise and regulate all aspects of our lives so it wouldn't offend them. It's for the children offcourse.

Right on!

If the Allies had lost WWII, there would not have been many trials...only arrests and executions. Harris, Lemay, Eisenhower, MacArthur, Spaatz, Arnold, Montgomery, Patton, Halsey...to name just a few firing squad candidates.

What is ironic; By the standards of the Allied run war crimes tribunals, considering war crimes against humanity, most of those named would have been punished according to proper law.

Be that for another thread....but, it serves to prove the point. History, and law is written by the victors.

[MN_Air]

I believe that all violent video games should be abolished.

Do you remember that russian that was raiding the fridge? He probably had a wife and 3 kids back home, depending on the money he gets from being in the military because the wife lost her job in the nuclear bomb factory after the soviet union collapsed. And you just shot him in the face.

Virtual character genocide needs to stop now before it is too late!

[Rossdobby]

In the new Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. On one mission I was an American Special Forces operative that had infiltrated a Russian terror group. AT the beginning of the mission I walked out into the shopping mall. Opened fire and killed every civilian that was in that building and then I killed The cops That came after me. Then I died and the game continues.

I can safely say that I do not wanna go to a shopping mall and open fire.

[budgie]

[QUOTE=Astaran;4578227]Uh yeah, I'm a bad, bad man because I destroyed entire planets in Master of Orion II, nuked cities just for fun in Civilization, slaughtered complete armies in Empire: Total war and massacered prisoners in Medieval: Total War.

[QUOTE]

I had a rule in Rome Total War. When I took a province I allowed its inhabitants to go on as normal with a lowered tax rate and some infrastructure spending. If they staged an uprising once I'd put it down and overlook it. The second time, I'd put it down and enslave the populace. The third time I'd put the whole city to the sword. Very effective.

[Arnie100]

I had fun calling in kinetic strikes on enemy positions when I played Tom Clancy's EndWar...what does that make me?

[Jippo]

I can safely say that I do not wanna go to a shopping mall and open fire.

Yeah, in your case I would be more worried about the fact that you can't tell when you are in an airport and when in a shopping mall.

[TacoDelRio]

People don't flip & go kill everyone because they play. But for people who are on the verge, or have gone over, they will have an influence.

With all due respect, Jippo, someone who is on the verge or over the edge is committed. Once one is committed, they're going to do something. They're not "on the fence", as in, "Eh, maybe I won't blow up the office building today, I'll just go get a latte and read a book."

Also... a touchy subject regarding "desensitizing" people... how "sensitive" do we want people to be? I grew up hunting, shooting, dealing with dead animals, whereas other kids did not. Other kids flipped out if they saw blood or a rabbit or something, or a spider. I'm sure everyone on here can relate. So many "kids" are so damn sensitive and honestly really feminine nowadays that it's sad.

I doubt games will change someone this much. FWIW, someone = average kid, in my equation.

I apologize if any of this post was hard to follow. I'm not so great with writing and whatnot. :)

[Elbs]

I had a rule in Rome Total War. When I took a province I allowed its inhabitants to go on as normal with a lowered tax rate and some infrastructure spending. If they staged an uprising once I'd put it down and overlook it. The second time, I'd put it down and enslave the populace. The third time I'd put the whole city to the sword. Very effective.

Should have killed them all as soon as you took the city. Keeps rebellion down and prevents problems in the long run p-)

RTW was a fantastic game.

[Sootan]

Uh yeah, I'm a bad, bad man because I destroyed entire planets in Master of Orion II, nuked cities just for fun in Civilization, slaughtered complete armies in Empire: Total war and massacered prisoners in Medieval: Total War.

I accept it: I don't deserve to live, because I enjoy those games. The Human Rights guys convinced me :(





And there was the Planet Buster in Alpha Centaury :lol:

[toki]

Not relating to violence, but if i had a kid who'd call himself and avid gamer with 10 or 12 i'd sure be a bit worried and took care that he has some kind of team sports to go to.
If xbox live is your only friend from 12 on, nothing good will be the result. IMHO it is full of retards and the head-set culture sure left a mark on many, if they're too young.

Violent or not doesn't really make a difference, it's the general dose.

[Elbs]

Violent or not doesn't really make a difference, it's the general dose.

x2 whatever happened to going outside and actually doing stuff.

[TacoDelRio]

What Toki said.

Go outside, get some social skillz, and level up with the babes.

[PsihoKeke]

Go outside, get some social skillz, and level up with the babes.
11-25-2009 11:28 AM
Bah, that's for n00bs who can't find **** on the internetz.

[Jippo]

With all due respect, Jippo, someone who is on the verge or over the edge is committed. Once one is committed, they're going to do something. They're not "on the fence", as in, "Eh, maybe I won't blow up the office building today, I'll just go get a latte and read a book."

It is not on/off switch, world is grey not black and white. It just makes it easier to "blow up an office" when one has previous experience of it. Even virtual. In the way like the last straw that broke the camels back.


Also... a touchy subject regarding "desensitizing" people... how "sensitive" do we want people to be? I grew up hunting, shooting, dealing with dead animals, whereas other kids did not. Other kids flipped out if they saw blood or a rabbit or something, or a spider. I'm sure everyone on here can relate. So many "kids" are so damn sensitive and honestly really feminine nowadays that it's sad.

That is pretty much what I tried to say, but different words. What I see as a problem is:

Pimple faced 12 year old gamer says: "Games don't do **** to me or anyone else, so jerk-off!"

Soccer mum says: "Games made my kid burn down the school, burn the games now before they hurt someone else!"

Both are equally wrong. Games affect everyone, ****, everything you do alters you. Violence is just one aspect of life just like everything else, so more there is, more your mind will adapt to cope with it. On the other hand games don't make people do anything. They just might help in reducing natural inhibitions for violence as mental training to kill, give ideas, etc... They don't trigger anything in themselves, they aren't the cause, they are more enablers than anything.

What comes to sensitivity. I think the society is far too PC these days, and AFAIK we are nowehere near US levels in that. People have forgot that killing is normal natural part of life and despise it and people who kill for a living or a hobby. Yet they buy meat from the supermarket and watch zombie movies for fun. If anything that is ****ed up IMHO.

I personally will have no problems teaching my kids to kill, but that lesson will come with discipline and responsibility. I don't see that as a problem. Killing is good and natural and they will learn to hunt and shoot when they can hold the rifle in their hands.

But you can bet I'll follow PG-ratings when it comes to having fun with killing of pixels and actors. They'll think it is unfair, but so be it, life is.



I doubt games will change someone this much. FWIW, someone = average kid, in my equation.

If the kid is more or less grown up, I agree.

[MaDuce]

...but I finally go enough of a killstreak for Tactical Nuke so what If it's a war crime.

[Nano]

1984 anyone? These retards are trying to create some basis for thought crimes. This is how it appears to me. These human rights researchers should be worried about real not perceived or virtual human atrocities given that there are more than plenty out there.
Then again being a virtual human rights protector is in actuality easier and less ****e to actual protecting human rights. The only people who benefit here are these virtual human rightists who get to live a rather shallow and supposedly principled life on someone else dime without real cost to their personal lives or having an impact on human rights.(not pixels, meshes,etc)

Let suppose you're are already a psychopath etc.and the only thing that keeps you from playing out your wild fantasies is carrying them out in a game.
Now I propose to these researchers is that a negative about these games or a positive. I'd much rather have criminal masterminds play their sick fantasies out in a harmless game than play them out in reality.

[TacoDelRio]

Jippo, I agree with ya on those points. Just kinda always amazed that the media, in whatever form, is always making mountains out of molehills.

[IraGlacialis]

Just kinda always amazed that the media, in whatever form, is always making mountains out of molehills.
That stuff sells. *shrugs*

[Mastermind]

Sorry...wrong post to wrong thread

[Tucker217]

This is idiotic as games show how bad Warfare and War Crimes are, So Geneva Convention You can go F*** yourself.

[Jippo]

This is idiotic as games show how bad Warfare and War Crimes are, So Geneva Convention You can go F*** yourself.

No offense, but if they did show that, they wouldn't be very popular.

[Tucker217]

Yeah I know they show bad warfare is but make it sort of enjoyable to play

[Sergei Litvin]

Jesus, I can see it now


Today in the dock at the Hague, Bobby Jones, 11 from Dayton is accused of murdering 123 villagers during a particularly nasty bit of genocide in CoD2 Modern Warfare.

Time to re-open/re-build Spandau?


Speaking about CoD2 Modern Warfare, I found murdering hundreds of Russian civilians just for the lulz a very poor choice and taste.
The jerks who programmed this game are really sick individuals.

[Sootan]

Speaking about CoD2 Modern Warfare, I found murdering hundreds of Russian civilians just for the lulz a very poor choice and taste.
The jerks who programmed this game are really sick individuals.

In plenty of other games (FPS, RPG etc), it was possible to go berserk and kill bystanders/NPCs. CODMW2 only took it to a higher level of realism, graphic wise.

[TacoDelRio]

That stuff sells. *shrugs*

Absolutely. It's the best response I could come up with. [Light-hearted giggling smiley face.]

[martinexsquaddie]

I'm going to jail
had an arguement with my wife over laughing at blowing up a village on MIA old old vietnam war vidoe game.
its wrong your evil
er there just pixels
your wrong it should be against the law
me thinks deseperatly yes dear.


help some body phone amnesty
hang on possibly don't not sure they have forgiven me for suggesting there reports give great suggestions for interrogations:(

[Astaran]

I'm waiting for some vegetarian Hippies to find this little video and the upcoming outrage!

I can see the headlines:

Murderous video games permit slaughter of poor animals for fun


http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/eZ_IlKiRxMs&NR=1


p-)