General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumswhat is it with DU's collective reluctance to criticize violent video games?
No, I don't think they cause mass murders, but I do think they're part of an ever growing ugly cultural mindset that celebrates the worst, crudest, most violent shit.
Grand Theft Auto 5 Review
<snip>
Grand Theft Auto 5 is detailed and beautiful, and evidently the work of game developers who are at the height of their powers, but it's not an intelligent game. It's written terribly and sits as proof that Rockstar's trademark, so-called biting satire, in fact boils down to misogyny and racism.
<snip>
But dozens of other reviews have praised these things already and I'm on a tight word limit here. So I want to focus on what struck me the most about Grand Theft Auto 5: The bad writing, the rampant sexism and how, after 16-years making these games, Rockstar seems to have lost its cool.
<snip>
That's how the game treats race. It treats gender even worse.
Michael's daughter has a tattoo that says "Skank." A radio station advertises a college where women can learn to screw better. There's a level where you're chasing an actress because a paparazzi friend wants to get a photo of her "low-hanging muff."
Almost everything in Grand Theft Auto 5 is at the expense of women. The constant gags about female bodies are one thing, but the game consistently marginalises women and their sexuality:
- Franklin's auntie wants to start a feminist discussion group at her house. The game refers to her constantly as a "crazy bitch."
<snip>
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/507050/20130918/grand-theft-auto-5-review.htm
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Orrex
(63,208 posts)There's often been a certain tsk-tsking about it, but as a culture we adore violence and ugliness.
Why would we expect our response to violent video games to be different?
cali
(114,904 posts)supposedly doesn't celebrate sexism and racism.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Can you link to a thread where this occurred?
We are, after all, a microcosm, and in my experience any cultural microcosm will quickly configure itself to mirror the larger culture, warts and all.
I don't personally object to violent videogames because, like you, I can distinguish fiction from reality. I suspect that many people enjoy the vicarious, fantastical adventure that such games afford, or they appreciate the technical achievement, or the like having the ability to interact with real people in virtual environments.
Are these DUers specifically celebrating the sexism & racism, or are they celebrating a game that includes these elements? Gamers should be mature enough to acknowledge the faults of their favored game, but even if they resist criticisms that elements of the games are sexist or racist, I don't believe that's the same as celebrating racism or sexism.
Precisely
(358 posts)"what is it with DU's collective reluctance to criticize violent video games?"
reluctance to criticize, not "celebrate"
"I suspect that many people enjoy the vicarious, fantastical adventure that such games afford." Many people who are reluctant to criticize sexism and racism?
Orrex
(63,208 posts)I asked for an example of the celebration described in that post.
Maybe, and maybe not. One can criticize elements of a game while still playing it, just as a viewer can enjoy an overall film while finding part of the film acutely distasteful.
Precisely
(358 posts)claim that there was a celebration. duh.
and duh again. more sidestepping bs.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)By asserting that DU doesn't normally celebrate sexism and racism, Cali is indicating that there exist contrary cases in which DU does celebrate these things. I'm simply asking for a citation. It's not sidestepping at all. It's not bullshit at all.
If you have such a citation to share, please do so. Otherwise, don't pretend that the question is bullshit simply because you don't care to answer it.
Precisely
(358 posts)Orrex
(63,208 posts)Keep at it--you'll figure it out eventually.
Or maybe not.
Look, it's late and I need to turn in.
Are you going to post anything worth revisiting tomorrow, or should I forget what you've dropped on the thread so far?
Precisely
(358 posts)God bless you
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)and still very strongly supports raping women.
We have, however, moved towards social justice for various groups.
So your reply or excuse is basically, same as it ever was.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)So your replly or excuse is basically "nothing that a culture does can be distinguished good from bad."
Before you can declare that fictionalized violence should be rejected for the same or equivalent reasons that we reject the subjugation of blacks or gays, you need to demonstrate that fictional portrayals of violence are as bad as the subjugation of blacks or gays.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)for the spawn of the poor that's been achieved in America is equivalent to the formerly universal and officially sanctioned bigotry that still exists?
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Precisely
(358 posts)"always"? No.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Has there ever been a time when we haven't eagerly engaged in war?
Has there ever been a time when our culture hasn't embrace violent entertainment, whether in books, film, or on screen?
I know exactly what I'm claiming, and my claim is correct.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)You make some pretty grand assumptions. Just what is "Our Culture"? You are implying that your understanding of our culture is only what you think it is. You are assuming that "our culture" (and that in itself is a mouthful), that our culture is static. It is not. It has evolved throughout history and comes in uncountable forms. What one group, nationality, political system, or city block has done in the past is history only; it's where we were once. You may be content with living in a static universe where what has been will always be, but most of humanity has changed considerably over time and continues to thrive on change whether toward peace or toward war.
Our culture is what we make of it.
What do you want your culture to be?
well put
Orrex
(63,208 posts)To assert that an element of culture is recurrent is in no way the same as claiming that the culture as a whole is stagnant. I assert that our culture has always had language. How does this imply stagnation? Your premiss is false.
"Our culture" is all of human civilization, which for the sake of convenience I will limit here to the span of recorded history. Recorded history does not abound with persistent, sizable, non-isolated societies that altogether shunned violence. How many can you name?
We are a violent species. If you think that we are not, then I trust that you never lock your house or car.
Our culture is the emergent phenomenon resulting from the interactions of billions. Who am I to presume to have any say in that? Why should my wish supersede billions?
Precisely
(358 posts)this rhetorical game is a waste of time
defacto7
(13,485 posts)You are absolutely sure you are correct. My condolences. Defending your point seems to be your point. The ancient Hebrew word for arrogance does not translate smoothly into English. But it comes close to the following: One who is unteachable or unwilling to learn. And see my signature.
BTW,
"...Who am I to presume to have any say in that?"
You are having that say right now and it is affecting those who read this post.
"Why should my wish supersede billions?"
It doesn't have to supersede anything. It just has to be a path and that path is either cultivating peace or cultivating its antithesis.
We do have ugliness in human history. But our choices and out compassion are the tool we have to evolve. He have, we do, and will continue to change based on our choices.
Not much else to discuss here so,
Be well, and I hope you find your peace.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Rather, I am simply arguing that violence has been, is, and will continue to be a major part of our culture, that our culture has always embraced this, and that video games are simply more of the same. No one here has offered a persuasive rebuttal to this argument. Instead, the argument is attacked on aesthetic grounds or dismissed as a rhetorical game, and I am criticized as an arrogant know-it-all.
That is also incorrect. I am not unyielding in my views, and I will happily change my view if presented with a compelling refutation or evidence to the contrary. However, that has not happened in this discussion.
Additionally, it is hardly arrogant to assert one's claims to be correct. Do you begin many posts by declaring yourself to be wrong?
You are having that say right now and it is affecting those who read this post.
Be well, and I hope you find your peace.
Precisely
(358 posts)"Our culture has always celebrated the worst, crudest, most violent shit."
Was your claim. It's been pointed out how vague and arbitrary. What does that actually mean? Whatever you think it does.
"There's often been a certain tsk-tsking about it, but as a culture we adore violence and ugliness."
"Why would we expect our response to violent video games to be different?"
What do you think? Why do you think violent video games would be different. Honestly.
Where is there anything previous comparable with GTA? Specifically.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)In real life, you normally can't have access to race cars, or rockets, or fighter jets, or machine guns. You can't jump twenty feet straight up in the air, or wield a sword like a master, or explore a nuclear wasteland, or walk through teleportation portals. In real life, you can't blow away people who piss you off. You can't shoot zombie clowns, or slit the throats of Renaissance-era Italian nobles, or match wits with a psychotic AI.
But in video games you can.
Video games offer vicarious experiences that are pretty damned fun.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Parents need to be more responsible in what they allow their children access to.
I see nothing wrong with some college aged kids playing some grand theft auto but not a 7 year old.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Art is sacred. Stuff like that.
It seems to leave out the idea that speech that's been criticised still came for free.
Drale
(7,932 posts)I don't see DU'ers criticizing paintings, poems, or music either. Video games are one of those things you have a choice about, if you don't like them don't play them, if you don't like a certain one don't play that game but don't criticize others for liking and playing that game.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)It's not a slippery slope if it happens over and over again. Just like books (Hate to do this, but ask the Nazis). Just like movies (Production Code led to censorship). Just like music (PRMC demanding labels led to stores blocking sales of "Parental Advisory"-labeled music, forcing artists to change lyrics or take the financial hit).
I think I'll quote Ice-T talking to Tipper Gore:
"Yo Tip, what's the matter? You ain't gettin' no dick?
You're bitchin' about rock'n'roll, that's censorship, dumb bitch
The Constitution says we all got a right to speak
Say what we want Tip, your argument is weak"
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Speech that doesn't offend anyone doesn't require protection.
alp227
(32,020 posts)Only drones do so. "Free speech" is NOT a defense of speech. The onus is on the speaker to defend the speech!
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)It's on the person demanding censorship. They should have to explain how Dead Kennedy's "Kill the Poor" is inciting violence (it isn't) and should be banned, or how "Rocky Mountain High" was promoting drug use (it isn't) and should be banned.
Parents can take an active fucking interest in their kids' music. They can pick up a liner sleeve and read the lyrics just like (or arguably better) than the kids. That's why when my sister was on a two-year Alanis and Jewel kick, I learned about Billy Joel, Carlos Santana and Janis Joplin because my parents took an interest and said, "no, THIS is good music." That's why when the other kids were reading Harry Potter and Goosebumps, I was reading the originals of Tolkien and Poe.
If you're too lazy to bother as a parent, shame on you.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)If artists are so desperate for the almighty dollar and their vulgar ties that they cannot even withstand parental advisories, then that says one hell if a lot about our culture and your artist
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)an overly reactionary corporate machine that bows to the whims of a few parents who are too lazy to read the liner notes. Yeah, it's extortion and censorship. The PMRC held an economic gun to the heads of artists.
Go play with the NRA, which prefers censorship of video games and movies to anything actually involving the problems at hand — like, you know, how crazy people can go buy guns.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)You are beyond extreme and the hyperbole you spew is pathetic
MADem
(135,425 posts)She just wanted parents to have a way to understand what the hell their kids were buying with the money their very same parents gave them.
Ice-T's attempt to portray her as "sexually frustrated" because she had the nerve to give a shit about influences on young kids is just stupid, sexist and reflects very poorly on him--I'll bet he wishes he could take back those words, they make him sound like a misogynist asswipe. Nowadays, I'm betting he's on HER team.
With age--and children--one's perspective changes. Funny how that works.
No one was being prevented from making a record--what "Tip" was doing was akin to the ratings system on films and nowadays, on television shows.
Your WALMARTS and other rightwing - leaning businesses will find a reason to exclude material they don't like. Other outlets will eagerly pick up the slack and charge full price, no discount.
Nowadays, that "censorship" whine is just not operative--people can buy anything online, and merchants are all about those benjamins.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)But she was pretty successful.
BTW, when this came out, there was no Internet for sales. There was just the local record store — which had already taken a huge hit — and big box stores like Walmart, which had to bow to political pressure to not carry music with a Tipper Sticker. YES, artists who depend on sales to, well, live, needed to have their albums in the biggest stores, otherwise the cost of production is too high and labels would dump them.
It was extortion. Yes, it did prevent people from making the music they wanted to make. Ergo, censorship.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Her efforts more likely had the very opposite effect. Forbidden fruit, and all that. Slap a Parental Advisory sticker on a piece of shit song, and kids wanted it because it was forbidden:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resource_Center
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Vomit?
Or is that free speech forbidden, kinda like you scream about tippers right to speak out about parental ratings.
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)
Precisely
(358 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)and are only dangerous in the hands of a relative few. If we actually admit that, well...
Ohio Joe
(21,755 posts)They get blamed here for violence on a regular basis.
Throd
(7,208 posts)BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)...they love a game that feeds the Wolf ?
Don't care for them myself, which doesn't mean anything but I do like Role-playing games and puzzle stuff.
Remember Myst and it's offspring 
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)I'm talking about criticism and you start squawking about fucking banning.
I hate disingenuous crapola.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)I would submit that "criticizing" things like violent video games, or porn, or what have you is just step one in a passive-aggressive attempt to shame consumers into changing their consumption, which inevitably would lead to the gradual disappearance of the demand, thus effectively ending the production of such materials. Of course, all of these social engineers are very, very careful to make sure they never actually use words like "ban", or "outlaw", but the end goal is still exactly the same.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Come on - have film critics ruined movies because they pointed out that some of them are bad? Are there still movies to go see? And does anybody think that film critics really want to see the film industry go away? Rather they want to trumpet good product while criticizing bad product.
And part of criticizing bad product is usually on a moral level; the great critics haven't shied away from saying that a film is bad on a moral level or encourages bad ideas or opinions. Consider this Kermodian rant about Sex in the City 2 -
The problem is that much video game criticism isn't criticism of a specific game, which may be good or bad, but criticism of the existence of video games or of people who play games.
But to say that all criticism leads to banning is not accurate at all.
Bryant
opiate69
(10,129 posts)for their technical, or artistic merit is one thing, but when the "critic" is making ridiculous, hyperbolic statements like "I do think they're part of an ever growing ugly cultural mindset that celebrates the worst, crudest, most violent shit..." the main thesis of their critique, then I think it clearly implies a desire to see such materials eradicated.
Precisely
(358 posts)and behavior
opiate69
(10,129 posts)(ignoring for now that correalation =/= causation)
Precisely
(358 posts)opiate69
(10,129 posts)Because, worrying about how other people spend their recreational time and money is, generally, an activity associated with the other side of the aisle.
Precisely
(358 posts)unless those "recreations" affect behavior and attitudes toward, say, women, minorities, etc.
It's all good if you don't give a shit about how those are portrayed. Unless you do.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)That people on this side of the aisle were aware that correlation does not equal causation, and that we would hold off on mustering the morality brigade until actual evidence of harm was proffered.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)Such a well thought out and articulated position.
Precisely
(358 posts)doesn't matter how "well thought out and articulated position." And where is the research you refer to?
opiate69
(10,129 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)followed by "MUST BE BANNED".
it isn't like we haven't had this discussion before. I'm just skipping the intermediate steps.
Chess is a very violent game.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)I'd like to know, since you are so roundly and broadly criticizing:
CreekDog (38,055 posts)
Tue Mar 19, 2013
Guns are not toys and shooting is not a game
I'm not asking for laws about the above.
I'm just asking for a new way of thinking.
Yes, it sounds impossible, but we've made strides in elevating non violence as a value, we've made strides about bullying, from thinking it was a necessary part of growing up, to being increasingly battled and recognized for the harm it does.
In the aftermath of the Milk-Moscone assassinations in San Francisco when I was a child http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone%E2%80%93Milk_assassinations, which were just one week after my congressman, Leo Ryan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Ryan, was himself assassinated during the Jonestown Massacre (where my current congresswoman, Jackie Speier http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackie_Speier, was herself shot multiple times and survived)...I was not allowed to have toy guns.
I was disappointed at times that my friends could have them and I could not. But as I got older, though I shot guns, did target practice, I have never liked guns and in my early 20's eliminated even the rare shooting I did do with friends because it put lead into the environment.
I'm not asking people to not own guns in this post.
I'm asking them to make sure the next generation is taught that they aren't toys and that what they do isn't a game --it can be done and it will make a difference.
TeeYiYi
(8,028 posts)...uses violent video games to desensitize soldiers for war.
I doubt Chess is used in the same way.
TYY
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Its the disconnect I'm concerned with. The virtual relationships. The supplements for real human experience and interaction
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)or the printing press or literacy or paper or the alphabet or language. Nothing makes it harder to communicate than inventing new ways to communicate.
Don't you wish we could go back to the days when you could only communicate by grunting and pointing? Those were the days.
Bryant
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)fujiyama
(15,185 posts)and doesn't address the core societal problem of bullying and the cruelty and greed instilled at a young age. Social media itself can be misused like any technology and its usage should be limited and controlled by parents. I also don't understand why all these kids need damn cell phones (that too smartphones!) nowadays. It's kind of ridiculous.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Best damn thing I did
fujiyama
(15,185 posts)I sometimes feel like the smartphone has made me dumber over the years - certainly less focused and more easily distracted.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)
JesterCS
(1,827 posts)I keep Video Games and Real Life separate. I play Battlefield 3. Doesn't mean I'm going to go buy a SMAW anti-tank launcher =p
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I think at a fundamental level, everyone realizes that garbage in equals garbage out. However, I think we'll often rationalize away any meaningful criticisms of what we on a personal level may enjoy, and find a myriad ways to justify (if only to ourselves) garbage as art.
BKH70041
(961 posts)I heard there was a level where you film a prostitute being raped who then has her throat slit. Now, I don't know if the report I heard is true, but if it's even sort of close, that's sick.
I'm not going to get into it with people who say "freedom of expression," etc... I understand the principle you're expressing. But really, as a society do we truly want to go down this path? What happens when we're anesthetized to this and they have to push the envelope even further?
Sure, it may be legal, but that doesn't mean I have to like it or where it very well could be headed.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)"Rocky Mountain High" by John Denver based on the title. Or like CNN reporting random crap prefacing it with "I don't know if this is true or not, but here it is" and then dumping out crap that never was true to begin with.
cemaphonic
(4,138 posts)Additionally, that bit was in a development build, not a final product (which isn't out yet). It was intended as satire, but missed the mark completely, and the studio removed it when all of their QA people reacted with total disgust.
BKH70041
(961 posts)Not having the game or knowing who to ask I could obviously only go off what I heard. I figured if what I heard was inaccurate, someone would come along who knew.
But IMO it's just a matter of time until we have games where you can experience what it would be like to round up Jews, or AA's, or whatever group of people you choose and torture them in a concentration camp, or any number of other atrocities that make stomachs turn just to think about them. For all I know there's games like that already (and if there are, I'd just as soon not be made aware of it).
Precisely
(358 posts)the people arguing for "freedom of speech" and comparing this to Rocky Mountain High have their own yardstick for what kind of garbage is acceptable -- racist and sexist, violent and degrading -- or not. Would they argue for GTA with lynchings and blacks drug behind pickup trucks? Who gets to draw the line? Why pretend it doesn't affect those who "play" it?
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Games fall under free speech -like books.
cali
(114,904 posts)DU goes into a hyperventilating tizzy about censorship every fucking time someone attempts to criticize the sexist racist dog shit in games like GTA.
Guess what? criticism is not the equivalent of advocating for censorship. It appears that you and many others here don't recognize that there's a distinction.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Criticize your fucking ass off then. In terms of the gun discussion, people have called for them to be banned. Hell, there are people here that want to get rid of football.
It appears that you don't recognize that these discussions usually end up going down the free speech path. Don't like it? Tough shit.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Like guns.
Video games: not so much.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)I am not for banning most things.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)In fact, they show people who play violent video games are less likely to use violence in real life. (I really doubt this is due to the games. It's probably economic - games and game systems aren't cheap entertainment.)
The only "negative" found so far is a desensitization to violence that lasts about 30 minutes after playing.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)If there's a more violent video game character than Kirby, I'd like to know who it is.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Precisely
(358 posts)Do you have any links? thanks
jeff47
(26,549 posts)There was one study that had people play games for 20 minutes, and then immediately tested their response to violent imagery. That is linked over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again by those trying to claim video games are destroying society.
So it's going to take a lot of digging to find the one that measured the duration of desensitization - the folks trying to make a buck on the subject aren't interested in linking a study that shows it isn't a problem.
someone offered Wikipedia. If there are links to actual studies, would be interesting.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)We talk all the time about how women are exploited in media and how how they are portrayed is damaging to young women's body image and self worth.
Then we talk about a game or games that are full of misogyny which are played by a lot of young men giving peer acceptance to these ideas but say that has no affect at all. It does not make sense to me that that is so.
I think down the road they will be found to mold perceptions in a negative way. It is just my opinion and I know it is a minority opinion on this board.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)the only they can actually be violent is if you maybe peat somebody over the head with it....
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)There's also a question of how informed the criticism is. Is it based on understanding and appreciating the difference between good video/computer games and bad ones? Or is it a surface level blanket condemnation?
Bryant
1-Old-Man
(2,667 posts)el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)There are good novels and bad novels
There are good movies and bad movies
There are good albums and bad albums
There are good TV shows and bad TV shows
There are good Video Games and bad Video Games
If your criticism of video games is that they are a distraction from the brain dead, isn't it possible you haven't really understood the issue?
JVS
(61,935 posts)
Dash87
(3,220 posts)They replaced music as the NRA's scapegoat.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)
leftstreet
(36,107 posts)That's the weird thing
The missions, quests, stunts, complication and longevity of the game, etc
The sexism and racism seem like some Get Off My Lawn game developers had to throw in their personal creepy agenda
The GTAs are pretty boring now
Driver and Just Cause = sweet!
Mosby
(16,306 posts)Lots of people here are in love with their video games and therefore are incapable of seeing the dark side of many video games.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)month on them.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)There aren't very many dark video games for consoles this gen. Siren: Blood Curse is pretty good though.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)the games and they are not spectator games..the individuals are actively involved.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)as a society to move past it. The games we are speaking about are not spectator sports, nor films
depicting violence, they are actively involved with the kill. The repetition of the game, frequency
they are played bothers me too.
I am not an advocate for banning these games btw. Yet the less time people spend socializing is not
a benefit for any society, imho.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)In fact, the advent of multiplayer games has enabled social interaction during gameplay. Having listened in on some of these interactions I can confirm that they do not adhere to formal rules of polite discourse, but that's equally true of much online interaction.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)a benefit. As I said, I am not an advocate for their banning. Yet, you'll never convince
me they are a benefit and again, the participation is not one of spectator, but an active
shooter.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)In such games the child is not a spectator but is an active shooter. The format has changed, but not the basic concept.
Setting aside the physical activity involved, was there no benefit in this sort of socialization? Why do multiplayer active shooter video games not likewise provide this benefit?
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)nor conclusion with virtual games..it is set in stone.
Maybe you have seen a benefit from people playing together with these games..I can't imagine
it. But I don't need to, if you feel it has been and no valuable time lost, then there is no problem.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Generally, the multiplayer versions of these games do not take place within a rigid story. It's the same computer models and an environment from the story, but the players are not required to follow that story.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)To keep the analogy from above going, they're free to shoot it out just like in "Cops and Robbers". Or "Cowboys and Indians" back in my youth.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)When children play they add whatever dimension their imagination comes up with
and they do not generally play a rote kill game over and over again.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Doesn't happen in video games either. People use their imaginations to come up with strategies to complete whatever the goal is for the game.
Do you frequently speak out against things you are unfamiliar with?
opiate69
(10,129 posts)Silly me, I forgot that in all of our games of Cowboys and Indians, we just sat around pretending to smoke peace pipes inside a sweat lodge. Kinda like a suburban 8 year olds version of Dead Man...
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Orrex
(63,208 posts)I work with someone who hasn't spent five seconds on first-person shooter games, but he's been to every one of the Pirates' home games this season. If he feels that no vaulable time has been lost, then there is no problem.
If a shooter game allows no room for an altered beginning, middle, or conclusion, then what's the trouble? The same is true of 99% of books, film & theater, even interactive theater.
I don't mean to seem as though I'm particulary taking you to task over this, but I've never heard an objection to violent video games that didn't apply equally to most other forms of artistic expression. If we condemned video games as culturally damaging or a waste of time, then we need to accept that books, films, paintings, music and sculpture can be condemned just as readily, and with equal justification.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)which as I said, I do not advocate. The comparison was not to film or literature btw, it was to
children when they play. They do not stay within the confines of a script, their imagination
takes them to wherever they like..that is what I meant.
There is no doubt, films, paintings, music, and the rest that can very well be seen and judged
as less than valuable..happens all the time, and should. Banning is an entirely different aspect
which we may agree does more harm than good, in the end.
Stay well. 
Precisely
(358 posts)any bleeding beaten violated women laying in the gutters, were there? No blacks hanging from the trees. The format and concept and imagery have changed, a lot. Imagination is powerful.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)I'm not asking to be funny--I really hadn't heard of that.
And does GTA feature beaten, violated women lying in gutters? Moreso than it does beaten, violated men? In the versions that I've played, you could beat up pretty much anyone you wished, male or female. I wasn't aware that you could forcibly violate other characters in the game.
you missed the point
Orrex
(63,208 posts)I guess we're done here.
Precisely
(358 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)It is incredibly violent. Plus rape.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)what I feel is a significant distinction. One is an active participant in theses games, the
shooter..not a spectator.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)you might learn something.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)are speaking of?
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)The recitation of the iliad was a huge annual cultural event and the participants, as a group, in the thousands, re-experienced the saga in its entirety and immersively.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)What the attraction is to be a participant as a shooter, I don't know, but it is sad, imo.
It is a judgement, which is why I imagine I received more than a few responses to my
initial statement in this thread.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)There's a story being told. And there are problems to solve. Challenges to overcome.
Is Les Miserable awful because of all the violence? Or perhaps there's other things going on in the novel/musical/film.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)You're supposed to just sit there and let the violence in MacBeth happen. You know Hamlet's dithering is going to get a lot of people killed, but you're just supposed to sit there and enjoy it as people die.
That's not required in violent video games, including the GTA series. Heck, the vast majority of the time you're a hero fighting back against those inflicting violence.
And if you're concerned about the effect on the people playing the games, repeated studies have shown that people who play such games are desensitized towards violence for about 30 minutes after playing. Long term, they're slightly less likely to use violence in real life than average.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)human condition involving many levels of emotions. Big difference imo.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The games in the GTA series tell an anti-greed, anti-Drug-War, anti-violence story.
The game "Assassin's Creed 3" has you sneaking around and slitting people's throats. The story it tells is anti-corporatist, anti-corruption and how your violence didn't actually fix anything.
The "Gears of War" series of games has you lumbering around with giant guns shooting masses of people. The story it tells is anti-war and anti-global-warming.
The "Halo" series is a story about the evils of religious extremism and sectarian violence.
Just because you don't know the stories told in these games doesn't mean there are no stories told in these games.
If all you knew about Hamlet was the hero told a broken hearted girl to kill herself, and she does, you probably wouldn't have a positive opinion about it.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)very well...you're taking on the role of the killer, the reasons you are killing is irrelevant, imo.
I don't like the frequency that is a common association with these games. There is a rote
response to these games, there is no nuance allowed.
Of all the things on my list to worry about, violent games are not on it..but that doesn't
mean I believe they are a contribution to the arts.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Other times you're fighting back against killers.
Then MacBeth should horrify you. Yet you seem to think the reasons for the killings, and the story they tell, is relevant in that situation.
By those who don't play them and rail against them. It's a tiring ballet of people claiming a particular form of media must be banned because it is causing harm. Those that respond are stuck responding to that critique.
Btw, the same thing was done with Shakespear's works at one time. Too much sex and violence in those stories, so they must be banned.
Yes, I believe many things I'm not actually familiar with are not a contribution to the arts. Yet that doesn't change what really goes on in those things.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)To each his own love of the arts...these games are not for me, never will be.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)And the people who have sought to ban that media.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)require active participation,..that is a distinction that sets it apart in terms of
the involvement. It is not a passive role.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And then we moved on to you claiming it was OK, because the violence was involved in telling a thought-provoking story.
At which point I pointed out there are thought-provoking stories being told in these games.
At which point you moved on to complaining the "video game argument" is dull because it falls into ruts.
At which point I told you it falls into a rut because people are out to ban these games, just like they've been out to ban other media for centuries.
At which point you went back to saying you don't want a ban, and I clarified I'm talking about the media you approve of and the calls for bans.
And then you went back to active participation is worse than passive acceptance.
And then I summarized the entire sub-thread in the hopes that we don't have to repeat it again.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)of itself from rote games. It is the false sense of mastery that I find peculiar.
I do appreciate hearing your perspective on what you term, passive acceptance of violence.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)They used to be, back before AIs were easy to embed - each Pac-Man game has exactly the same levels playing out in exactly the same way.
Not true of today's games. While you might be playing the same mission, and thus have the same overall goal, you have a variety of ways to get there. And the game has a variety of ways to try and stop you. At least, in a well-written game.
Think of it as a well-written novel versus yet another Danielle Steele book. The first will surprise and interest you. The latter is the same old trope repackaged with different names. The same holds true for movies, TV and video games.
Games are just another media in which authors can tell a story. If Shakespeare can use violence to tell a story in MacBeth, then video game authors can use violence to tell their stories.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)evil ass shit
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)To keep pushing the edge of the envelope as to what is acceptable artistically and socially. This way the "artists" can continue to generate publicity because of the controversy their "art" creates, and (most importantly) the $ale$ that go along with it. Personally I think Andres Serrano is an example of "art" that is pure crap. Pun intended.
But then I'm a Neanderthal who thinks Picasso was the death knell of "real" art.
But people are afraid to say anything because they are terrified of being labeled a prude, a censor, or more horrible of all "uncool."
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Some of the horror movies from the 1970s and early 1980s were pretty fucked up. Most of the horror movies now are really tame in comparison.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Just a guess.
-Laelth
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)but I agree it is definitely worth looking into the affect they have on propensity toward violence. I imagine research has been done into the subject. I myself would like to see an examination of a variety of factors leading to mass shootings: inadequate treatment for mental illness, video games, gun policy, and other factors that may play a role.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)You should see what the Japanese are watching & playing.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)I don't claim to know the answers, but we should really explore all possible factors.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)Violent crime has been, overall, decreasing over the years.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)It's amazing the level of violence people are able to tolerate. Everyone was up in arms about Syria, but more Americans have died from gun violence since 1968 than in all the wars in US history combined. Would you say that war casualties are insignificant? Not enough people die so why worry? Well, they pale in comparison to gun fatalities. The US homicide rate exceeds all industrialized nations and is higher than most underdeveloped nations. Turning a cold eye to 32,000 deaths a year is anything but humanistic.
As the percentage of young men in the population goes down, so does violent crime, including homicide. We still have horrific levels of violence compared to most of the world--higher than Palestine, higher than Pakistan, and even Afghanistan--a war zone. A soldier has a greater chance of being killed on US soil than fighting in war. That is the situation you consider acceptable.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)easy access to weapons, along with a nationalistic culture, etc. What does any of that have to do with video games?
ON EDIT: No where did I say the levels of violence we are at are acceptable, also, I'm not aware that young men are dying off, from what I can tell, the ratio of the sexes is still close to 50/50 in the United States.
What I'm saying is that we should look at causes, not bullshit which is a waste of time. For example, a more robust safety net, improved economy, better, more involved education, removing access to guns from the general public, etc. Would go a long way towards reducing violent crime, my question is, if you think violence in video games is a problem, what should be done about it?
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Cross-country studies of violence with nations of comparable wealth have shown that the only factor distinguishing the US is the high percentage of guns and gun ownership. (See the conference on gun violence at Stanford that was broadcast on CSPAN a couple of months ago.)
The safety net is great idea. I don't know when you think that's going to get passed. You have to eliminate GOP control of the House first. Nor are you going to remove the general public's access to guns. That's more impossible than greater spending on education and social programs because of the Heller decision. Steps like expanded background checks, however, are feasible.
My point was very clear: I don't have the answer but I think it's worth looking at the available research on video games. Since there is no prohibition on federal funding into video games as there is for guns, that should be much easier. I don't pretend to know the answers. I said it's worth exploring all potential factors. My principal concern is gun control, but I know that isn't the only issue afflicting America.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)in the relationships between them and violent tendencies in people, so, at best, its a distraction from what you really want, which is less violent crime, specifically gun crime.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)That seems strange.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)have a tendency to help people blow off steam in a way that doesn't harm anyone. Also provides for creative and even social outlets.
ON EDIT: I would emphasize, however, that, again, correlation doesn't equal causation, and, at best, video games have little to no effect on people's behavior that isn't overridden by larger factors.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Precisely
(358 posts)Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)both pro and con, along with the ones below on the positive effects of video games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_controversies#Crime_and_violence
At best, with the conflicting studies, there is no scientific consensus, and there may never be, just like there isn't one for violence in movies or television.
Honestly, even I'm hedging my bets a little, emphasizing that correlation isn't causation, I'm basing my assertion on the historical evidence, in general, since video games gained mainstream popularity among youth, youth violence has been decreasing. Whether one caused the other is not really relevant to the discussion.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)and one that I enjoyed a lot is the Tomb Raider franchise. Not much killing and mechanical puzzles to figure out. But the character you play is female and let me tell you... they really made her a "sexpot" type. Itty bitty shorts, lots of cleavage, unusually large breasts and unusually tiny waist, and when she's wearing a wetsuit in particular, they put this reflection on her breasts where the nipples would be and it was stunning, in a bad way.
I realize they are catering to a predominantly young male demographic but as an adult female I find it disgusting. And it just feeds into and perpetuates this ugly objectification of women. I believe it definitely has an effect on how young males view women and speak about them, especially on the internet or in game chat.
This mild compared to GTA but the sexist mindset seems to permeate most games.
No I don't believe that as soon as someone plays these games they go out and commit a violent act, but things affect someone's perspective subconsciously. If they didn't then why do parents worry about anything at all that their kids are exposed to? Speaking of parents, I've had 8 year olds playing with me on Left for Dead and it's violent and has a lot of cursing. Even if a game is rated mature, that doesn't mean little kids aren't playing them.
That being said, I know several very nice guys who love GTA. They think it's funny and would never act that way towards a woman or think like that about them.
gordianot
(15,237 posts)When you think about it even chess has a violent proposition. Look at the movies we watch. Human competition and confrontation are a real problem for those of our species who are unable to make abstractions. It is going to be increasingly difficult for some humans to separate a virtual world from the real world as we evolve.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Attacking the game without acknowledging that is like attacking Jonathan Swift for being a baby eater.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)They haven't released the PC version of GTA V yet.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)Because when a 17-year-old picks up a girl who has barely hit puberty after getting dumped by his last "conquest," and over the next 48 hours seven people die, that is really how love is and how awesome Italians are at love.
Idiots... Now I've got Taylor Swifting stuck in my head.
Mike Daniels
(5,842 posts)as the particular company that does that series is based in Great Britain (IIRC). The games that have come out as of GTA III all feature talk radio stations that mock the "sky is falling" hysteria expressed by GOP types over terrorism, immigration, etc.
In the case of the "skank" tattoo on the daughter (in light of where it was located on her body) I took that as being a poke at what some people generally presume of someone who has a "tramp stamp".
Can't speak for the rest of the game as I'm only a few hours into it but based on GTA's history it seems that the game more often than not aims to take the piss out of certain US attitudes on any number of subjects (social, political and otherwise) vs. celebrating them.
obxhead
(8,434 posts)I'm about 10 hours into the game myself.
Best GTA yet.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)... always seem to devolve into absolutist positions about freedom of expression vs. a call for bans. On one side, it is pointed out that we are free to discuss and depict the unlikeable, the unsavory, and the unethical. We are permitted to pretend things we shouldn't actually do.
So we don't generally silence people for discussing or simulating things that are abhorrent. Sometimes those depictions and discussions are for the good. No criticism or satire can exist without acknowledging the things we despise. Prohibition of bad ideas has never proven to be the path to better ones.
The truth, as usual, probably lurks in the middle somewhere.
Misogyny or racism in a video game is open to criticism as misogyny or racism. It's bad art for starters, unless it really is some kind of intelligent comment on those subjects.
But then come the discussions as to whether we are creating the things we imagine, just by swimming in that cultural soup. Normalizing them. Suggesting that our worst impulses are something everyone would indulge if they could. We don't believe that, do we?
God knows, I am not bringing up p_rn, but those threads always seem crippled by this same issue. Who gets to decide which expressions are worthless, exploitive, or harmful? A lot of us pretended to shoot our friends or innocent Native Americans as kids, and grew up with not the slightest thought really doing those things would be okay.
One thing -- I have noticed we're now using "porn" to describe any depiction in art that appeals to an unsavory human impulse. "Torture porn" films spring to mind. We're talking about exploitation vs. observation in a slightly new way.
At what point are we being asked not to observe and comment on something loathsome, but to enjoy it, normalize it, or participate in it? I watched a film called "Hostel," supposedly based on truth bizarrely enough, and it lingered so long on depictions of humans abasing and mutilating others for sport that I felt unclean. It felt less like storytelling and more like an invitation to malicious fantasy. I wouldn't arrest the filmmakers, but I would suggest they did something wrong in creating "art" like that.
Complicating all of that is the question of children -- so often used disingenuously to try to limit adult freedoms on the basis of how something might impact a person not yet fully formed. But there are things that impact children differently. Without the context of experience and knowledge, how is a child going to receive "playing" at murder or abuse? Do we risk stimulating a response adults understand has no place in civilization?
Maybe the answer lies in discussion itself. *Is* GTA 5 using a tasteless appeal to immoral / amoral fantasy as a selling point? Is it not whatever else it claims to be -- escapism, irony, satire, mindless amusement? I don't know. I played games shooting space invaders as a child and games shooting Nazis and zombies as a young adult. None of them made me feel I was being encouraged to revel in cruelty or feed any kind of desire to do real harm in the real world. Playing at killing prostitutes or children sounds different to me, but I haven't actually seen these games. I've yet to see any fans suggest they like doing horrific things in a game because they'd like to actually do horrific things.
If it is bad art, it should at least be called out on that. Regardless of whether someone wants to argue whether a game can actually warp a child's perception or any of that, tastelessness or glorification of cruelty ought to be identified. Something can be legal, and a "game," and still reprehensibly awful.
People should talk about it, *without* getting backed into corners with prohibition on one side and no one having the right to question appeals to worst human impulses on the other.
Bad ideas need daylight to give way to better ones.
G_j
(40,367 posts)"If it is bad art, it should at least be called out on that. Regardless of whether someone wants to argue whether a game can actually warp a child's perception or any of that, tastelessness or glorification of cruelty ought to be identified. Something can be legal, and a "game," and still reprehensibly awful. "
Precisely
(358 posts)"... always seem to devolve into absolutist positions about freedom of expression vs. a call for bans. "
There's no call for banning. That's an accusation tossed by those with "absolutist positions about freedom of expression."
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)assume the discussion is about. If you want to say that's the fault of one "side," that's really not a contradiction of what I said, nor particularly relevant. It's still where the conversation goes, and you seem to be agreeing that's the problem.
The problem with that is you don't get any further unless you actually put something forward that's not in that vein. Insisting it's not you going there is a nullity.
So where do you think the discussion should lie?
Precisely
(358 posts)The bs on this thread is unbelievable.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)
dogknob
(2,431 posts)If it were easy to find the quality stuff all the time, what do you think would happen?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Or about Titus Andronicus? Or Elvis? Or hip hop? Or the talkies?
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Bigger Thomas is the archetype for the gangsta hoodlums that populate GTA. Perhaps we should start by re-writing an american classic to rid it of its depraved violence and misogyny.
Rex
(65,616 posts)And realizes that it is kinda idiotic to focus on video games as the source of violence? 
That is just from what I have observed over the years here, I'm sure I'm wrong.
What do you have against clams?
I know some that have considered teaching...
Rex
(65,616 posts)A clam bit me on the toe, I've never gotten over it. DO clams have respawn points?
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)opiate69
(10,129 posts)
Rex
(65,616 posts)Why do the shit eaters always taste the best? Yes catfish, I am looking at you and you too shrimp!
opiate69
(10,129 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)I am surprised there is not a video game called 'Steak and Lobster Boy'.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)
Rex
(65,616 posts)I can't drive 55. Without a bazooka.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)
opiate69
(10,129 posts)
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Discussion is indeed, a waste of time to many of the trout-brained and dogmatic when sacred cows are involved.
Regardless of whether you're wrong or not...
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Today, people are complaining about violent video games and the damage they must be doing. Largely based on the assumption that only children play video games. And ignoring studies showing people who play violent video games are actually less likely to use violence in real life.
Yesterday, it was rap music. Before that, various branches of punk and metal. They were going to cause the same destruction of society, but didn't quite do so.
Before that, it was TV. Same complaints, same predictions, different media.
Before that, it was movies.
Before that, it was comic books.
Before that, it was 'racy' novels.
I would not be surprised if we found a tablet where an ancient greek complained that the violence in Homer's works were damaging to society.
It's not the violence that makes GTA5 bad. It's the misogyny, the terrible writing and the uninspired repetition of the gameplay.
Go play "Assassin's Creed 3". You literally go around slitting people's throats. But the writing is excellent and the story it tells is actually anti-violence, anti-corporatist (well, they'd be corporatists if it wasn't set in the 1770s), and anti-corruption.
Or go with the "Gears of War" series. You run around blowing up people and creatures with massive guns. It's actually an anti-war and an anti-global-warming story.
That's not to say these games are appropriate for the average 8-year-old. But neither is an R rated movie, nor "A Tale of Two Cities".
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)And what is a bunch of middle-aged people huffing and puffing about too much sex and violence really going to achieve?
I was going to say I am a gamer and a DUer and I have criticized and will continue to criticize video games when they are beyond the pale--but some of the responses have proved you have a point.
I would say though, its not the collective of DU. There are some on this thread who are vehemently against criticizing video games, but there are quite a few who seem to recognize that some "art" is just violence or prejudice covered in poetic license.
Someone else can buy the those games. I won't, and I'll continue to point out when a game crosses the line into shock value porn.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)I've allowed a few of the Call of Duty games, but I limit his playing time on those and a few other games that are mature rated.
We have firm rules on gaming for our 14 year old. We learned the hard way that just letting him go is not healthy.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Trivia: There are no natural female Smurfs. Smurfette was Gargamel's attempt to engineer an artificial Smurf in order to find and capture the real Smurfs. He screwed it up and created a female.
See, the original creator of the Smurfs was a massive, massive, massive misogynist. So his stories are extremely unflattering to women, to the point where he created an all-male race of creatures. (Interestingly, he was also a homophobe, hence the Smurf's method of procreation).
And it's children's programming. At least the video games that we're discussing are targeted at adults.
Of course not. Just like "R" rated movies aren't healthy for most 14-year-olds. "MA" games are for adults, just like "R" movies are for adults.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)1) Mentally stimulating and challenging. This is true of everything from puzzle games like Myst, stealth-based action games like The Last of Us, and real time strategy games like Rise of Nations.
2) Help develop teamwork and cooperation. True of almost all multiplayer games.
3) Emotionally-investing and engaging. Most games I've played are very well-written and have very complex characters. Some moments have actually made me cry.
I very rarely play anything rated lower than M, and most of the ones I play are absolutely violent, but that's not why I play them.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Adults are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves which video games they do and don't want to play. And children are not my problem, they're the parents's problem - let them do the work of policing their crotchspawn's gaming, without inflicting their self-righteousness on the rest of us.
And I do criticize video games - Superman 64, for example was a terrible game for the N64 - horrible gameplay, buggy code. The latest Simcity released by EA was ruined by EA's requirement to be online (multiplied by server outages/congestion) and obnoxious DRM.
But I have zero tolerance for calls for censorship. This is America - we have freedom of speech here. Deal with it.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I try not to criticize when it's well done.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)Here's some footage from the original Mortal Kombat that Joe Lieberman was flipping a shit about back in 1993, really gruesome stuff...
There's a Beatles tune with a chorus... "Bang bang Maxwell's silver hammer came down upon her head, bang bang Maxwell's silver hammer made sure that she was dead". I think we need to talk about how Beatles music is promoting a culture of violence.
Every time there's a new form of media that has violence in it, we collectively flip our shit because it's different and more "realistic" than what we're used to. At the end of the day it's intended for fantasy, not to encourage people to actually do these things in real life. If you find it distasteful, don't buy it.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)I use the phrase to emphasize how panicked we get about these forms of entertainment and then realize years down the road that we shouldn't have been so panicked.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)....was so up in arms about video games. Thank God that asshole is gone from the US Senate, although he's still stinking up the joint as a chickenhawk think tank lobbyist.
Yeah folks, I said it, Sanctimonious Joe is a piece of shit. Get the fuck over it!
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)If you mention video games or mental illness then you are distracting from guns.
And everything anyone says must be focused on promulgating a party line in the mind of some unidentified hypothetical credulous reader.
Of course spending countless hours practicing gunning down other people in vivid simulation will have a certain effect on a person who happens to be developing a profound mental illness at the time.
That is not sufficient reason to ban or censor any games, but you would have to be God's perfect idiot to think it is not sometimes a factor in developing the ideation of a mass-shooting.
(And, of course, if you mention something negative it is presumed that you are arguing for its legal prohibition... which, sadly, is a presumption close enough to being predictively accurate on DU that one cannot mention anything without finding themself on a "side" in some primitive anti-rights debate.)
because a lot of people on here play video games and nobody wants to admit that something THEY do could possibly be questionable.
I agree with you totally and would also add that I think violent video games do have a hand in mass shootings. And yes, I know the Japanese play more games, and I know plenty of people play video games and don't shoot up the nearest military base. But it's the whole mix of factors, of which games are one.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)While I am not a fan of GTA I am a fan of video games in general. You want to criticize GTA that's fine, but to lump "Video Games" in with GTA is counterproductive.
GTA is designed to get you to do exactly what you are doing. It's made to be controversial and misogynist and to make people complain loudly.
Kind of reminds me of early Rap Music and The Sex Pistols.
I have to disagree with this statement:
"No, I don't think they cause mass murders, but I do think they're part of an ever growing ugly cultural mindset that celebrates the worst, crudest, most violent shit. "
Yes GTA does do that. But many games don't. To lump them all in with GTA is like saying all movies are bad because of Red Dawn.
Like with all "news" you only hear about the bad stuff.
I have 3 teenage boys, 19,17,16 and all of them are playing GTA5. One is in his first year of college. One is Homecoming King this year, and then I have one stoner musician. Each kid good in his own right and nothing in GTA5 is going to change that...
BTW Cali, please don't take this post wrong, I agree about GTA and you and I are on the same page most of the time, I just grew up playing games and so did my kids and we all turned out ok
The Green Manalishi
(1,054 posts)Of anything. Anytime. Anywhere. That has ever been created, interpeted, notated, annotated, rendered, reported upon or otherwise recorded published or promulgated.
All the information that has ever existed should be available to everyone. Every book, game, picture, movie, song or poem should be accessible to anyone anywhere. Period.
That's my belief and I'll oppose with my vote, my money and my pen any person, organization or ideology that tries to censor anything.
YMMV
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The Green Manalishi
(1,054 posts)The two are not exactly the same thing, but close enough for me to worry.
The same people who don't want their kid playing GTA are the folks who would pissed if that 12 year old was reading 'Justine' or '120 days of Sodom' (both books I enjoyed at that age) or researching how to build a bomb (my JR high science report was about how to build a dirty bomb back in 1974). If someone can get their panties in a twist about Doom then they can try to keep intelligent kids from doing interesting things such as RC model rocket fights (we tried, the tech wasn't there back then, nowadays I'd have been called a terrorist at the age of 15- ha!)
good times
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)A lot more gorey and violent than we get. Oh and look, they don't have gun nuts running the streets. Guns ARE the problem.
dkf
(37,305 posts)I will make sure my nephew does not get his hands on this. I do all the tech buying so this is something I will make a call on.
washnwmn
(28 posts)Recently while playing cards on EA's Pogo site one of their new games was being promoted paring violence supposedly with humor.
Am I the only one who's sick of cop shows on TV, politely called crime drama? I'm sick of shoot-em ups being replayed over and over and over, and have decided to boycott TV violence.
I end up watching PBS most of the time for lack of any real entertainment value on any other channels, even knowing the Koch Bros are manipulating PBS.
My TV is getting pretty old, but I refuse to put money into a new one to watch nonsense. Looking into smart TV's to watch TV on the web. At least I can have some choice that way.
Daniel537
(1,560 posts)Gore1FL
(21,130 posts)It's fun. It's meant to be over-the-top. It's doesn't create violence. It is not related to reality.
beerandjesus
(1,301 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)I'm not ready to attribute cause and effect, but the reality is that since 1993, violent crime has dropped roughly 75%.
I've never played any of the GTA games, but it is demonstrably true that the people who grew up on "Happy Days" were a more violent bunch.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)AllyCat
(16,184 posts)To criticize. Dreadful form of "entertainment". So much creativity out there and wasted on hatred.
Rex
(65,616 posts)That is for sure.
AllyCat
(16,184 posts)Software, simulation to train our pilots and pubic safety employees, drivers...I know many do this kind of work, but the fact that the $ goes to crime simulation and teaching division between people.
fujiyama
(15,185 posts)diffuses into the mainstream for simulation and other educational and "productive" uses. Gaming also pushes the technology limit in terms of graphics cards and CPUs.
Ultimately, video games are entertaining and it is an art form. Saying that a video game creator could be doing something better with his or her time is like saying the director of entertaining action flicks could be directing something more "high brow". Yes, they could be producing educational documentaries, but they may not be talented at doing so.
Video games aren't my thing, but as a fan of several TV series and movies containing violence (usually to drive the plot along though), I find it difficult to criticize those indulging in another media with similar content. I will agree that much violence in the media is simply gratuitous but I find that a reflection of society itself and it's ultimately up to parents to decide how much their children can handle.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)1) The willingness to look away from themes that are clearly against their values on the premise that they separate them and don't take them seriously.
Sentiments like this are in the thread. I believe that this is more prevalent in the younger generation where the cultural battles for liberation were not as personal as they were for us who experienced the 60's.
It seems to be, unfortunately, rather common. For example I have family members who watch and laugh at the show "Ridiculousness" (or whatever it is called) where a skateboarder guy with limited intelligence takes clips off the internet (usually involving horrific accidents) and makes jokes about them. The few times that I watched have always included clips/comments that were clearly racist. I asked my AA family members how they can stand to watch it and their reply was "yes it was racist but it is also funny".
I also get cartoons sent to me from my Muslim brother in law. Sometimes they are from GB and invariably make fun of, you guessed it, stupid Pakistani Muslim immigrants.
I don't understand why people don't connect the dots, but clearly they don't.
2) An even more important issue IMHO is the amount of time the younger generation spends playing these games. In the apartment complex we are in (and my daughters as well) you can feel the base playing when they are playing these games that start at 6 pm and go to 3 in the morning. I know several older adults whose lives are ruined because they cannot get off the games. During the weekend the noise will go 20 hours straight.
It turns out it isn't religion that is the opiate of the masses its a play station.
And for the not so clever copycat thread.
The difference between these games and watching "Inglorious Bastards" is two fold: One is that QT is ridiculing the bad guys not inviting you to join their team. Secondly I may watch a violent movie once a month while these people are spending a hundred hours a month playing them.
Rec the OP, I don't get it why they get a pass on commercializing hatred.
hunter
(38,311 posts)Our kids went off to college, maybe got their fill of them, and now as adults both claim to be irritated by childhood friends who are stuck in them.
I guess something about our parenting worked. If they're simply not telling us they've already played Grand Theft Auto 5, that's okay too. They are, officially, adult.
I never told my mom a couple of things, even though she's heard them second-hand by now. No, I did not fall in the brambles, we were playing with explosives... Yes, I did get kicked of college. Twice. Yes, I was living in my car in a church parking lot.
My wife and I never liked violent movies or video games because we've seen too much blood in real life and I guess we've been honest with our kids about it.
Broken_Hero
(59,305 posts)I got a contract in Dawnstar to fullfill, plus my wife wants to vacation in Solstheim next week so I gotta start to pack my bags now....
Wait is this reality?....hello, why am I wearing Nordic Carved Armor?.....and who the fuck is Balbus, and why does he need a fork?
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)At least with that conjecture the correlation evidence matches the causal claim.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)And it's pretty easy to discern reality from the games.
What fun would it be playing a crime game if you have to be all politically correct and proper? These people you're portraying are scum.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)the early 1990's, if anything, there is a correlation between the prevalence of violent video games and the decrease in violent crime.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)This is the issue, with video games, you seem to be criticizing a genre, rather than a work, that I have a problem with because it is illogical.
Dpm12
(512 posts)Freedom of speech. Plus, violence in video games and movies (some people think this is true even though this is ludicrous) does not cause real life violence
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)on their own merits, I will just as easily criticize Rapelay(a horrific video game, look it up), but not video games in general because of it, just like I criticize 50 Shades of Grey as a horrible book, or Twilight as a horrible book series, but won't condemn literature because of it.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)It's also harder to work up a nice froth of outrage about Kids These Days with those genres (never mind the demographics of gamers in general, which are usually very far off from what the thinkofthechildren crowd think they are).
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)Either here on DU or elsewhere, but the framing is different, they talk about THAT bad book, movie, or song, they don't hold those bad things up as examples of their respective form of art, but video games are treated differently, and I'm puzzled as to why.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)The exact same thing, and I mean the exact same thing, happened in the late forties and early fifties with comic books. Something new, unusual, Kids-These-Days-centric, and with uncomfortable content means people flip their lid about it while giving any established media a free pass.
If the Gods of Implausibility were involved, and video games were an established thing for the last couple of lifetimes, and, oh, let's say stage musicals were the latest big form of entertainment that showed up and was increasingly popular among the younger generation, you'd see people freaking out about those, and specifically those, while ignoring or that's-differenting everything else.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)If one company makes a killing selling video games that are full of sex and violence, every wannabe pile in with their offering. The result is a pile of shit.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)in books, shoddy "me too" garbage that is standard Hollywood fare, etc.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)There's the A-list of blam-fests which you describe, sure, but in the last few years there's alone been a heck of a flowering of different, unusual, artistic games, or stuff that goofs around with concepts the medium lets them sandbox-ize, or lets them explore things from geology to pretty detailed social/economc simulations in settings either historical, or very much not all of which are pretty damned far removed from the standard A-list gun fests that the media and Concerned Parents love to insist is the entirety of the genre. That's before getting into the fact that there's people quite actively directly challenging the more problematic bullshit in the field head on, and doing so consistently.
There's a heck of a lot out there, and a lot of people in the industry are very, very aware of the reputation a lot of the companies have (and deserve), which means it's possible, even easy, to get a lot of entertainment out of it while not contributing to the nastier stuff at all, or being part of those giant follow-the-leader firms. Most of my own gameplay lately is some amazing large-scale historical simulations, put together with breathtaking detail by a Swedish company who have, I think, less than two dozen people on their payroll. Heck, at this point a lot of the more interesting titles are being produced by a couple guys operating out of their apartment, without any real contact with EA or the other big companies (who really are doing exactly what you describe).
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)as I do about violent/reality TV:
I don't watch them.
Is GTA violent and misogynistic.
Yes.
Does it require my criticism?
There is not enough time in my life for everything that deserves criticism.
MirrorAshes
(1,262 posts)kcr
(15,315 posts)Unless you want to criticize video games. Then you're not allowed to do that, apparently.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)individual games or series.
Its kinda like me judging literature on 50 shades of grey, that would be foolish, wouldn't it? Equally as foolish as what the OP posted.
kcr
(15,315 posts)I just don't think they should be immune from criticism any more than 50 Shades of Grey or any other medium. Unless someone is actually calling for a ban, there's nothing wrong with it. Free speech goes both ways.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)Just don't delude yourself for a second that your criticism is somehow immune to scrutiny.
kcr
(15,315 posts)Unless someone is actually calling for a ban, what's the problem?
Those who are criticizing, what is it exactly they are trying to achieve? Are they merely criticzing for its own sake, or are they trying to get the makers of these games (or movies, music, etc) to decide to stop making products which they deemed objectionable? Either way, the end result is the same.
kcr
(15,315 posts)I can't recall too many times where mere criticism has resulted in the demise of a medium. As much as I love video games and feel protective of the medium myself, the reason I also feel protective of this sort of criticism is I see this sort of reaction to social criticisms all the time. It's just a way to stifle discussion. Video games have been standing the test of time and have been only getting better, and for good reason. There's no reason to stifle the speech of others. It isn't necessary.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)The desired end result is the same. The people criticizing GTA would, in their perfect world, like to see the game be a huge flop, so that companies like Rockstar won't green-light future releases in the series.
kcr
(15,315 posts)It's GTA V, with 800 million on its first day sales. They can wish all they want. That goes back to my point. Most people wouldn't mind the things they don't like disappearing off the face of the earth. There are people within the gaming community that question the content in some of the more violent games. Should they voice those concerns? I know how videogames are often the favorite whipping boy when it comes to discussing society's ills. That can compel us to be pretty defensive. I get that. I just hate to see the stifling of discussion, particularly on DU. I think we could ease up here a little more and let people have their say, because it is DU, where people are generally talking about their concerns in the context of their cares about this country and the world. They're not your typical jerks you find on the internet in general.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)The odds of it happening are far greater if those of us who oppose such attempts at social engineering don't speak out against it, wherever we might encounter it. Imagine the far-right religious whackjobs and their continual boycott threats. If their voice was the only one being heard, they would be frighteningly successful. (Focus on the Family, or whatever loony group is always trying to boycott TV and movies, etc.)
kcr
(15,315 posts)By all means point out factual errors and defend gaming. Screaming shut up, and claiming they're calling for a ban when they aren't? I think that's the wrong way to go about it. Especially here on DU. It made me bristle and I'm on your side. It does nothing to show why they're wrong and puts them on the defensive, for one thing.
fujiyama
(15,185 posts)Video games are art. And like art, sometimes they can be tasteful and other times crass and vulgar and many times they can be everything. They elicit a wide variety of responses emotionally. Video games are protected speech and are entitled to the First Amendment protections.
I personally enjoy watching a few TV series which contain violence used to drive the plot along (Breaking Bad, The Wire, The Sopranos, etc). Does this make me want to cook meth or join the mob? Of course not! I have not played the GTA series myself, but from what I can tell, there are elements of satire and a creative plot lines involved. I am not certain, but I do know that when news media will cover such a title, the most sensational aspects of the game will be played up.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)The Grand Theft Auto series absolutely skewers the right-wing in this country, it is one of the most subversive game series ever and it features some brilliant political humor.
This is an actual ad that appears in the game for the Republican candidate in the games fictional Governor's race.
Those who think this game is promoting hate are wrong, it is a satire which mocks hateful people in often brilliant ways. I suspect most the left leaning people who attack this game would be quite surprised if they actually played the game, it shines a mirror on American society better than any other game on the market that I know of and I am willing to bet many people attacking the game on this thread would find some things they loved about GTA if they took the time to look for them.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)That said, I haven't played GTA5, not yet. I played some of the earlier ones, found some of it marginally interesting but not as good as many other games.
I think for people who want to write off/critique all video games (or all games that contain "violence" or make blanket statements about the state of the medium or the industry, should play Bioshock Infinite.
I thought that was quite possibly the best put-together game I've come across, period.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)You don't see them flipping out over, say, the Mass Effect series, or Deus Ex (Human Revolution would probably spark some interesting discussions on DU for the issues it explores, and then there's the fact that several of the climactic "fights" are actually debates), or, as you point out, Bioshock. I'd wager the main reason for that is that most of the people dispensing the shrillest complaints are the ones who know pretty much nothing about an industry that passed the film industry in size in the last couple of years.
Hell, even one of the earlier GTA games is at its heart looking at the circumstances that kicked off the Los Angeles riots. (I'll usually give people a pass for flipping out some over GTA at least. I enjoy the series but it's over-the-top enough that I'll grant it to be very much an acquired taste, moreso than most of those other titles.)
And that's before going into the pleasantly vast swathe of titles that aren't the peak output of the big-name studios...
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Than with what is actually out there.
I'm certain I'm guilty of this as well.
I enjoyed Mass Effect, quite a bit. But "explaining" the interesting narrative stuff in that or, say, Bioshock to someone who just sees a controller and shooting... Kind of a waste of time.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)I usually just try to point out that there's rather more to the industry than FPSes and crime sandboxes. Though there's plenty of range even in those - Mafia's pretty much the opposite end of the spectrum from GTA in terms of how it glamorizes crime, and aside from two boss characters it's possible to go through Deus Ex: Human Revolution without taking any lives - but there's also a giant mountain of other genres out there/
Of course, at that point the goalpost is moved to either the time involved (unlike TV [but that's different {no it's not}]) or, as you imply, things get dragged back to GTA or whatever brown-beige manshoot EA last released. I suppose seeing people equate, say, Victoria II to GTA would be as good a sign as any that there's no hope in that particular discussion...
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)That one just blew me away so much I kind of figured the bar had been set pretty high for anything else.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)I should probably put it somewhere in the queue, but those vile bastards at Paradox Interactive have their talons in my free time at the moment...
Arkana
(24,347 posts)It's well known how horrible GTA games are in terms of violence, sexism, and racism, but if you can't tell the difference between Liberty City and the real world, then you shouldn't be playing video games.
MirrorAshes
(1,262 posts)for its sexism and misogyny. It hasn't gotten any sort of free pass there. Not sure why there ought to be any special outcry over it on DU.
These games are notorious, nobody should be surprised. Parents should take heed of the mature rating and make their own choices. It's hardly something we should have our hair on fire over.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)n/t
Walter-White
(17 posts)And I have no urge to go on a mass murder spree.
I waited in Line at Midnight for GTA V its a great game. Violent video games are only a problem if there is poor parenting involved.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)I love GTA V and I know the difference between real life and the game.
FFS.
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)Don't dis the doobage.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)Yes, many video games could be described as low-brow entertainment. My son is almost 18, so I'll tell you my experience.
My son has always known I'm a very liberal Democrat and not OK with racism, homophobia, sexism, or any kind of discrimination. I've discussed the topics with him at length. As is typical of his generation from what I know, he is even more liberal than I am, with the notable exception of gun control (his brothers are fond of guns).
He is pretty much beyond the GTA variety game. He will now play Skyrim or the like. If I had made it forbidden fruit and ranted extensively about it, I think he might STILL be playing it.
I think my strategy overall has worked. I think he knows deep down inside that those games are not exactly progressive material, but I do think overall he embraces progressivism.
Moral of the story: Don't make things forbidden fruit unless you absolutely have to. Kids love forbidden fruit.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)I enjoy seeing blood spray when I "kill" someone or something in the game. I enjoy being a badass, ass kicker. I'd guess this is because I'm nothing like that in real life. Blood makes me squeamish, I hate conflict and I'm far from badass--I'm a dork, a geek, a nerd. It is also a way to let go of stress without causing anyone or anything harm (other than my ass that gets broader from sitting on the couch).
As far as the misogyny in video games, I vote with my dollars. I won't purchase GTA because, one I don't like driving games but also because there aren't strong female characters. I look for those in video games and amazingly, the game creators are getting better at providing those characters. I also prefer games where I get to choose my characters gender because I know those games aren't going to be a sexist mass of goo.
I think if you're really concerned about violence in video games and how they affect children and adults, you then need to talk about music, TV, movies, books, etc. because people who are prone to violence are going to be effected by violence in any and everything.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)It's hard to miss the progress through all the mantrums and some of the more loudly misogynistic titles, but studios (and the people covering the studios - Rock Paper Shotgun's been amazing in that regard) are showing an awareness of social issues that I would never have assumed they'd manage even five years ago.
vdogg
(1,384 posts)They are great stress relief, and I am more than adult enough to discern fantasy from reality. If someone doesn't like violent games they shouldn't by them.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)and so much talk of how toxic the notion is that guns solve problems, yet that sentiment is pretty much the basis of a massive chunk of our popular media.
Walter-White
(17 posts)If the Parent did His/Her Job then there will be no issue.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)They feed an aggressive, less empathetic, less compassionate culture. They legitimize the worst that humanity can be, rather than the best.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)How's that?
defacto7
(13,485 posts)But our culture is not static. Human culture is what we make of it. So choose well.
longship
(40,416 posts)Somebody needs to learn some basic statistics. And some science.
Correlations do not imply causal connections. That's a primary rule. If one does not understand that, one will be led astray time and time again. It's a common mistake with the Republicans. I would hope that Democrats would know better.
Sorry. You'll have to better to convince me.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)I think the controls are clunky, except for the driving, which is pretty tight. I also don't really care for the themes. I like fantasy, sci-fi, and horror. However, I don't find them to be particularly violent when compared to some of the other games available on the mainstream market, such as Fallout 3, Dead Space, and Siren: Blood Curse, three games I absolutely love. The reason I don't criticize violent video games is because I love them. I think they're wonderful. Swoon!
I sometimes see or hear people complaining about how violent movies are getting, but what they don't realize is that movies are actually becoming much more tame. I have seen people complain about movies like Saw and Hostel, but those are nothing compared to the movies that were being made in the 1970s and the early 1980s. Patrick Still Lives, Cannibal Holocaust, Zombie Holocaust, New York Ripper, Blood Sucking Freaks, The Beyond, ... they just don't make movies like that anymore, and that is unfortunate, as far as I am concerned.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)And Anthony Hopkins didn't eat all those people, either.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)The vast majority of video game violence is over the top, much like most forms of entertainment over the centuries. It's about fantasy vs. reality and our ability to tell the difference. After a rough day at work being treated like shit it's kind of nice to sit down in front of my TV/monitor and curb stomp squishy aliens in Gears of War, or drive through a bunch of rag doll physics enabled pedestrians in an open world GTA type game. It's the same thing that keeps drawing customers to crazy action movies or screwball physical comedy over the years.
As for GTA V specifically, I never get into it precisely because of some of the issues you listed. And I've heard quite a few in the game media and game playing public echo similar criticisms. GTA is odd in that it goes for satire but also attempts to tell a serious crime story at the same time. When trying to meld these two elements with the open world and each other it can create a disconnect between the player, the character they're playing, and the story. I haven't played GTA V, but in GTA IV it would get weird because the character Nico was played in a sympathetic manner. It's like they wanted him to seem like a decent guy who got sucked into the crime world (kind of a crime movie anti-hero I guess), but he really should be considered more of a sociopath if you look at the actions occurring in gameplay. It causes a disconnect where the game is divided into two separate experiences. You have the story that the designers are trying to tell, then you have the amoral sandbox where the game is treated more like an adult playset to just goof around in. Some people are better at separating the gameplay from the story than others, or ignoring the storytelling inconsistency because big budget video games have always struggled in that department.
I think Rockstar, at least in their GTA franchise, does try to hide behind satire to push some pretty nasty stuff out there. I understand their primary audience is male and they want to push some male centric fantasy into their games. But I think there's a fine line between catering to fantasy and pushing outright disrespect and degradation that Rockstar sometimes crosses.