Support NeoGAF

[Council Pop]

The thought that Video Game Violence leads to real Violence is just confusing to me but You believe what you want to believe.

I can't believe that some people STILL think that if you're opposed to violent video games it means that you think video games directly cause violence.

Some people seem to really lack the capacity for critical thinking. We have a culture of violence that spans every media type and is part of our culture that we just accept. From a young age we are conditioned to associate violence with heroics, as something that is necessary for 'good' to overcome 'evil', as something masculine, as some inevitable that all men should be able to deal with etc etc. Minor violence is seen as "okay" by the state- if you get beaten up by someone in the street, see how much the police would care. Mass violence is fetishised by the media, in the same breath as it being condemned. The state crack down on illegal pornographic videos and throw people who watch them into prison, yet videos of real life murder and executions are fine, and the people who receive gratification from watching them is nothing to worry about. This culture normalises and rewards violence, and this is what 'causes' real world violence (although even then it's nowhere near that simple).

This culture of violence is caused by myriad different things, such as masculinity/patriarchy, class (the use of violence by the ruling classes to stay in that position), colonialism/imperialism and the western fetishisation of the armed forces, various historical tensions etc etc, and it's reinforced through every aspect of our culture, including popular culture, of which video games are just one sub-category. Video games don't 'cause' violence. They just contribute to a culture and ideology.

The issue with video games is that in the vast, vast majority of video games, the main way you interact with the world is through violence. It's easy to find films without any violence in, or where violence is presented as something horrific. This is changing a bit; lots of refreshingly non-violent games, and stuff like Life Is Strange is violent in parts but never condones it or rewards it. There is also the issue that violence and combat isn't necessarily the best way for gameplay mechanics to actually work. For example, I thought the impact of the story in The Last Of Us was significantly lessened by the crap cover shooter gameplay, where it could have easily been a stealth, exploration and environmental puzzle game.

But yeah, on a day like this it does seem bad taste to be celebrating a load of new games that celebrate excessive violence, regardless of the fact that they don't cause violence themselves.

 

[SliceSabre]

Notch may not have phrased it in the way a lot of people would have liked him to, but he entirely has a point.

The people want violent video games and the EAs of the world are glad to give it to them.

 

[Cromwell]

Saying "there's a lot of violent games at E3" doesn't really say much of anything.

It starts a conversation, doesn't it?

 

[Comfort Jones]

I lost family members in both world wars I enjoy video games with shooting in them. I'm stoked dice went with ww1, people need to get over themselves, games are and entertainment like books movies music, if you don't like killing things in a video game there is plenty of other genres to play.

Yep.

I think people forget they had movies about war not only after WW2 was over but DURING it. Before I could even watch r rated movies my friends and I would shoot fake guns at each other, wrestle around, whatever, enjoying fictional recreations of violence is in our very nature. Get over it.

 

[Wallach]

What has he done lately? It's nice to say every developer should do something, it's better to do it yourself.

Persson (Notch) isn't the one arguing for change here - if you take his statement to indicate he would argue that specific point - Blow is. And Blow's recent game is completely absent of violence.

 

[Relativ9]

This isn't a problem for the grand majority of us, but when there's so many people packed in one place the minority opinions have more numbers to make noise with. I don't think you're even drawing off any real stats here either way tbh.

Also lol Europe has dealt with more direct violence than this country has ever known. Guess the UK should be disgusted with any fun WW2 games since they got hit pretty hard by that right?

Right, but I didn't say the majority of you.

Let me clearify, from my subjective point of view, it seems to me, that most of the people complaining about violence in video games are Americans. Not most that most Americans complain about violence in video games.

And while yes, Europe has seen more violence...in history. It hasn't recently, and gun ownership is nowhere near as prevelant. Walking down the street in Oslo, Amsterdam, Rome, Barcelona, Dublin or even London you can be pretty secure that few to none unsavory characters are carrying firearms. You cant say the same about LA, NY, Huston, Miami or Chicago.

It also helps that the video game playing public probably weren't alive during WW2...

 

[Shahadan]

But there's nothing wrong with shooting games. There's absolutely no reason to tell the people that want shooting games that they can't have them. The fact that it works out financially for the publishers is an after thought.

Why go to all the effort of trying to convince the masses that they don't want something when they obviously do if there's no harm in giving it to them?

Haven't said there was something wrong with shooting games. They're fun, most of the time.
Their number and how they often try to one up themselves on the killing and/or gore because they have to, however, can and maybe should be up for debate.

 

[Psamtik. Death's Demise]

Content in games hasn't been under serious threat or scrutiny since the Lieberman/Kohl Congressional hearings of 1993/4. The industry complied by adopting a ratings board, and that's been more or less that since (Jack Thompson didn't have the federal government on his side, after all).

Eventually, someone in a position of authority is going to realize how many of the prominent mass murderers and would-be mass murderers of the last few years - Anders Breivik, Adam Lanza, Eliot Rodger, James Holmes, Dylann Roof, and James Howell (whose Santa Monica plot was just foiled) - have been way into video games, and start asking questions to which we'd better have answers.

 

[Widge]

I'm with Notch on this one.

Games are violet because that is what people want.

Really? I don't go looking for games thinking "up for a nice big of ultraviolence".

It's such a fricking elitist statement for him. We are the gamers, we define what games are, you don't. The very sort of mindset that stifles creativity and diversity.

 

[Izuna]

I liked Braid and thought I was a fan until Witness ended up being the most empty unfun game. That's my reason to not be a fan.

This ridiculous view is my reason to lose any respect.

I didn't know Jack Thomson is cool these days.

 

[Comfort Jones]

Right, but I didn't say the majority of you.

Let me clearify, from my subjective point of view, it seems to me, that most of the people complaining about violence in video games are Americans. Not most that most Americans complain about violence in video games.

I get that and I still don't think we're the leading voice on that. Plenty of countries censor violence in games more than we ever would.

It also helps that the video game playing public probably weren't alive during WW2...

But they did watch WW2 movies and soldiers in this age play modern war shooters all the time.

 

[hobblygobbly]

I don't think a few opinionated tweets constitutes as """drama""".

In my opinion the only real issue I have with video games when it comes to violence is the juvenile glorification of war/conflict.

There is absolutely a discussion to be had about how some games do things as well as the utter trash ideas like the "No Russian" in MW2. Or when war games can't even research non-English text they use in the game when shooting the "baddies" like Russian, Arabic, German, Korean, Chinese, etc.

We should also hold games accountable for how they handle history, its lack of accuracy like the controversy surrounding CoH 2 with the Eastern Front. There is a WW1 game being created right now which should go under the same lense of criticism, historical war shooters may be making a come back and it'll be a good time to discuss it.

It's a different discussion of violence regarding mowing down demons in Doom vs. shooting people that represent ethnicities and countries with a juvenile narrative.

 

[KurtSloane]

Who's saying that? People just seem to be asking about video game's place in culture and how that culture reflects the world we live in.

Games like FPS have nothing to do with culture, rather they tap into and satisfy power fantasies held by many men (less so women, but plenty do play them) with relation to war, action, violence. The focus on impact and the cool ways to kill someone in these electronic fantasies is due to the fact that these represent one of the key pay offs in this fantasy, the moment of a kill.


It is what it is, it's not for all and other types of fantasies are available, so indulge in the one that suits your own sensibilities and sensitivities.

 

[Chunky]

What gets me is Notch's 'not that you would know'. I doubt an indie dev will ever make as much as Notch has, but Blow is hardly a stranger to success. If he'd left that out he would've sounded like much less of a cunt.

 

[lightskintwin]

Right, but I didn't say the majority of you.

Let me clearify, from my subjective point of view, it seems to me, that most of the people complaining about violence in video games are Americans. Not most that most Americans complain about violence in video games.

And while yes, Europe has seen more violence...in history. It hasn't recently, and gun ownership is nowhere near as prevelant. Walking down the street in Oslo, Amsterdam, Rome, Barcelona, Dublin or even London you be pretty secure that few to none unsavory characters are carrying firearms. You cant say the same about LA, NY, Huston, Miami or Chicago.

It also helps that the video game playing public probably weren't alive during WW2...

E3 is in America. A lot of games media is in America. A lot of gamers and game developers live in America. Don't you think that plays apart in visibility alone that may skew your perspective of anything about America?

 

[zoukka]

But they did watch WW2 movies and soldiers in this age play modern war shooters all the time.

War movies had a plot, morals and a vision. War games have none of those.

 

[Already Torn]

What gets me is Notch's 'not that you would know'. I doubt an indie dev will ever make as much as Notch has, but Blow is hardly a stranger to success. If he'd left that out he would've sounded like much less of a cunt.

I mean that holds true for most things Notch says. He's got some brain problems.

 

[SliceSabre]

Content in games hasn't been under serious threat or scrutiny since the Lieberman/Kohl Congressional hearings of 1993/4. The industry complied by adopting a ratings board, and that's been more or less that since (Jack Thompson didn't have the federal government on his side, after all).

Eventually, someone in a position of authority is going to realize how many of the prominent mass murderers and would-be mass murderers of the last few years - Anders Breivik, Adam Lanza, Eliot Rodger, James Holmes, Dylann Roof, and James Howell (whose Santa Monica plot was just foiled) - have been way into video games, and start asking questions to which we'd better have answers.

And we'll have the same answers we did back then: video games didn't make these nutters go out there and kill people anymore than violent movies or violent music.

In fact most of the mass killers out there recently have had some bullshit justification that has absolutely nothing to do with video games for what they did.

 

[the_batman]

Really? I don't go looking for games thinking "up for a nice big of ultraviolence".

you don't but tens of millions of people do every year.

 

[cyba89]

Typical Americans, blaming games and rap and doing absolutely nothing about gun control.

He's not blaming for real-life violence and I don't think he's in the Position to do anything about gun control.

 

[UrbanRats]

Games like FPS have nothing to do with culture, rather they tap into and satisfy power fantasies held by many men (less so women, but plenty do play them) with relation to war, action, violence. The focus on impact and the cool ways to kill someone in these electronic fantasies is due to the fact that these represent one of the key pay offs in this fantasy, the moment of a kill.


It is what it is, it's not for all and other types of fantasies are available, so indulge in the one that suits your own sensibilities and sensitivities.

Culture has no relation to what power fantasies people enjoy?

 

[madmackem]

Content in games hasn't been under serious threat or scrutiny since the Lieberman/Kohl Congressional hearings of 1993/4. The industry complied by adopting a ratings board, and that's been more or less that since (Jack Thompson didn't have the federal government on his side, after all).

Eventually, someone in a position of authority is going to realize how many of the prominent mass murderers and would-be mass murderers of the last few years - Anders Breivik, Adam Lanza, Eliot Rodger, James Holmes, Dylann Roof, and James Howell (whose Santa Monica plot was just foiled) - have been way into video games, and start asking questions to which we'd better have answers.

They all watched movies and listened to violent music etc, sick people need help if a form of entertainment can warp thier mind into doing something bad.

 

[Krammy]

While I certainly don't agree with Jonathan Blow, Notch making jabs with "Not that you'd know", is so ridiculously childish and ruins any kind of valid argument he could've made.

 

[Mivey]

Games are violet because that is what people want.

Oh yeah? What do you say to these colours?

Also, people have no clue what they want. They simple take what they think is best from the given selection. The actual thing you should say is: Publishers believe that all that people want is violet games.

 

[Comfort Jones]

War movies had a plot, morals and a vision. War games have none of those.

There's also plenty of them that absolutely glorified the war one way or another though. Honestly I find a multiplayer game far less harmful than a movie making war look like some noble patriotic thing.

Oh yeah? What do you say to these colours?

10/10 post.

 

[zoukka]

While I certainly don't agree with Jonathan Blow, Notch making jabs with "Not that you'd know", is so ridiculously childish and ruins any kind of valid argument he could've made.

He hasn't made a valid argument since the development of Minecraft.

There's also plenty of them that absolutely glorified the war one way or another though. Honestly I find a multiplayer game far less harmful than a movie making war look like some noble patriotic thing.

Well even the romantic war movies tended to show the human side of the war, the human tragedy and loss of lives. Games usually don't comment on the social/political elements of war at all, it's just a playground for you to blow shit up in visual historic context (not that there's anything wrong with that, just that the field of war games is very homogenous).

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Notch may not have phrased it in the way a lot of people would have liked him to, but he entirely has a point.

The people want violent video games and the EAs of the world are glad to give it to them.

Yeah bravo 'Notch' for coming up with such a genius argument. 'People want what they want'. Really sage insight there.

I can't believe that some people STILL think that if you're opposed to violent video games it means that you think video games directly cause violence.

Some people seem to really lack the capacity for critical thinking. We have a culture of violence that spans every media type and is part of our culture that we just accept. From a young age we are conditioned to associate violence with heroics, as something that is necessary for 'good' to overcome 'evil', as something masculine, as some inevitable that all men should be able to deal with etc etc. Minor violence is seen as "okay" by the state- if you get beaten up by someone in the street, see how much the police would care. Mass violence is fetishised by the media, in the same breath as it being condemned. The state crack down on illegal pornographic videos and throw people who watch them into prison, yet videos of real life murder and executions are fine, and the people who receive gratification from watching them is nothing to worry about. This culture normalises and rewards violence, and this is what 'causes' real world violence (although even then it's nowhere near that simple).

This culture of violence is caused by myriad different things, such as masculinity/patriarchy, class (the use of violence by the ruling classes to stay in that position), colonialism/imperialism and the western fetishisation of the armed forces, various historical tensions etc etc, and it's reinforced through every aspect of our culture, including popular culture, of which video games are just one sub-category. Video games don't 'cause' violence. They just contribute to a culture and ideology.

The issue with video games is that in the vast, vast majority of video games, the main way you interact with the world is through violence. It's easy to find films without any violence in, or where violence is presented as something horrific. This is changing a bit; lots of refreshingly non-violent games, and stuff like Life Is Strange is violent in parts but never condones it or rewards it. There is also the issue that violence and combat isn't necessarily the best way for gameplay mechanics to actually work. For example, I thought the impact of the story in The Last Of Us was significantly lessened by the crap cover shooter gameplay, where it could have easily been a stealth, exploration and environmental puzzle game.

But yeah, on a day like this it does seem bad taste to be celebrating a load of new games that celebrate excessive violence, regardless of the fact that they don't cause violence themselves.

Completely agree with you.

I think there is too much violence in gaming but that totally does not mean I think they cause violence.

Society fetishizes violence and it needs to change.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Haven't said there was something wrong with shooting games. They're fun, most of the time.
Their number and how they often try to one up themselves on the killing and/or gore because they have to, however, can and maybe should be up for debate.

Yeah, that I can agree with, but I feel it's a different conversation (realism level of violence and gore in gaming: where is it going, and where do we draw the line).

 

[Alienous]

People choosing to stand on the violent videogames soapbox, of all the soapboxes they could choose, after a mass shooting, is somewhere between ridiculous and offensive to me.

 

[madmackem]

you don't but tens of millions of people do every year.

And how many of those tens of millions go out and do something bad?.

 

[witchedwiz]

I don't agree per se, but..
A few days ago i was visiting a girl...
Her 10 years old brother was alone playing the division..
At his age i had ravaged kingdom and assalted plenty of opponents in videogame (take your pick... Rygar, Shadow of the ninja, little samson, Beckham even lolo had you use your enemy ad meatshield after "putting them to sleep"),but the low res made it all disjointed from reality..
A 10 y/o kid playing the division made me cringe a bit in hindsight..

 

[Bobs Big Boy]

Persson (Notch) isn't the one arguing for change here - if you take his statement to indicate he would argue that specific point - Blow is. And Blow's recent game is completely absent of violence.

I understand but what has he made that has fulfilled that need? And why would he know, better than Blow, based on what he has made?

 

[Chunky]

I mean that holds true for most things Notch says. He's got some brain problems.

I'd like to think with billions of dollars I wouldn't have the need to get into pointless Twitter beef, I'd be too busy consuming my body weight in cocaine on a blimp above the Bahamas...but maybe Notch just gets bored easily.

 

[Council Pop]

Completely agree with you.

I think there is too much violence in gaming but that totally does not mean I think they cause violence.

Society fetishizes violence and it needs to change.

And we can help change this by just admitting to ourselves that violence in games is problematic, and by celebrating non-violent games. But it doesn't mean we have to stop playing Overwatch, or GTA or whatever! We just need to become more critical thinkers IMO.

 

[Keasar]

There was murder in fifa17?
Might be the first football game I buy.

"A young boy, his family taken from him by a corrupt football manager, takes his ball up against his oppressors as his fathers last wish was for him to play football and defeat the enemies of his clan."

 

[Mindwipe]

Culture has no relation to what power fantasies people enjoy?

Not in the simplistic linear way some people attempt to draw with a college sociology essay level argument, no.

Much the same with sexuality. We do not live in a uniform culture of anything. We live in miriad overlapping subcultures filtered through widely variant individual prisms.

And that's why most sociology is quackery, tbh.

 

[SliceSabre]

People choosing to stand on the violent videogames soapbox, of all the soapboxes they could choose, after a mass shooting, is somewhere between ridiculous and offensive to me.

I mean there is a mass shooting practically everyday in the US so when is a good time? No I'm not belittling the mass shooting in Orlando in any way, but people get murdered everyday on this planet, multiple people, there is a war going on everyday on this planet.

All those things considered, when do you suppose is a good time to get on the 'violent video games soapbox'?

 

[jiggles]

I love violence in my games, but I don't want that to be all I get. There's something a little unsettling with how glorified it is, especially when you get a big event like this and everybody's pushing shooters hard. The big highlight moments of Titanfall 2 were the kills, but they could just as easily have been about avoiding fire, with how much mobility you have.

The red carpet on the Battlefield stream was also a little worrying. It's only purpose was to ask a bunch of celebs how many people they're going to kill and how they're going to do it. Yes, it's just in a videogame, but given the timing, it's just crass and tone-deaf. Should've been pulled, or at least changed the approach.

 

[SolidSnakex]

AAA is never going to be the place for that as long as game studios keep treating their audience with absolute cynicism. Look at what Christopher Nolan did in movies, for sake of contrast. He got people to come out in droves to see Interstellar, a movie WB spent $150 million on about people exploring in space and questioning our place in the universe without a single person getting shot.

The gaming audience has been trained over years and years to just expect violence. Weening them off of that takes time, effort, and risks, but anything is possible. A Mass Effect without shooting (to go along with the Interstellar comparison) sounds pretty exciting to me, for example.

Movies and games are not the same. A box office flop isn't going to have the same type of impact on a studio that a major game that flops commercially would have on that developer. The risk is extremely high in gaming when it comes to bombs.

You're talking about weening people off violence in games, but whose to say that a large amount of people want less violent games? For as much as people are giving Markus shit, he's absolutely right about developers giving consumers what they want. During the PSone generation the best selling games were racers, platformers, survival horror and JRPG's. The market as a result was flooded with those types of games. Then the next generation people fell in love with open-world games due to GTA, and developers responded by making those types of games. Then FPS games became really popular, and developers once again responded by making more of them. At one point we even saw developers making mini-game collections that were actually non-violent because that's what consumers wanted at the time. And there were music games as well.

But the reality is that consistently, generation after generation, games that are violent remain popular. FPS, TPS, RPG etc. games don't go out of style like mini-game collections or music games. They're consistent. They're safe. And that's key in AAA development right now because of how volatile the market is in terms of what happens if a big budget game isn't successful.

 

[Chunky]

I don't agree per se, but..
A feb days ago i was visiting a girl home...
Her 10 team old brother was alone playing the division..
At bis ave i bar ravaged kingdom and assalted plenty of opponents in videogame,but the low res made it all disjointed from reality..
A 10 y/o kid playing the division Made me cringe a bit in hindsight..

bit early for drunk posting?

 

[patapuf]

It starts a conversation, doesn't it?

Sure, but if you write an article you could try to add a little substance to it rather than referencing the low hanging fruit of an unforseen event not changing plans and conferences that have been set for months and in the case of the games, years.

It rings especially hollow when, as shown, your own publisher is gleefully joining in "pretending the tragedy didn't happen".

As seen in the thread. Not a lot of great discussion to be had when the issue framed that way. Especially since there's a history of blaming videogames for real life violence.

 

[Comfort Jones]

Well even the romantic war movies tended to show the human side of the war, the human tragedy and loss of lives. Games usually don't comment on the social/political elements of war at all, it's just a playground for you to blow shit up in visual historic context (not that there's anything wrong with that, just that the field of war games is very homogenous).

I get your point here but I feel like it's not always true. I think the CoD campaigns for instance absolutely carry that spirit of goofy romanticism where your side can do no wrong. There's maybe less games that have a really serious take on violence than there are movies but they're starting to gain traction. Stuff like Spec Ops: The Line or This War of Mine for instance.

 

[Wallach]

I understand but what has he made that has fulfilled that need? And why would he know, better than Blow, based on what he has made?

I'm honestly confused at what you're getting at. Notch does not appear to have any needs going unfulfilled, judging by this exchange. He seems quite happy with the state of things.

 

[ScientificPizza]

we're going to be stuck in this video games are too violent loop for all of eternity. after a point it is up to individuals to draw their own lines about what is right and what is too far. i respect blow as a developer, but this argument has been had ad nasueim and the market has remained largely violence driven

in saying that there's probably more diversity now than there's ever been. it's just a boring argument at this point, and i doubt anyone's mind is really going to be changed

 

[blankempathy]

Nobody is saying "stop making violent video games". Some people are just looking at the games presented and thinking "why is everything about killing people?".

It's a valid criticism of the medium and we should look at it. Nobody is taking the violent video games from you. But like everything, it's fine to analyse it and question it.

Lets be honest. We know this criticism is in the wake of the tragedy that just occurred. So instead of rationale and well thought out criticism it simply sounds like someone using an opportunity to hit that emotional nerve. And itll be buried because theres simply no stopping the e3 machine thats been in works for the past couple of months. Seems like they should of waited till after e3 when everyone quieted down a little more and then have a real discussion. But blow has never struck me as a guy with restraint.

 

[Bobs Big Boy]

I don't agree per se, but..
A feb days ago i was visiting a girl home...
Her 10 team old brother was alone playing the division..
At bis ave i bar ravaged kingdom and assalted plenty of opponents in videogame,but the low res made it all disjointed from reality..
A 10 y/o kid playing the division Made me cringe a bit in hindsight..

Are you OK?

Edit:

I'm honestly confused at what you're getting at. Notch does not appear to have any needs going unfulfilled, judging by this exchange. He seems quite happy with the state of things.

What has he done lately?

Maybe it's better not to be content with how things are. But what is Notch developing that makes a difference either way and if he's not developing anything... why are we talking about him?

 

[Herbspiceguy]

You can't possibly be serious. Does context mean nothing to you? Mowing down people in the airport level in CoD is not even remotely the same as blasting cartoon characters with laser guns or something. One is directly tied to the real world, the other isn't.

Nobody is disagreeing the context is different.
I'm just saying that it boils down to the same thing; killing life to reach the goal of the game.

 

[Inviusx]

So are the consumers to blame for buying these "mass murdering" games? Publishers put out these games because people buy them. People buy them because they're fun to play.

How do you argue against this without saying that people are "wrong" for buying these games? Blow has a problem with the industry that allowed him to be who he is. That's a tough spot to be in, I don't envy him...

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I liked Braid and thought I was a fan until Witness ended up being the most empty unfun game. That's my reason to not be a fan.

This ridiculous view is my reason to lose any respect.

I didn't know Jack Thomson is cool these days.

Ha! I was just thinking about good ole Jackie boy...

 

[UrbanRats]

Not in the simplistic linear way some people attempt to draw with a college sociology essay level argument, no.

Sure, but saying that fps have nothing to do with culture is just incorrect.
Especially if you follow it up with the power fantasy argument.