Skip to main content

2.5 Games and Violence (Due: Dec 5 Status: Not Completed)



2.5 Games and Violence

1. There are many answers, none of them sufficient, as to why video and computer game are so often violent – sometimes graphically (as in most FPS games), sometimes cartoonishly (as with most of the classic Nintendo franchises), and sometimes on large, semi-abstract scales (as with most strategy games) with both military and civilian populations at stake.

2. As someone who abhors (real) violence, I sometimes question why I play so many violent games. As someone who feels that even the most necessary war is folly and tragedy, I wonder why I am drawn to war and (military) strategy games. Some of the justifications for violence (graphic and not) in games include:

a. “Most of the players are boys and young men.” This is increasingly untrue, to the point that it should have lost its credibility by now. On the other hand, it continues to be true that 30-something male gamers spend the more money on games per capita than other audiences. Of course, this still fails to explain why games for men should have to be violent. I, for one, don’t believe that men are necessarily violent or only drawn to violence.
b. “All games are about (violent) conflict.” Though not completely true, the case can be made that a lot of our sports are “sanitized” gladiatorial combat (American Football more than most), and that many traditional games (like chess) are, at heart, wargames. Conflict is important to games, and most games have a winner and a loser. This is one of the differences between structured games and unstructured (or less structured) play. Free play doesn’t always involve conflict, and rarely has a “winner.”
c. “That’s the way it has always been done.” The history of computer and video games is rooted in kinds of play that emphasize conflict, violence, winners and loosers, and “Good” versus “Evil.” Tabletop wargaming was one of the first genres adapted to computer play (partially because computers handled the complex rules and interactions of wargames well), and computer gaming is deeply indebted to Dungeons & Dragons, which itself started as an attempt to make a wargame based on J.R.R. Tolkein’s Lord of the Rings. There are also practical reasons why many early action games were shooters: it was something early computers and arcade games could do easily that you couldn’t do easily with a traditional board game.

3. It should be clear by this point that games don’t have to be violent. It is probably also obvious that there will continue to be violent games. Do games cause violence? The evidence is mixed, but mostly indicates that no, they don’t. If anything, excessive gameplay of any sort at a young age may impede development of social skills, but Doom was no more responsible for Columbine than The Catcher in the Rye was to blame for the murder of John Lennon. New media, especially popular ones, are regularly blamed for issues that are more broadly societal. Games, comics, tv, radio, film, novels and Socratic debate have each, in their turn, been blamed for “corrupting youth” and described as inherently bad or unhealthy.

4. At the same time, individual works in any medium can be part of a larger social or societal problem. If games can educate, inform and enlighten, then they must also be able to miseducate, spread lies and misconceptions, and reinforce bad ideas and bad habits. It becomes the responsibility of those creating games (as well as of those who buy them) to be conscious and critical: not to censor or sanitize, but to think about what games say, what arguments they make and way.

5. In that vein, I am in some ways more concerned about sex in games than violence. Violence in games is the subject of an open, if often polarized, public debate, and many people have commented on the US’ national culture of glorified, graphic violence – that is, the larger social issues. On the other hand, open sexuality in games, including normal, healthy adult relationships, is almost completely taboo: even games that let the player’s character have sex and (incredibly rarely) children are more self-censored than Production Code era Hollywood film. Partially as a result, there’s a lot of (barely) implicit sexuality in games, and substitutions of violence for sex (because a female character killing someone (an “enemy”) and then striking a sexy pose in a skimpy costume is, for some reason, completely acceptable.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking up Your Story into Beats

  What scenes or story beats do you need to tell this story? You’ll add what you need to the basic framework you already have in your premises. Let’s work from the Jackie Chan Adventures premises we have so you can see how it’s done.   Basic structure of Jackie Chan Adventures: “Queen of the Shadowkhan”  Premise: •Jade, as one of the main characters, is the star of this episode. Her character fl aw is her need for peer acceptance/respect. This fl aw motivates a whole chain of problems for everyone around her. •We go to the end to see what, if anything, she learned. She learns not to succumb to peer pressure, and she realizes that indeed she did not succumb to Shendu’s pressure. (Theme: Respect earned from someone you admire is better than respect from all others!) •Jade’s initial goal is to be cool (have a tattoo) and gain respect. That snowballs as she begins to abuse the respect she gets from the ninjas. •Shendu is the villain who uses Jade in an attempt to destroy Ja...

Three Acts

  “Leaves of three, let them be.” A helpful little phrase when it comes to avoiding poison oak in the woods, but when it comes to your  screenplay , three absolutely is company. This is the core of screenwriting.  Three Act Structure is your framework and the almighty epoxy of  the screenplay . These three parts, often literally taking place in different worlds – physically and/or figuratively – can work independently of each other, yet when connected, they build a solid whole. 

Q&A – Lawrence Gilliard Jr. (Bob Stookey)

  Actor Lawrence Gilliard Jr., who plays Bob Stookey on AMC’s  The Walking Dead,  talks about his apocalypse-ready clarinet skills and how his character from  The Wire would react to zombies. Q: You’ve been in a lot of crime-centric shows. Were you excited to do something different on The Walking Dead ? A: Yeah absolutely. You get to play and have more fun and be more creative when you’re doing a show like this. Killing zombies — that’s what you do as a kid! Now I get to do it as a grownup. I definitely looked forward to the change and I’m having fun. Q: Your character is a medic. Do you have any skills that would be useful in the apocalypse? A: I play clarinet. I also play the drums, so I could keep the spirits lively and entertain everyone. That’s all I could do. Q: Bob is a pretty good shot. Did you do any weapons training for the role? A: None so far. When I was young, I learned to shoot, so I don’t really need any training for that. Q: You’ve...