Q: 1) Do you think violence in games has any negative effect on a person with aggression or violence?
A:
Objectively speaking, I can’t say for sure since I am not a scientist nor a psychologist. In order to determine this, there must be a study conducted over a big number of people, and not just by the hundreds or simple thousands.
My current personal belief is that whether violent games have an effect on people depends on the psychological status of the individual. Each human is different, each culture raises their children differently as well. I think that the differences are very important to study because each life experience of a person contributes to how he or she reacts to certain things, such as video games. For example, people who experienced something traumatic in their life such as being sexually assaulted or being ambushed in war, these things leave some kind of psychological damage to the person and there is usually a trigger, maybe a scene from a movie, being touched by someone, or hearing something, and they’ll feel the negative emotions and experiences associated with their terrible past.
In my own personal life, violent video games has never affected me in such a way that I would become a social outcast or someone who is dangerous to anybody. I’ve been playing “violent” games since I was around 3 years old if I remember correctly. I remember playing games like Contra on the NES with my mom as well as other games that involve shooting and killing stuff. Back then, games like those were already considered “violent”, especially when you’re growing up in a religious family. Still, one thing that I remember that my parents taught me was that with all things, may it be movies, tv shows, music, and of course video games, I should be able to separate reality from entertainment. This is where good parenting or at least having a good guide helps a lot. As a growing person who still doesn’t know everything about the world, you need someone who’s probably seen a lot of things in their lifetime to tell you how life works, what the laws are or at least the basic ideas of most of them, and what’s acceptable and what’s not in society.
With the way I was raised, the amount of “violence” didn’t really matter because to me, they were all just games, things to have fun with and not actions that I should be doing in real life. The friends whom I grew up with were also gamers at an early age and we all played almost the same stuff. We’ve all graduated college without even getting arrested for anything and most of them even have their own families now.
As for ratings, I don’t think they’re really effective anyway. Age doesn’t really tell whether a person will be “smart” enough to handle the game without turning into a serial killer. Just go try to give a game that deals with sexual violence to a victim of what and see how he/she handles it, no matter their age. Go and make a survivor of real life war who lost all of his friends and got his feet blown away by IEDs play the latest Call of Duty or Battlefield game, see if that doesn’t make him feel bad and troubled. Now that’s an example of why age can’t be a good way of deciding whether a game is for someone. These people can be 50 years old or even older but the games will definitely have a negative effect on them. It’s not because of their age, it’s because of what they’ve experienced in the past that the game deals with.
I think the idea that “Video games will turn you into a homicidal devil!” is just something similar to what people believed the negative effects of that board game called “Dungeons and Dragons” was. In the past it was “Rock N’ Roll” that was Satan’s tool, then it was “Dungeons and Dragons”, now it’s almost every video game in existence.
I guess I’ll just say that in my own opinion, only politicians are the ones making up these type of claims because video games can be an effective “enemy to defeat”, especially for the conservative guys due to the nature of most games nowadays. A hero needs a villain, and this is how politicians think about games. Games are easier to regulate and control unlike real criminals on the streets where even if you manage to stop hundreds of them today, there will still be thousands committing crime all over the place tomorrow.
Q. 2) Do you think the gaming industry has gone too far with the level of violence in their games, or do you think the levels of violence in the games they produce are acceptable?
A.
In my personal opinion, there really doesn’t need to be a limit to the violence that a game can have. Games are just the modern books or movies of our time. Games are works of fiction. The level of violence a game has should only depend on how much the story needs it to depict. If the game involves cute little zombies in a cute little down, then if they only bite their victims without actually ripping their flesh off, then that would work because of the cute theme of the game. If the story depicts the zombies and everything else as terrifying, then zombies biting victims only to leave cute little teeth marks won’t work at all. You’ll need them to tear the flesh off of people and devour them violently since the story needs them to be very scary and gruesome.
I think that the level of violence is just a tool that the author of the game can use in order to affect how players will enjoy his game. You can compare it to the writing style of various authors of famous books or even great painters of art. Each had his own style of showing their own art to the people. Some authors liked building the suspense first before leaving the story at a plateau and then going for the climax, some painters liked heavy curving strokes while some liked thin outlines. The need or level of violence should only exist depending on how the author thinks it will contribute to the experience of the players.
Q. 3) Do you think there is a need for more violent video games, and if so, what do you think most strongly attracts violence of high level into the games of the modern day?
A.
First of all, I don’t think that violence in games is a negative thing. We see violence all around us everyday. It’s in tv, radio, movies, comics, magazines, newspapers, books, art, and more! Violence is simply a depiction of what already exists in our world. Nobody in real life can be sheltered from every form of violence. With that said, I think that violence is simply a tool that the creator of the game can use depending on how he wants the game to be experienced. With our current technology, we can now depict violence as accurately as possible just as how it happens in real life. A long time ago when most games were just 2D, when you shot someone, they just blinked out or exploded in a cloud just because the machines back then didn’t have the capability to show how the body should react when hit by incoming bullets. Now that we have the technology to properly calculate trajectories and physics, it is possible for us to show how bullets would really travel and affect the target in a realistic manner.
I think that when people complain about violence in today’s games, they’re actually complaining about the realism of the violence. For example, people might complain that in the GTA games, you can run over people, set them on fire, plant a bomb in cars and make it explode on a sidewalk with lots of people and they all burn to crisps after the car explodes. But hold on a second and think back to the NES games and even the SNES days. There were already lots of “violent” games back then such as Elevator Action but you never heard it on the news that people were rallying about Elevator Action’s violence.
Let’s take a closer look at Elevator Action and see why I tell you it’s actually a very gruesome and violent game. First of all, you’re some kind of cop or detective and you’re supposed to find a suitcase or some spy material in a building. You start out at the top and ride an elevator down to each floor. Now each floor has a couple of doors where the bad guys come out from. If you shoot the bad guys, a spurt of blood comes out from where you hit them, then they crumble to the ground and explode into nothingness! Now isn’t that scary? What kind of gun does the hero have? Why does it make enemies explode into non-existence after a bloody spray of blood?! Not only that! If you ride the elevator and a bad guy happens to be below you, you can actually crush the bad guy and he’ll explode into nothingness once more!
Now imagine if Elevator Action was “rebooted” with today’s technology. Just think that its graphics have been updated into realism, but let’s keep the same game mechanics and how you kill the bad guys. When you shoot the bad guy, he’ll fall back with the help of proper physics as blood spurts out from the hole created by the bullet. After falling, his body will explode with bloody agony until he disintegrates into nothing. What a horrific death! Now imagine the elevator crushing part! A bad guy unwittingly stands just below your elevator. You continue on your way down and the enemy panics for his life. There is no escape, he’s trapped by the elevator! His bones break as the weight of the elevator continues to crush him. He screams in pain and blood starts flowing out of his ears, mouth, and other orifice. After a little struggle, the elevator finally crushes him into a splatter of meaty remains…then he disintegrates into nothingness. I’m pretty sure this version of the game will win the attention of some politician who needs an easy target for his campaign as well as the cries of a few mothers who don’t have the time to explain to their kids what’s real and what’s not, all because “It’s too real!”.
If you want a realistic game, then you can’t just pick certain parts of it to be realistic. If you can slice an apple with a knife in a game but you can’t use the same knife to cut someone’s throat, then it fails to be realistic. Violence is simply part of a cause and effect reaction, and whether or not the game should contain it is up to the creative view of the author.
Q. 4) Do you think the gruesome effects in a game, such as a spray of blood when an enemy is killed, or a realistic move where the enemy clutches his neck, then gradually fades away, has great effect towards the realism, the feel of the game, or improves the gaming experience for a gamer in any vital way, or do you think it isn’t necessarily needed, and maybe even unnecessary at times?
A.
We now have the technology to properly show animation and calculate the physics of how things should react with each other. I think that violence should be depicted according to how the author imagines his game to be. If he aims for a realistic game, then he should include how people actually react to being choked out of breath or having their throat cut wide open by a blade.
Q. 5) When in the store, do you find the more violent games appeal to you and the people around you most, or do you find less confronting games more appealing?
A.
I think that the real question you’re asking is “Do violent box arts for games win my attention more than non-violent box arts?”. When I look at the box art of random games, it’s not the violence that gets my attention. It’s very easy to throw a few blood splatters here and there. What I’m usually looking for are the main characters of the game. Actions don’t usually give me a good idea of what else to expect from a game.
For example, let’s say I was walking in a game store back in the 90s and saw the box art for the SNES game called Phalanx. Now, the box art shows some old Santa Claus-bearded guy playing a banjo. My initial reaction would be “What the heck is this game about, a banjo-playing tutorial?! Is this the Miracle Banjo version of Miracle Piano?!”. In reality, Phalanx is a space shooter game, similar to R-Type and Gradius. What in the world does a banjo-playing grandpa have anything to do with space shooters?! Nothing! Since if I wanted to learn how to play the banjo I’d just go ahead and buy a real one and learn from a teacher, I’d just pass this title up. Looking around a few more box arts, a title wins my attention. The box art shows three kids in front of what seems to be a gigantic tree. The scenery is lush green and beautiful. The picture alone tells me that the game has a potential to deliver an adventure of epic magnitude. Oh yes, and I was right, it was one of the best RPGs I’ve played!
Box art has the power to advertise the game itself with only one picture, but when used improperly, it can send more confusion to the shopper than telling them to “Buy Me!”. The important thing about box art is not just one factor of the game such as violence. A good box art should be able to tell me everything I want to know about the game to make me interested. It should give me an idea of what the game is about. Let’s take that Secret of Mana box art as an example. That picture was able to tell me that the three kids seem to be on some kind of journey. They were looking at the massive tree in front of them as if they’ve been looking for it for a long time. Behind the tree were even greater forests, which tells me that the game is probably about traveling to different places. The art style also lends a fantasy adventure feel to it, and the little girl in the middle seems to be too young to be journeying around. What’s her story? Why are these kids in this strange forest with a giant tree to begin with? What is Mana, and what is the secret of it? From the picture alone it already made me interested in a lot of ways, unlike the box art for Phalanx which immediately made me think “No, I don’t need banjo lessons.”.
Q. 6) What in a game do you normally look forward to?
A.
I usually look forward to the adventure that I’ll be having in a game. It doesn’t matter what violence level the game has, as long as it fits with the game’s theme. For example, it would be very out of place if whenever Mario stomped on a goomba, the goomba’s guts would spill out all over the place. Mario is about a fun innocent style adventure that lets you escape into a cute fantasy world. It’s not about realism, it’s not about political issues, and it’s not about murder. This is why Mario games don’t “need” to implement realistic violence because it isn’t a game about reality anyway.
For games like GTA that deal with reality, then I expect them to be as realistic with violence as well. In fact I was a bit disappointed with some of the later GTA titles. I think that it was in GTA 3 or Vice City, you could blow away people’s body parts if you aim properly. In San Andreas and GTA 4, you can’t even decapitate people anymore! I think that was a step back in the realism of violence department. They’re still fun games, but I wish they kept the gore intact.
Other things that I look forward to in a game are how much I can replay the game in a different way and how I can experiment with the things inside the game for different results. I don’t like games where the outcome is always the same or there’s only one way for everything. This is why I love sandbox style games like GTA, there are many ways to accomplish the same task and most of them are fun! I also love RPG games because I like epic adventures with rich storylines. It’s somewhat like reading a book, except you’re actually playing it and watching it at the same time.
Q. 7) When playing a game with violence to a high level, how does it affect your mood, if it does, and which aspect of the game do you think gives you this feeling, for example the violence, or sudden surprises, or general thrill?
A.
When I’m having a bad day and I need to release stress, I love playing violent games. The reason for this is that in the real world, you can’t just destroy other people’s stuff or kill someone without affecting their families and getting in trouble with the law. I myself don’t want to be a victim of someone who just felt like killing people and blowing stuff up today just because he’s in a bad mood.
Violent video games is a very good form of stress relief. It lets me act out the anger inside me in a game world where nobody in real life can be harmed. I can kill and perform the worst crimes in humanity in video games and nobody has to really get hurt in real life. Everything is contained on your game screen. Did your girlfriend cheat on you in real life? Go play GTA and pretend that “for-hire” woman is your ex-girlfriend. Plant a bomb in your car. Drive very fast and at the last moment jump out of your car. As the car flies in the air, push the button and detonate the bomb! KABOOM! Fireworks in the sky for everyone to enjoy! Goodbye you two-timing lady dog! Welcome back to the bachelor’s life baby! Maybe someone in real life was being a pain in the butt to you, maybe at school or at work. You’ve got a game called “Fight Night Champions” or the latest WWE game. You know what, you can create characters there. Go create the person who’s making you feel bad and beat them up in the game! Make sure to cause them pain with low blows!
Games help you release your anger and rage. I personally believe that this is a lot better than keeping all the pain inside you. Sometimes, people go crazy and actually become killers in real life just because they have no way of expressing their anger and pain and they just couldn’t keep it hidden anymore. With games, you can act out on your fantasies of violence and satisfy your desire for revenge without actually harming anyone in real life. By relieving yourself of stress, your mind becomes clearer and you’ll be able to think carefully while knowing what’s allowed and not allowed in the society that you’re living in.
Q. 8) With one who is still in his/her schooling years, do you think addictive gaming, and violence will affect their learning, or do you think it will do quite the opposite in some ways?
A.
In my personal experience, games, whether they had violence or not, were more of a reward for me whenever I got good grades at school. For example, during my elementary and highschool years, I usually aimed to get honors each year just because my parents would reward me with a lot of new NES and SNES games. That was my agreement with them. I just usually didn’t play when there were serious exams coming up like mid-terms or quarterly exams because I can really get into playing without sleeping. Right after the exams on the final day, I usually invited all of my school buddies to come over to my place so that we can all play games after a week’s worth of studying hell.
I can say that games were a major part of my motivation to always aim for the highest grades all the time and to keep on studying. I loved video games as a kid in nursery and my parents knew it as well, and that’s probably how they used the idea of using games as my reward whenever I got high grades.
As for the choice of games, well they made me choose which games I wanted. I had all sorts of games, from cute ones to violent ones. My mom’s the one who usually played the games with me. We played violent games too like Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, and others. Even my grandpa used to play Battle City with me and it’s a game where you play as tanks to blow up buildings and other enemies.
I think I can call myself an “addictive gamer with control remaining” just because I really love games a lot and I can remain playing up to 2 days without stopping if given the chance, but that’s only when nothing important is really going on such as deadlines and the like. I think it can be bad if you can’t control yourself that you actually get to the point where you get sick because of playing too much, but that’s why you need to plan first if you want to spend a lot of time playing. For example, maybe you need protective eye-wear if you’re going to stare at the monitor for a long time. You also need to rest your eyes every couple of hours to reduce eye strain.
Anyway, games can prove to be effective motivators for students if they love games. It’s just the same as rewarding people with money when they do a good job. The idea is to give them what they want because they earned it when they successfully perform what you asked them to.
Q. 9) Who or what do you think has the biggest influence on whether a child decides to play violent games, and how confronting they find them?
A.
When I was a kid, I never really decided which games were the only ones I’m going to play. I tried all of them out and I figured that some games were great while some were just mediocre. It didn’t really matter how violent the games were, what mattered to me was if the games were actually fun to play.
I’ll just repeat that the important thing is for the player to actually know the difference between real life and entertainment. This is something that is very different for each of us. When does a kid know the difference? It’s really up to them, and this is where it’s important to have a parent or a guardian to explain to them what’s acceptable in real life and what’s not. We always have to remember that games are simply games, they’re not real life. We can be as evil as we can be in games, but we can’t do that in real life without harming others and facing the consequences.
For a very young player, what they need is an understanding that not everything in the world revolves around them. They need to understand that other people have emotions, too. I think one of the best lessons to teach them right away is to “Don’t do to others what you don’t want them to do to you!”. This is one of the first things I learned as a kid. Even with this very basic idea, you’ll know what you don’t want to do to others. If you don’t want others punching or causing you harm, then don’t do it to them. If you don’t want others to steal your stuff, then don’t do it to them. If you don’t want bad stuff happening to you, then don’t do it to others.
I think that what we need to remember is that no matter how inexperienced kids are, they’re not dumb. Just show them the cause and effect of things and they’ll understand. When I was a kid we usually watched that show “911” together. I knew that if you committed crimes, the police will go after you and you’ll be thrown in jail…with no way to play games! I saw that when someone died, their friends and families will be sad and get hurt. When children are in danger, their parents would immediately fight for them. I knew then that hurting someone meant you’re also going to hurt other people, not just one. I think that this is why it’s very important for young kids to learn about the realities of life. Show them what really happens, don’t sugarcoat the world for them. The more you treat them as “super vulnerable” babies, the more they’ll think they’re untouchable gods and will not develop compassion for other people. The earlier they understand what pain is and how other people don’t like pain, the earlier they’ll understand that being a trouble maker is no way to live a happy life.
If you’re a parent or a guardian of some kid, make a deal with them after telling them why certain things are not alright to do in the real world. Tell them that they can play any game they want, but only if they really understand the difference between real life and games. The moment they cause trouble to others or try something crazy that they saw in a game, you’ll take their beloved stuff away from them as punishment until the day that they truly understand the importance of knowing the difference between the two is.
Just remember to always tell kids why they’re being punished for something they did wrong. Cause and effect. You did this, which resulted in something or someone being hurt, and since this is unacceptable and against our agreement or the law, you are being punished accordingly. If you don’t take the time to explain to the kids about the cause of effect of actions, they’ll just pretend to understand just to get you off their backs and make the same mistake later on again. Talking to kids seriously is very important. They might not know every little detail as to why certain things are not allowed like pulling a gun out in public and waving it around, but if you explain to them in detail, it will stick into their minds especially if you show them examples of what happens when you do that, such as some guy being shot by the police to death.
Anyway I hope my opinions also contributed to something in your research, have fun and good luck:)
Adeno Man
Programmer/Art Designer/Music Composer/Story Writer
