In a close to perfect world I would not see a problem with war video games. If while at war, soldiers themselves act as if combat were a game, why shouldn't games that portray war exist? Until those soldiers went out and did their job in a serious way, I wouldn't see a problem with games such as Call of Duty and Gears.
I would argue that the critics questioning the players, the games, the makers, and their morality have no right to say if its offense or not. I would argue that I bet they've never fought in war. That if it doesn't offend the real soldiers the games are trying to portray why should it an average Joe? I might even say that such games help show today's adolescents that war is a bloody dangerously scary situation that only the bravest put themselves in. That they are heroes and should be better respected.
But today's adolescents aren't the only ones playing these games. Its turned into youngens, girls, and even older men obsessing over these games.And with shows like Jersey Shore being such a hit how mature are the customers these days?
Moreover we don't live in a world full of sane people. Not everyone was blessed to have good role models to teach them that video games are just games. That shooting real people should not be fun. Not everyone can differentiate between reality and fiction. Unfortunately it only takes those few insane people to kill many and to give games like Gears a bad rep.
On top people don't understand that young children shouldn't be exposed to violent games. Younger kids look up to their fathers, brothers, sisters etc. and seeing them over react to a loss. Or become addicted to playing those games makes them feel like its the right thing to do. Which in the eyes of most, again gives the right for negative light upon the games.
A major quality for humans is to conform. And future generations see more and more that its OK to be overly aggressive. That if anything I've got to be tough to have power, confusing toughness with violence. Possibly thinking, I've got to learn to play these games and to act this way for me to get my brothers affection. Or, for me to be able to get attention from my boyfriend I need to focus more on these games. Maybe even, to be part of the cool crowd and hold conversations with fellow peers I admire I must first get in touch with these games.
Those in favor of such games might respond in saying: Gears and Call of Duty help keep kids out of the streets and causing trouble by staying home with friends to enjoy their games, that they also relive stress and teach friendly competition.
It's all about how far people take things. Promoting competition can be a good healthy thing but too many times it gives people the feeling like they have to fight for everything. That they have to be defensive because there isn't enough to go around for everyone. Yes, while uniting friends and relieving stress might be true, might not be.
Like an alcoholic, you don't know when you crossed the line from friendly drinking to dependence. How much are these people playing that the stress reliever later turns into a stress creator. How long before 'just hanging with some friends' turns into hey group of friends lets plan on how to later go out and kill?
Another thing is that now technology is so advanced that these games to compete with one another have to have better graphics. Playing a game with better graphics makes it feel more realistic. Its not something the producers can help since it's what the consumers want, but it is not helping the cause. Perhaps if all game makers agreed on making their games be more realistic in the sense that one shot to the head bam your done, not, ten shots later your life power goes down to red meaning your about to die. Never the less that still wouldn't solve all the other problems these violent games cause.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/10/modern-warfare-2-the-case-for-the-dedicated-server.ars
http://www.nowpublic.com/us_soldiers_use_video_game_skills_to_master_remote_guns_crows
No comments:
Post a Comment