Posts Tagged ‘First-person shooter’

While reading gamepolitics.com, I came across the below article, talking about how the Whitehouse is not considering attacking the industry (thankfully) for the Navy Yard Shooting. So I started reading the comments, and came across one commenter who kept on spewing nonsense about violent games over and over again, and after reading his crap again I realized something. He is really not who he appears to be, in fact he is actually an anti-gaming crusader using a fake name. I won’t reveal his probable real identity but gamers who know who he sounds like know how that person behaves.  Here are a few quotes from him:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/congress-video-game-violence-navy-yard-97131.html#ixzz2fZo0xKpg

“Sorry to bust your bubble but your wrong. In Paducah Kentucky, the 14 year old shooter had never fired a gun before his murder spree, except for once the day before. He played violent video games where it showed him how to aim a gun. He shot his victims with such accuracy that the only explanation is the video games taught him how to shoot so well. Look it up for your self. Not all kids that play these games end up killers, but all these killers played these violent games!”

This is one of the biggest BS claims going out there right now. That Micheal Carneal learned how to aim just from Playing Doom. There are tons of problems with this. First of all, doom at the time lacked vertical aiming. A random number generator determined how high your bullet went. You have no control over how high you shoot at all. Explain how carneal hit 3 of his targets in the head then? He couldn’t have. He fired 8 individual shots with semiautomatic pistols that don’t fire multiple rounds when you hold the trigger down, and hit 8 kids in the head or chest. Doom trains you to hold down the mouse button down, your gun in the game will fire multiple times. All of the guns do. Unlike anything but full auto guns in real life. After killing all the enemies in the current room you let go and rinse and repeat in the next room, etc. If Carneal trained on Doom, he would fire one round while holding down the real guns trigger and no more shots would fire, and would not be able to hit all 8 targets at all.

Another thing is that this poster claims is that lots of mass shooters played violent games. Only 4 have. Harris/Klebold, The Norway Killer, and the Navy Yard shooter. 1 News paper tried to claim Cho (V-Tech Killer) played Half-life (meaning counterstrike I think), but the neighbors of Cho said they never saw him obsess over “violent” games. Adam lanza was quoted by some plumber in a Tabloid to have played call of duty because “people who play call of duty know about realistic models of tanks and weapons from ww1-ww2” because of the posters showing Weapons and Tanks From WW1-WW2. No other proof given. To me that’s proof he Did NOT played COD. James Holmes played Some RPG’s (oblivion, etc), all Sword fighting games, combat wise. He killed people, with a gun. That doesn’t work.  The norway shooter said he used COD to train for the massacre. That’s it.  One other shooter said he played “Guitar Hero”. Is that the morons definition of a “violent game” now? I guess it’s because of the Heavy Metal and it’s fake Satanic cult who molests kids who happen to be part of every Metal band and metal Fan worldwide… Go Figure.

“Look up the work by Col Dave Grossman. He trains our military on how to kill people. He knows what he is talking about.

“Grossman argues that the techniques used by armies to train soldiers to kill are mirrored in certain types of video games. The conclusion he draws is that playing violent video games, particularly light gun shooters of the first-person shooter-variety
(where the player holds a weapon-like game controller), train children
in the use of weapons and, more importantly, harden them emotionally to
the task of murder by simulating the killing of hundreds or thousands of
opponents in a single typical video game. Grossman uses blunt language
that draws the ire of gamers—during the heights of video game controversy,
he was interviewed on the content of his books, and repeatedly used the
term “murder simulator” to describe first-person shooter games.”
As for your assertion that this has been tested… nice try. You are wrong!”

Col Grossman was a shrink from the Military. He had NOTHING to do with training people to kill. Boot Camp does. The whole idea that violent games are used to break down the inhibition to kill is debunked by this blog, not written by some “gamer druggie”, but a person who actually served in the military.  I quote his lengthy debunking below:

“Let me give you some background. I am coming out of a four-year stint in the United States Marine Corps. I spent six months in Afghanistan and two months in Iraq (crossing the Line of Departure a mere 72 hours after the word was given by the President).

While not in a combat unit, every Marine’s primary job is basic rifleman. We are all considered trained enough to put steel on target when the lawful order is given.

Video games are poor training tools. For anything, really. I think the last games I learned from were Sticky Bear Math and Number Munchers.

I’m not aware of any military unit that uses video games to break down the inhibition to kill.

In fact, this breakdown really only occurs in one place: Boot camp.

Boot camp doesn’t even specifically concentrate on the inhibition to kill. Rather, they follow the CIA training manual for brainwashing almost point by point, in order to instill in recruits ‘instant and willing obedience to lawful orders’ – that is what they do. The assumption, of course, is that these orders may be to kill; But they could be to drag a wounded child to safety, or set up a bunker in 100 degree weather, or pull night watch after being up for a 36-hour convoy.

The inhibition to kill can only be broken down by, wait for it . . . killing.

When we were parked on the outskirts of Fallujah and watched as night fell and the Iraqis came out onto the streets, even though our orders were much more liberal than the current Rules of Engagement, there was still hesitation. And this after our convoy had turned around after taking fire at the front.

When we got ambushed, it was actually unfortunate that my extensive game-playing hadn’t prepared me at all for the sheer confusion, excitement, fear and horror of those moments.

If you think America’s Army is anything but a half-decent game and a lame recruitment tool, you’ve never run an obstacle course, or been ‘quarterdecked’ by a DI.

If you think Halo can help you learn how to shoot, you’ve never tried to get ten in the black from 500 yards with the piece-of-shit M16A2, with your elbows getting ground by sand trapped in your cammies and the sun causing sweat on your forehead which drips into your eyes.”

One more quote by the anti-gaming activist pretending to be a politico.com poster with a fake name:

“Trust me I hunt, competitive target shoot and have a concealed pistol permit my self. Just look at my profile pic. It’s of the late great Col. Carlos Hathcock. I also play these same video games. I never blamed guns as the problem and never said all people that play these games are going to be killers. What I am saying is when you add these games without parental supervision, mentally unstable kids, etc… your going to get a few killers in the outcome.”

The fact that the same anti-gaming activist has called gamers “Junior” like this guy (read the comments he has said), and has berated gamers in emails, just like this person proves they are the same person. They are virtually Identical. There is no way this guy plays violent games. If he did, he would know the BS he spreads is NOT TRUE…

I have suspected for years that anti-gaming activists have been spreading nonsense like the Hack Psychologists claims under fake names, after I read several posts by odd people quoting his claim. Now I know the truth…. It IS happening. It’s quite disturbing. Why the hell groups like this allow people like this do do this kind of crap is beyond me.

ESRB

ESRB “Mature 17+” rating symbol, displayed on the packaging of computer and video games appropriate for audiences over the age of 17. Part of the ESRB Video Game Rating System. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

So I thought this Moral Panic on  violent entertainment causing Sandy Hook was done. Apparently not… Lo and Behold, Senator Grassley, a Repooplican from Iowa starts ranting on how the Gaming Industry’s Voluntary Rating system isn’t good enough, how it “lets these violent games get to kids”. What violent  games are these, “ones that glorify killing of innocent people”. Sure… I quote:

“There are too many video games that celebrate the mass killing of innocent people — games that despite attempts at industry self-regulation find their way into the hands of children,” 

 

Talk about a moronic claim…. Number 1, the “attempts at industry self-regulation” (like they are a complete failure, despite the FTC study that says that the ESRB ratings are better than the MPAA ones, enforcement wise), have nothing to do with why these “violent games that glorify the mass killing of innocents” fall into the hands of children. Number 1, the Industry itself isn’t to blame if the Stores refuse to card the people buying the games, or the 2/3’s of parents who refuse to read the ESRB ratings in the first place, right? Apparently to this moron, the parents aren’t to blame and somehow the industry made the parents not read the ratings or the stores are being all run by the industry and purposely start selling GTA games to kids…. This whole claim is bunk, and he knows NOTHING about violent games, the industry or the “attempts at industry self-regulation”. He just blindly believes all the nonsense being spread that violent games are marketed to kids because “oh noes, the kids can buy games…” BLAH BLAH BLAH

To make things worse his claim of how their are too many games that “celebrate the mass killing of innocent people” is a bogus claim too. I regularly debunk crap like this. It’s just a blanket statement, used to demean the industry based on shitty games, ones that do allow the “mass killing of innocent people”, which are few and far between. Using a list of all released FPS games on wikipedia, I calculated that the sheer lack of “uber violent games” is astounding, despite what scaremongering is being said by people like Grassley.

This list spans all the way back to the 1970’s with Sega titles such as “Jet Rocket”, long before the dawn of PC gaming, so it does count everything…. No picking and choosing, no editing of the total data to show a point, pure unadulterated Facts…. Something anti-gamers almost never provide, it’s almost always rhetoric, false data, or misinterpretation.

When You look at the spreadsheet, look at the column “gms kill inno”. This is how many games out of 650 allow you to kill “innocent civilians”, where innocent civilians are defined as characters who can’t fight back. I have 2 rows, one with all 650 games in the FPS category, and another with all FPS games + Postal + all GTA games.  That one is the second row, the lower one with 658 total games. The top row with 650 games is just FPS games. “gms rwd inno” is how many games that reward killing of innocent people.  “gms nrwd ino” are games that punish killing innocent civilian characters. Look at the % with and without GTA and Postal applied, tiny %, less than 10 in each case…  There have only been 19 FPS games EVER released that allow the killing of innocent characters. Only 4 of these reward it. Tiny numbers when you factor in the 650 total FPS games ever made. 8 Punish the killing of innocents.  IF you count in GTA  games and Postal 1 you get 27 total games in this list that allow the player to kill innocent characters, and only 8 reward it. 15 Punish the killing of innocents!!! You see a pattern, equal amount of FPS games punish the killing of innocents, and in the case when you add in GTA, more punish than reward. Apparently Grassley can’t stand the fact that there are 8 games since 1970(!) (when the list started) that reward killing innocents. But he mentioned mass slaughter of innocents!!!

Grassley’s complaint about “too many games that celebrate the mass killing of the innocent” is a nonsense claim. Because this suggests that there are games where you are rewarded for mowing down big rooms of innocent civilians in such a game. Here’s the thing. No ESRB Game like this Exists! In any game with civilians, that reward it, it’s never been huge numbers killed at once. People might say “GTA!” but GTA, despite the nonsense claim about it, does NOT reward  the killing of innocent civilians. It punishes it. You get the police after you for doing stuff like this, get arrested, etc… That’s punishment, not rewarding. The last game to reward mass killing of innocents, the only one was before the ESRB, so the esrb has nothing to do with it, that was Carmageddon! In 1997! The only game I know where it :”rewards” the mass killing of innocents….. Under the ESRB, the “voluntary rating system” there have been 0 games that “glorify the mass killing of innocents!!!”. NONE! Zip! Zero!! Zilch!!! Grassley is a liar… Surprise!!

So Grassley is making up crap, just like a lot of morons who attack games do. It’s stupid. It has to stop. He is also hinting at regulation of the industry by the government and using biased claims and utter lies to support it??? I thought this country was beyond it. IF they do decide to regulate the games like this, what’s to stop them from setting up a system where they purposely rate any game that is only slightly violent or above, to their equivalent of Adult Only, so the stores won’t sell them.. Hmmm… Because thats what I think people like this want, just to get rid of all the violent games so no one can buy them, no adults can too, no gaming companies can sell them so the industry just goes out of business. These people shouldn’t be in office if they use nonsense like this to fuel censorship, and make no difference it is. The gaming industry does not need to be regulated!! Just the Congress!!! Seriously…

I know this is old news to many gamers, But when I read this, I immediately laughed but then got angry at how serious nonsense like this is… Behold, Wayne Lapierre and the NRA have got a vendetta against violent games, because in their mind, they have to scapegoat violent entertainment like all these gun nuts do all the time. In a lot of cases, I have seen, Gun Nuts tend to be anti-gamers. Which is worse, violent games or people Selling tools of REAL violence, that only a nutcase like Lanza or Harris would want to use to harm real people in a school shooting… Where are the other Millions of gamers committing school shootings once per week in the country, caused by their constant “exposure to violent games”.  They don’t exist. That’s right, because Gamers for the most part Are not violent… The Few shooters that committed mass school shootings like Harris had Other Issues, like being raped by the police (!!! The real cause for columbine !!! not violent games!!! ), we don’t even know Lanza’s issue yet… Yet the scapegoating from the Nationalist Rhetoric ASSociation continues…   hmm…   So the NRA has to stifle the blame for something they may have caused. If they had nothing to do with this, why all the publicity on attacking a violent flash game that Doesn’t exist anymore (Kindergarten Killers)   ?

 

It’s not the first time some random 10 year old super violent game like Postal 2 has been used as an excuse to attack the gaming industry (in the media after Brown VS EMA dozens of articles kept on spewing nonsense about 99% of violent games having features like “peeing on kids”, that were, Surprise(!) only found in Postal 2, One Damn game!!! )  But in this case the game was a random flash game hosted on a website that deleted it later, newgrounds.com, and the gaming industry, has Nothing to do with it… It’s like Lapoopierre decided to look around for ONE game, flash or not that had murdering little kids part of it. He couldn’t find a single one marketed by  the Industry as a real ESRB rated title (because it doesn’t exist, DUH! – Despite how many idiots after columbine in newspapers tried to call Doom a School Shooting Simulator… More on that later).

 

To make things worse, this game wasn’t even POPULAR on newgrounds.com. It was taken down in 2008! It hardly was a Big Smash hit all the 2 year olds are playing behind their mothers back because the “ESRB rated it teen like they do to all uber violent games because the industry is selling filth to our toddlers!”.  Bullshit. This game wasn’t even a real Boxed game. But you know what? Do the NRA really care? Of course they dont!  Because it’s the scapegoat for the industry they have chosen and it will be used as proof that all violent ESRB rated games are like that in millions of biased, stupid, payed for by the NRA, news articles next. Mark my words. Just like Postal 2, which also wasn’t even remotely popular, and crappy too…

 

The worst thing, is this game is the LAST you want to use as a scapegoat. It is so Amateurly made… It is gory, but it has super hand drawn graphics that make it look so cheap, that trying to call it a “realistic depiction of real school violence” (they will try this…) is utterly stupid. You can’t even move around in the game, it’s all aiming and killing. If you kill the kids in each of the scenes, who all fight back(! – WTF! Yes they are all armed!!! Highly realistic… ) you go to the next scene. If you don’t you die. It’s strictly a flash shooting gallery game, sick, yes, disgusting, yes, but Realistic and bound to make kids shoot up a real school? NO WAY IN Hell. Too cartoony. Even a 10 year old can tell it’s not real life….

 

That’s besides the point here. The point is the NRA scapegoating is using something (on purpose) to demean 99% of the violent games that aren’t even that violent, and don’t have this kind of disgusting purpose (shooting up a school).  A previous article of mine debunked 5 extra violent game myths using a spreadsheet documenting all 605 PC FPS game releases. One was the idea that all violent games are uber violent… I quote:

 

“Ok… This isn’t so much a claim but a pattern among articles “damning”

Violent video games.  These articles use examples from 1 or 2 violent

games that are what I call “Uber Violent” games as proof that

“most games” are like them. Uber violent games are a rare thing.

What’s the definition of “Uber violent games”? Games that are so

violent that most people would find them tastlessly violent.

Out of all 605 FPS games ever made, only 4.46% are “Uber Violent”

like this. Only 14.81% of all 81 Popular FPS games could be

considered Uber Violent. These “Popular Uber Violent” Fps games

only make 1.98% of all FPS games ever released! (605)”

 

That’s right, this 1 Example of a game that isn’t a real Game marketed by the industry is being used

to demean Thousands of games that don’t even come close, simulated combat with aliens/demons/zombies/etc is being scapegoated for causing the shooting,  by using an example from a poorly done FAN MADE CRAPPY ARCADE GAME…. Yeah… NRA is really pushing it…. The nonsense continues.

 

 

 

Back on gamepolitics.com, there was a poll that asked how much gaming legislation impacts voting choices, and many ignorant fools kept saying that it didn’t… But it does…. One of our candidates, wants violent games banned, and he is still in the race, and it’s preposterous to assume that if people vote for him, that the gaming industry will survive, for his comments, in 2008 proved that he wanted “something to be done about retailers who sell violent games”…I am obviously talking about Mitt Romney. According to this site, his words in the 2008 election were quite proving if his motivations. I quote :

“I want to restore values so children are protected from a societal cesspool of filth, pornography, violence, sex, and perversion.”  “I’ve proposed that we enforce our obscenity laws again and that we get serious against those retailers that sell adult video games that are filled with violence and that we go after those retailers.”

Notice not once did he say that he would “go after” retailers who sell them to kids, just sell them, PERIOD…  If you think that the gaming industry would survive after this, you are crazy. He is clearly talking about Shutting down ALL retailers of any game with violence included, 99% of violent games today… It’s obscene to think that in America, that politicians can get away with such freedom tarnishing regulations.  It shouldn’t even be allowed in this country, anything that could allow for an effective ban of violent games to all age groups. It’s what the morons who attack games want. Romney’s speech proves it!.  Nevermind all his BS on the cesspool of filth and how he claimed Harris/Klebold “drank from this cesspool” when in fact it was proven through a freedom of information act request that a police rape incident in Jan 1998 triggered the school shooting as a revenge crime… (Look it up)..

If he is seriously planning on making it illegal to simply sell any game with violent content, how far will he  go is the real question. How would Amazon.com and other places be affected? I know that I plan to get several FPS games this Holiday season and into my birthday, next march. This kind of dark ages, knee jerk, save the children bullshit regulation is uncalled for.  This country should be ABOVE complete bans of violent entertainment, to EVERYONE. Every other country is for this crap. We are supposed to be civilized to know that my  freedom as an adult to buy violent games MATTERS…

That’s why I say, that voting for Romney, is voting for the death of the gaming industry, porn, etc…. He WILL try to legislate morality and there WILL be no gaming industry left when NO stores are legally allowed to carry any game with violent content in them..  Back in Brown VS EMA the Supreme court struck down a law trying to do just this. Don’t be fooled by the claim that the CA law would have fined retailers who sell violent games  to kids. The law used Obscenity clause language to determine how the board of censorship in CA would judge a game. If the game is offensive to  them they would claim that it lacks “scientific, literary, and educational value” and they then would fine any store that carries it. Stores, not knowing just WHAT games would be effected would pull ANY game that COULD be fined, effectively banning violent games without a strict law saying that this should happen… DONT VOTE FOR ROMNEY!

(This is a really old article published here several years ago that got accidentally deleted, but I thought it was important to republish it)

After reading about that article complaining about the ‘game’ (really a Half-life 2 MOD)  school shooter 2012, I began to wonder how the people writing the biased article linked in that debunking got their hands on the mod. It’s not like the mod was popular. It wasn’t even popular in the HL2 Community, so how the hell did the people attacking the game on the article find out about it?

Mod communities are closed communities. Fans of the game the mod is made for, and only those fans, go to the communities looking for mods for it.  So how does a nanny state representitive who wants to find the newest violent game to complain about find out about a mod, to complain about it?  In the case of a real game like GTA, there is countless ads on TV, articles about it coming out, etc. For mods none of this exists.  So for someone to find that mod to attack it on a site, must mean that they are in the Community releasing the mod, at least I think so. Do the anti-gamers go to gaming mod sites, and then write articles complaining about the mod being released by the mainstream video game press… It seems likely this is the case…

Only problem, is this is the only time that I’ve EVER seen a mod for a game, be targetted like it’s a game, by the violent game attackers. The thing is that this is not the first time someone has made some tasteless school shooting level or mod for a game. Go to Doomworld idgames site (where doom levels are hosted) and you will find this lovely gem, from back in 1997. Overlooked by all the anti-gamers. Was really the same thing as school shooter : american tour 2012, minus the kill yourself ending. Not that I like this kind of game, but….. It’s been done before. What caused SSAT 2012 to get so much negative press? It’s content is horrible, making light of the school shooting tragedies, make no mistake, but if this article would never have been written, no one would have commented on it outside the gaming community. There are tasteless mods for many games online… None are complained about in the media.

Who is inside these communities finding this stuff to write about? Is it someone being an idiot and seeing all the bad responses to get something to laugh at, because he has a sick sense of humor? Is he someone doing this on purpose to see how idiotic the comments are about violent games, to see what misconceptions they spread? Was the whole mod made for that purpose? Or is the writer some anti-gamer latching onto a mod that is tasteless to use it as ammo to attack Valve software with. It’s not like Valve hasn’t been hit with lawsuit threats before. Some lawyer threatened to sue valve when ‘he’ (the lawyer – in a news article, no less) named counterstrike as an influence to the V-Tech Killer’s rampage. With no other proof that Cho played counterstrike, presumably to use it as ammo against valve in some big lawsuit, even though valve did not make Counterstrike. The thing is that he said that ‘Cho Played Half-life’.  Currently, the articles slamming the Mod (or “game” as they label it for this purpose) don’t mention Valve. But what if one did? The company who has developed some of the best FPS games ever (half-life, HL2, Portal, Left 4 dead 1/2) would be ruined…. Out of all the gaming companies that DON’T deserve this kind of link to a school shooting, valve is it.  Their games are usually puzzle intensive, where combat is a challenge, and violence is not rewarded like in GTA. They pretty much started the ideas that formed the tactical shooter revolutioin, and lead to Far Cry, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., etc.

Valve would get lawsuit threats, a crapload of media complaints, and maybe even another senate hearing that could lead to stronger restrictions, a govt enforced rating system that I think could be abused to ‘effectively’ ban violent games to all age groups in the US. Is this the purpose of the article……

I don’t know. But I would love to find out

So I was browsing the net looking for a certain candidates views on violent game bans that I was writing about last week, when I  came across this lovely right wing Conservative site that is spreading utter BS about violent games to people, claiming to be a trustworthy source. Now I will add a disclaimer,  the site may not be Intentionally doing this, but many of the PRO side points are quite suspicious at best, and down right fabrications or bad misinterpretations at worst… Anyone looking at this will believe the points debunked below, because most people believe what they hear: Here is the site I am talking about.

http://videogames.procon.org/

Now on  to the debunking, shall we.. After all, this IS what I do here, debunk BS spread about violent games by ANYONE!

“97% of 12-17 year olds in the US played video games in 2008, thus fueling an $11.7 billion domestic video game industry. In 2008, 10 of the top 20 best-selling video games in the US contained violence.”

Really, 97% of 12-17 year olds played video games? Shocker. Notice it said video games, not VIOLENT ones…  It then tries to claim that this is the reason that the gaming industry made so much money. Then it immediately tried to assume this 12-17 year olds must have played  the violent ones!!! So  “10 of the top 20 best-selling video games in the US contained violence” Shocker!!!
Let me tell you one thing. Most violent games aren’t even played by such “young kids”… The target demographic is 18-35, according to the ESA. They also say that the average age of gamers are 30 years old… They even did a study proving this, unlike the article linked above, which tries to imply that 12-17 year olds are playing “violent” games. Now Let me define violent game. A game with Combat in it, and killing. Not neccisarily a Uber Violent one like GTA where you run over old ladies, or games where you decapitate people, BLAH BLAH BLAH. The media for years has been using examples of rare tastelessly violent games as a way to say most games are like this, but it’s more than wrong because, according to a study I did using a wikipedia list of 605 FPS games released since 1986 on my other blog, only 4% or so were what I think most people would  consider “tastelessly” violent. That’s 21 out of 605. Not even 1/10! The real number of tastelessly violent games is actually lower than this because FPS games make up only 1/5 of total violent games and tastlessly violent games, at least to me, seem quite rare… Now on to the more severe lies…

Increasing reports of bullying can be partially attributed to the popularity of violent video games. The 2008 study Grand Theft Childhood reported that 60% of middle school boys who played at least one Mature-rated game hit or beat up someone, compared to 39% of boys that did not play Mature-rated games.”

The sample size is not mentioned here, 60% of anything less than  5000 people means nothing… A lot of studies  that try  to prove this stuff use small sample sizes to make it look like it’s an serious issue, and by possibly manipulating the results to show high percentages of people pre-chosen to show the result they want they can fudge the study. Recently a study was done saying that 1000 people all supported violent game legislation. 1000 people may seem like a lot to the untrained eye, but 1000 is TINY, like in 625 times smaller than the Population of Boston, MA in 2011, 625,000 or so. So finding 1000 people who support legislation ignores the other MILLIONS who do not. It’s statistically insignificant, and the fact that such studies, more than likely pick and chose 1000 people who support it anyway, means that they should not be trusted. Not saying the study above isn’t trust worthy or the one mentioned in the article but you have to learn how to critically examine such studies…




Video games often reward players for simulating violence, and thus enhance the learning of violent behaviors. “

Most violent games don’t even do this at all. Ones that do are things like GTA, Sure, and uber violent games like blood, but many games don’t even make dead enemies drop items at all these days. Very few actually force players  to even kill any enemies, notable exceptions are quake 2, and serious sam type games. So much for rewarding violent behavior. Yes, killing is part of many games, but to kill, in order to survive hostile opponents trying to kill you, isn’t really rewarding anything but survival. Very Few FPS games that I have played (and I have played 100’s), really give you substantial rewards for killing… The whole realism thing in modern shooters (a BIG thing today) prevents significant rewards because realism requires minimal rewards per kill… A lot of these games focus on puzzles and missions to accomplish as well. Killing enemies is secondary. You can beat 90% of shooters without killing enemies. Just because killing is part of these games doesn’t mean they reward “simulating violence”. Also the claim that games that “reward simulation of violence” enhance the learning of violent behaviors is crazy. Most people who play violent games won’t go out and kill people because they have been rewarded in a game to do so in the game, not in real life… These points mentioned completely ignore that real life violence is different than simulated violence in a game, on purpose many times, to make it look like people who play violent games will want to kill for real… 




Violent video games desensitize players to real-life violence. It is common for victims in video games to disappear off screen when they are killed or for players to have multiple lives.”


There is actually no real evidence to support the idea that violent games desensitize people to real life violence. Define Real life violence, then look at what desensization really means. It means that people who consume violent entertainment get more used to the violence in it. Real life violence is Completely separate from  this, Period!  There is evidence to suggest that consuming said violence entertainment, or anything really, will make a person more used to it. That’s all the evidence is really saying. Saying it proves that people get used to a completely separate, different thing (real life violence), is a willful, stupid, and deceitful misinterpretation of studies that prove something different. If there is any study that says violent games desensitize people to real life violence, then I seriously doubt that it isn’t flawed like all the other video game “aggression” studies being linked as proof of violent games causing real life violence by anti-gaming morons everywhere for 10 years. 


Now on to the claims that there are lots of games that have multiple lives, and disappearing characters. Where the hell did they get this from? Only Extremely KIDDIE games like Super Noah’s Ark 3D have Disappearing characters that completely disappear. Only one recent game series features this, that’s serious sam. Most games have corpses that NEVER disappear. Making Dissapearing characters is way to make a game seem LESS violent to kids, and is only done in KID type games to prevent the game from showing off VIOLENT DEATHS… HELLO!  And the idea that people in games have multiple lives. I can name all the popular games in FPS history that conform to this. Wolf3d, Descent Series, and Serious sam. THATS IT. Most FPS games ditched the whole lives thing because it made it too easy. The change was made in 1993 for gods sake, with Doom, which revolutionized  the idea that players who die don’t get to come back without restarting the level or loading a save game. Lives in FPS games are almost non-existent.




2000 FBI report (187 KB)  includes playing violent video games in a list of behaviors associated with school shootings.”


Ok… So there is this study that lists risk factors for school shootings, and it listed being obsessed with violent entertainment. So a bunch of anti-gamer DickNozzles starting purposely interpreting it as proof that playing violent games is the risk factor, not being obsessed with any form of violent entertainment. Since I couldn’t actually quote the study, I screenshotted it below. Lo and Behold, this proves it again. The people who made this site committed this crime.

Nowhere here does it A) Single out violent games B) Make it so simply playing them is a risk factor like the article linking to it says.  The article above is Purposely misinterpreting the facts to create a moral panic. Plain and simple.   The FBI study finds that “themes of hatried, violence, weapons and mass destruction Recur in virtually all his activities, hobbies, and past times”. So simply playing violent games will make this happen? WTF! Sounds like these people who posted the article Don’t know people who play violent games mostly Do NOT obsess over real life violence. The study also says “The student spends inordinate amounts of time playing games with violent themes and seems to be more interested in violent images than the game itself”. Where does this equate simply playing violent games with school shootings. NOWHERE.   Then it says “On the internet the student regularly searches for web sites involving violence, weapons, and other disturbing subjects. There is evidence the student downloaded and kept material from these sites”. Where does this equate playing Violent games, with school shootings? NOWHERE. It equates being Obsessed with Real violence, Hatred, And wanting to commit real violence, as a risk factor. This whole paragraph DOES NOT simply link playing violent games with school shootings. It links OBSESSION WITH VIOLENCE IN GENERAL. These people are making up BS about this…. The FBI wouldn’t actually link simply playing violent games at all. They aren’t pro family enough to do  that… Only right wing nutjobs who want violent games banned do that..





Violent video games cause players to associate pleasure and happiness with the ability to cause pain in others.”


Looking at  the source of this proved that it came from one of the “hack psychologists” going around on talk shows in April 1999 claiming the military uses violent games to break down the inhibition to kill, all while selling his book, a big batch of lies… If a blog run by an actual person who was in the armed forces debunks the claim, then this claim sounds suspicious as well.. I know for a fact that even though I played wolf3d for the first time at age 13, duke3d at age 16, etc, I did not “associate pleasure and happiness with the ability to cause pain in others”. The whole idea that this happens, is using the same analogy as people misinterpreting desensitizing studies to prove that violent games desensitize people to real life violence, not the fake video game violence. This makes it look like games that make people want to cause pain in a virtual environment make people want to do it in real life. It’s BS… Just trust me on that… If it were true, you would have a LOT more cases of gamers hurting real people. I don’t see that, or any evidence that that is actually happening… So this is more than likely bunk too, IMHO.


A 1998 study found that 21% of games sampled involved violence against women (165 KB) . Exposure to sexual violence in video games is linked to increases in violence towards women and false attitudes about rape (47 KB)  such as that women incite men to rape or that women secretly desire rape.”


Number 1, the (probably) flawed study was done in 1998! More than 10 years ago! Number 2, since then most FPS or violent games, don’t even have women to kill in them. And if they do, that’s not saying they do this on purpose to single violence against women on purpose. Then the thing makes up the claim about sexual violence. Like all the other claims of “rape simulators” in violent games, this is also BS, because the last time a game actually had a scene where there was a controllable rape scene where a woman was a victim and the player was a perpetrator was, Custer’s Revenge, in 1989, an ADULT only game not sold in normal stores!!!! Since then only 3 games have even had rape in them, Phantasmogoria, which features the player being raped in a cutscene, and Fear 2, which ends with the evil chick villian Alma, Raping you in arguably  the most fucked up ending any game has ever had, but get this, it is most likely a dream sequence….  Not once has there been a game that had virtual rape in it where a women was a victim, and if a guy was a victim, well, I have never heard of it. And the claim  that violent games lead to “increases in rape” came straight out of a moron Fox news put on their “bullshitting” on Bulletstorm 3 years ago, which they tried to say bulletstorm causes real life rape, with this analogy “Since Rape is a violent crime and violent games cause violence, then violent games have caused rape”… It’s Fucking bullshit. The person saying this had NO proof that violent games caused real life rape, just said they did without actual evidence.




Violent video games can train youth to be killers. The US Marine Corps licensed Doom II in 1996 to createMarine Doom in order to train soldiers. In 2002, the US Army released first-person shooter America’s Army to recruit soldiers and prepare recruits for the battlefield. “


Nowhere here, did they mention that the first was a training for group tactics, and was a Modification of the game not the game itself, with HEAVY REALISTIC changes to gameplay, and graphics, almost nothing from Doom in it at all. They want to make it look like the military uses real games like Doom 2 to train soldiers to kill on, but the blog ran by the military dude linked above “design synthesis” disproved that, didn’t it?  Now the thing about americas army is true, it WAS a recruitment tool. But it’s the only game that ever was a recruitment tool, period. That’s out of THOUSANDS of violent games, most of which aren’t tastelessly violent..




California passed a law in 2005 that would have required violent video games to include an “18” label and criminalized the sale of these games to minors. On June 27, 2011, the US Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Association (485 KB) that the law violated free speech rights.”


What they don’t say is that this law would have used a really subjective Obscenity clause like language to determine what games would be fined, by saying that games that are morbidly violent and “lack literary, scientific and educational value” are targeted for fines. This would allow them to fine any game they got offended by, period, causing many tame games to be fined, causing stores to pull any game that could be fined under the law off  the shelves, causing most violent games not to be sold in stores, causing the companies that make lesser known games go out of business at the least. That’s what the BS article REFUSES to tell people…  It claims to be a trusted source on the points made by the experts…  All it is is spreading plainly debunkable lies to fuel censorship… It’s stinks, like most of the polished turds that get released by the anti-gamers…

While looking at how many of the candidates are for video game legislation of any kind, I came across a shocker, according to this site, which posted US presidential election candidates opinions on violent game legislation  A certain Presidential candidate  apparently  supports a complete ban on all violent games, yes that’s right, a full ban to everyone, adults included, not just kids. (I’m not naming this candidate by name to protect my from possible fraudulent libel lawsuits from any candidate. I have no choice, the US Gov’t won’t make it so bloggers are immune to Libel, and don’t make it so false claims of libel get thrown out before the lawsuit has been decided to go to trial.)


So He is quite possibly saying that he  wants to go every retailer that even dares to sell violent games, PERIOD. Apparently to “shield kids from the violence in society”, we need to makes sure even ADULTS can’t get “video games that are uber violent BLAH BLAH BLAH!”.  And I assume he has lumped online retailers like amazon.com into his description, because they have no way to filter out kids because there is no way to tell age at all through amazon, so under his plan he would be taking down any possible retailer that could accidentally sell “uber” (as in any kind of violence in them) violent games to kids, even ones online that have no way of knowing what age their buyers are.. BAH!  Well under his description of what all of these games are like we would end up banning 99% of all the games ever made because 99% of video games have violent content, from sidescrollers, to FPS, to Third Person Shooters, To RPG’s, to fighting games, to you-name-it. But apparently someone hasn’t actually researched how many violent games are not Uber violent. Shocker!


Using an article from this blog, I will show right here, that unlike what certain people think, 99% of violent games are not uber violent…
Here is a quote from that article in question which was written to debunk the most common violent game myths using a wikipedia list of all the FPS games made since 1986, to calculate how many fit the claim of the myth based on ones I have played or heard about:



“Claim  : Most FPS games are Ultra-Violent


Source : MANY, Many articles saying this in many ways, basically all saying most FPS games are uber violentbased on descriptions of one game (good example is all the articles describing games like Postal 2 to attack the Justices who voted against CA in EMA vs Brown)


Ok… This isn’t so much a claim but a pattern among articles “damning” Violent video games.  These articles use examples from 1 or 2 violent games that are what I call “Uber Violent” games as proof that “most games” are like them. Uber violent games are a rare thing. What’s the definition of “Uber violent games”? Games that are so violent that most people would find them tastlessly violent.  Out of all 605 FPS games ever made, only 4.46% are “Uber Violent” like this. Only 14.81% of all 81 Popular FPS games could be considered Uber Violent. These “Popular Uber Violent” Fps games only make 1.98% of all FPS games ever released! (605)”


So according to this data, which I measured myself, only 4.46% of all FPS games are “uber violent”, not counting all the Third Person Shooters, RPG’s, Fighting games, and Sidescrollers that I didn’t count, so the actual % of violent games that are uber violent is actually much smaller than  that 4.46% figure.

 

First the GOP wages war on porn, and now thiis candidate’s comments suggest he is willing to wage an unconstitutional war on all games with even a hint of violence. Under no circumstances should the US government even think of an outright ban on violent games to all age groups. The very thought of US even attempting to this is Obscene in itself. The scary thing is that, it’s happened before in 2 states, right after columbine. Both states drafted bills that would have banned violent games to everyone but both failed thanks to the supreme courts. The government was so brainwashed by the newspapers all making up fake crap about doom (doom has pipebombs, allows you to kill kids, is a school shooting simulator, remember these?) to make it look like Harris/Klebold were solely influenced by it, that they had to attempt full bans. There is no excuse for this BS. Restrict all the games to adults all you want, but once the government even attempts to legislate morality in such a way so that any kind of ban, intended or not, happens, in such a way so adults cannot get violent games at all, or companies can’t sell them to adults in stores, or the internet,  this country becomes a fascist state.  I have played over 100 FPS games since I was 13, and there was not a single time I felt like I was gonna get violent or aggressive due to them, ever. And there are millions like me, and only a few anomalies, and people the media labeled as “game obsessed”, people who the media claim become violent due to violent games and only that, but in reality those people (School Shooters) most likely had other problems, like an obsession with violence in general, and terrorism, racism/white supremacy crap, mental illness, and other issues that would more likely cause real life violence than playing Doom, a game that came out in 1993! A game scapegoated by the media with questionable or possibly even hoaxed evidence,  like no other for crimes it did not commit, under the false tense of “saving the children” from violence caused by other issues! Go figure…. BLAH BLAH BLAH!