Video Game Rape Fest

[Almo]

Here's video of the FPS I have played for an hour almost every weekday since late 2001:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dQNwQeum38

I do not find myself desensitized to real viloence. This game is fast, reflexive, and requires instantaneous shooting of human-shaped figures. Some are more or less human, but they are all bipedal.

This is obviously anecdotal. But an interesting thing is that I've found that recently the sounds of my enemies dying bothers me a little in some cases. My empathy circuit for fellow beings in pain triggers. I really don't find myself getting less sensitive to violence. If anything, I've grown more sensitive over time.

I should note this is not the only violent game I play. Two more examples:

Dead Nation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3N9W0ADaYk
Warhawk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8NR7Da0L-A (though the sound on this recording is bad, it's very atmospheric when heard properly)

 

[Arthur Denton]

I wonder, if playing violent video games is so poorly seen by those who don't play, why is it so incredibly cool?

 

[Rogue1stclass]

1) Violent media, including video games, and violent actions are different experiences. Media is a depersonalized, largely passive, usually socially accepted experience while actual violence usually isn't any of those things. There just isn't any good evidence that one effects the other. There is evidence that people who perform violent acts are more likely to partake in violent media, but there are other, better explanations for that correlation than "the media done it". For example, people more likely to commit violent crimes are probably not going to list Bridget Jones' Diary amongst their favorite movies.

2) Violent entertainment is nothing new. Before movies, there were plays. Before video games, there were Cops and Robbers. Before TV, there were the Brothers Grimm. The only difference in modern media is that it has the ability to be more visually graphic. But that doesn't really matter because...

3) Before the advent of modern media, people were already less sensitive to violence, death, and gore than they are today. Between public executions, various bloodsports, racial and ethnic violence, warfare, industrial accidents, disease, and even just having to slaughter livestock for food, most people had more real life exposure to the horrors of human misery than many of us will ever see. Modern life comes pre-sanitized for your convenience.

4) In fact, there is some evidence that violent media has actually aided in this sanitation. Public executions and dog fights were still acceptable forms of entertainment into the early 20th Century. However, as visual mass media became cheaper and more easily available, they started to meet with social disapproval. It turns out, people enjoy violence and death, but they'd rather it not be real. And no matter how realistic or over-the-top games and movies get, it isn't going to change that. Without some major changes to the social norms and/or psychology of people as a whole, the "fake" part is just as important as the "violent" part, probably more so.

As an aside, there was some mention of Roman soldiers being taught to stab with their swords as a measure of conditioning them to kill. That's just not true. They were taught to stab because the natural "attack" instinct of a human is to swing, because our natural weapons are fists. In times of stress, such as combat, this is the motion our bodies want to make unless we are well-trained to do otherwise. You don't want to do this in a tight formation with a sword, for reasons that should be obvious.

In fact, the whole reason the Romans used this sword at all wasn't because it was more deadly than the longer Celtic or Germanic or even Greek swords, but because it allowed the Legions to get inside the range of those weapons while still in formation and be effective. Remember, the Auxiliaries, who were primarily equipped with spears, would do the actual fighting, shoring up the flanks, holding the line, that kind of thing, while the Legion itself was pretty much a blunt instrument. It's whole purpose was to get in as close as possible and physically push the enemy lines back, knocking the enemy soldiers into each other and spreading panic through the ranks as those soldiers found themselves pushed in too tight to actually fight back. The Legion, however, with their short swords, gigantic shields, and (for the time) heavy armor had no trouble at all butchering anyone in front of them. The relative deadliness of stab verses swing didn't really matter in this situation. What mattered is that you could stab, while he couldn't swing.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Let us test the veracity of those who abide by the claim that violent video games make violent people. Could we have a Cockroach and Rats killing game for mothers and housekeepers and see if after enough exposure they loose their fear of killing such critters?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Bulletstorm is now available for pre-purchase for those of you who have Steam accounts.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I really don't know why you do. After all, you've already admitted you're promoting a completely non-skeptical claim:




Since you've explicitly admitted you're promoting woo that has no support and that you don't think is even possible to ever get support for, why bother arguing any further? It's not like you're going to convince anyone with that level of argument.

What a utter waste of a statement. Gumboot didn't write the book. What he has done is convinced me to check it out, as it sounds like an intriguing and in depth look that was actually undertaken at considerably greater depth than the conversation here.

You can't "prove" anything on the internet.

Gumboot has tried to point out how the meme being tossed about so casually and so commonly in defense of video games -- full disclosure, I think Jack Thompson is a cretin -- that there isn't a linkage, isn't a good enough of an answer. There is a parallel linkage in human behavior and attitudes to killing, which in fact was investigated. The outcome of a serious investigation shows that things aren't that simple.

I like video games of some sorts, but never personally liked FPS. They tend to give me headaches. Third person perspective games don't tend to.

I know loads of teenagers (from the Bible study group that I taught) who play FPS (Halo for example) and are not mentally unhinged, nor particularly violently inclined.

Which brings up a further point, the absurdity of the school of thought that attempts to render video games as a single source cause, in a cause and effect relationship, linked to certain strains of violent behavior.

As Grossman seems to be pointing out (I really will take a peak at that book) it ain't that simple.

@ Gumboot: Marshall's "findings" were not derived with much rigor. We did a module on his "study" at Staff College. (I had to read a badly reproduced copy of his writings. Man, that hurt my eyes).

A few of the more pedantic, and academically rigorous, of my colleagues -- infantry, FA, AD, armor officers -- each had less than pleasant things to say about Marshall's attempt to use the scientific method.

That said, the fact that he raised the issue at all was a good thing. The resultant improvements in training have had numerous salutary effects. The Army had to confront the fact that the probability that soldiers would not fire during real fighting needed to be addressed, not assumed away.

 

[sadhatter]

I just want to say, to all the people who were attempting to screw with this game:

I had no intent on buying it, only heard it in passing from a friend. But now that you have brought it to my attention, and caused my curiosity to be peaked, i am going to take my Tax cheque and purchase this game early on tuesday ( when comes out here, if the local futureshop does a midnight release, it will be then. ). I seldom buy games, especially at full price, but due to your panties being in a bunch, you have made this one of the , maybe , 3 games i will buy this year.

And not because of thumb in the eye to you, simply because you brought it to my attention.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I just want to say, to all the people who were attempting to screw with this game:

I had no intent on buying it, only heard it in passing from a friend. But now that you have brought it to my attention, and caused my curiosity to be peaked, i am going to take my Tax cheque and purchase this game early on tuesday ( when comes out here, if the local futureshop does a midnight release, it will be then. ). I seldom buy games, especially at full price, but due to your panties being in a bunch, you have made this one of the , maybe , 3 games i will buy this year.

And not because of thumb in the eye to you, simply because you brought it to my attention.

I've already bought my copy. As I said earlier in the thread, I wasn't terribly excited about Left for Dead 2, however I became determined to buy it after learning it was banned in Australia for promoting violence and prejudice against zombies.

What we really need now is a sequel/remake of "Carmageddon".

 

[fuelair]

Well, to be fair, the Japanese aren't far behind with stupid censorship rules. They have porn that ranges from the most softcore to the raunchiest, dirtiest, most explicit.. but they still can't get over having to censor the girl's vagina.

It's the last vestige of MacArthur - and even the degree legal now only changed in '95. If you want more detail ask. I am not making that up.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I got this game when it came out. I'm afraid it didn't quite live up to the hype. The graphics were gorgeous. The height of the gameplay was the inventive scoring system. Other than that, it was a lackluster console port (I got the PC version).

The one thing I found in it that relates to the idea of whether games like this promote rape and other violent crimes had to do with one of the weapons and its specific kill bonus.

The weapon is a rocket launcher that fires rockets tipped with whirling drill bits. Shooting an enemy in the head earns the player 100 extra points and the "Root Canal" bonus.

Doing this several times in-game did not make me feel compelled to attend dental school.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

I really have to wonder about the moral development of people who believe any given input can cause people to act immorally. Does that mean people who believe video games can cause people to commit crimes are themselves admitting that with the proper stimulus they themselves would launch into crime? Are they robots? Input a Bible, they behave good, but input Magical Hentai Sailor Girls IV and they launch into a frenzy of rape?

Well it's no different to the staggering amount of Christians that honestly believe that atheists must be immoral because they don't have the bible to give them a moral foundation.

 

[manofthesea]

I think that it is just game developers catering to their customer base.
I'm big into Gran Turismo, but when I play online the 'rooms' are full of degenerates. Mostly talking about male-male sex.
It's f'n sad.

 

[Comrade Raptor]

I have committed genocide numerous times in Master of Orion 2 and Civilization.

I've had a standing policy since the first CIV that any of my cities that gets disgruntled enough to revolt against my tyranny gets an immediate mushroom cloud.

Should said technology not yet exist, siege and starvation will do in a pinch.



To the topic at hand more directly, the game has a rating. People just don't use it. My sister asked me to give my nephew (8 years old) Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 for Christmas. I refused. When she asked why, I asked if she'd like me to give him a Freddy Kruegar or XXX video.

She was appalled at the suggestion of that, but didn't blink twice about a game that carries the same age rating (more or less, depending on country).

That's just stupid, and stupid isn't the game's fault. It wears the facts on itself.

 

[Halfcentaur]

Game developers are their customer base. Outside executives in the publishing and financial department, games are made by people who love games and want to make what they want to play. As much as people want to paint someone like Bobby Kotick as some soulless Hollywood executive, most of the design decisions in games are still in the hands of people who love them. The talent still for the most part is free to dictate their own terms, especially if they demonstrate their talent is in demand.

 

[sadhatter]

I've already bought my copy. As I said earlier in the thread, I wasn't terribly excited about Left for Dead 2, however I became determined to buy it after learning it was banned in Australia for promoting violence and prejudice against zombies.

What we really need now is a sequel/remake of "Carmageddon".

Bought it day one, and am digging it, it is a 3d wild 9 ( which takes away most of the problems with wild 9) and is still entertaining.

And there is blood drive, it is an okay substitute for the 20 bucks you will pay. The only bummer is no money system, and the physics are a bit wonky.

 

[sadhatter]

I got this game when it came out. I'm afraid it didn't quite live up to the hype. The graphics were gorgeous. The height of the gameplay was the inventive scoring system. Other than that, it was a lackluster console port (I got the PC version).

The one thing I found in it that relates to the idea of whether games like this promote rape and other violent crimes had to do with one of the weapons and its specific kill bonus.

The weapon is a rocket launcher that fires rockets tipped with whirling drill bits. Shooting an enemy in the head earns the player 100 extra points and the "Root Canal" bonus.

Doing this several times in-game did not make me feel compelled to attend dental school.

I think the game promotes great morality. 90 per cent of the skill kills are fairly easy to get, but the ones for shooting someone in the stones take way too much effort and usually get you shot quite a few extra times.

Any game that promotes not hitting someone in the stones is ok with me.

 

[Corsair 115]

From my reading of the Epic forum for the game, it seems to possess a certain number of bugs and issues. More importantly perhaps is that the leaderboards for Echoes mode (the way players compete with each is by trying to top each other's score) already have glitched/hacked scores on them. Which immediately renders that competition pointless.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

It's the last vestige of MacArthur - and even the degree legal now only changed in '95. If you want more detail ask. I am not making that up.

What???? Sorry, dude I couldn't make sense of that. I'm guessing the reason was that you didn't want to phrase it in a way that would violate any forum rules. If so, you can just PM me