Post by Segaman on Jul 6, 2004 16:53:24 GMT -5
Video games under the gun
Violent images, gameplay spur lawmakers into action
In video games these days, you can strangle someone with a garrote (“Manhunt”), pop off an enemy’s head in a shower of gore with a sniper shot (“Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy”), and direct a teenage girl to shotgun a demon dog (“Silent Hill 3”).
Not to mention beat up prostitutes, run down pedestrians, bathe in the blood of your enemies and curse like a lobster boat captain who’s stubbed his toe.
The video game industry seems to delight in pushing the envelope — and the bounds of good taste — with ever-gorier content. That has put it under renewed attack from legislators and activists who claim some titles must be kept out of kids’ hands, though courts have repeatedly granted games First Amendment protections.
The opponents cite new research that they say suggests strong links between violent games and aggressive behavior. They are disturbed by games’ cultural ubiquity and the always-improving technology that makes virtual gore more realistic than ever.
“Pediatricians and psychologists have been warning us that violent video games are harmful to children,” said Mary Lou Dickerson, a Democratic legislator in Washington state who wrote a law now being challenged in federal court — banning the sale of some violent games to kids. “I’m optimistic that the courts will heed their warnings.”<br>
Lawmakers in at least seven states proposed bills during the most recent legislative session that would restrict the sale of games, part of a wave that began when the 1999 Columbine High School shootings sparked an outcry over games and violence. None of the measures that passed have survived legal challenge.
Catharsis or caustic?
The game industry says legislating ultra-violent games out of the hands of children would deal a severe blow to free speech. Game companies point to the industry-imposed ratings system that gives detailed descriptions of violence in a game and labels some titles as “mature” or “adults only.”<br>
“Does it make any rational sense to you that we’re going to pass a law someplace that says we’re not going to prevent minors from buying ‘Passion of the Christ’ or ‘Kill Bill’ or ‘Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ in a local store but you can’t buy ‘Resident Evil?”’ said Douglas Lowenstein, president of the Entertainment Software Association, referring to three violent movies and a popular horror-action game.
The debate reflects a divide in the way people perceive games. Are games harmless, perhaps even cathartic, as many people who grew up playing them believe? Or are they teaching kids to be more aggressive, and in extreme cases, to kill?
To game opponents — many of whom admit they don’t play video games — it’s the latter. They point to new studies that purport to show a stronger link between violent games and aggressive behavior than ever.
“On average, there is a significant tendency for the studies to yield an increase in aggression by those who have played the violent games,” said Craig Anderson, an Iowa State University professor and leading researcher on the effects of media violence.
There is also the inescapable fact that the military uses video games to train its soldiers. A 2003 University of Rochester study found that young adults who played a lot of fast-paced video games showed better visual skills than those who did not.
Author Evan Wright ponders the effects of video games on U.S. soldiers in the current Iraq war in his new book “Generation Kill.” In an endorsement that “Grand Theft Auto” creator Rockstar Games would probably rather not get, he quotes one U.S. soldier as saying an ambush felt just like playing the game.
“It felt like I was living it when I seen the flames coming out of windows, the blown-up car in the street, guys crawling around shooting at us,” the soldier says.
Violent images, gameplay spur lawmakers into action
In video games these days, you can strangle someone with a garrote (“Manhunt”), pop off an enemy’s head in a shower of gore with a sniper shot (“Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy”), and direct a teenage girl to shotgun a demon dog (“Silent Hill 3”).
Not to mention beat up prostitutes, run down pedestrians, bathe in the blood of your enemies and curse like a lobster boat captain who’s stubbed his toe.
The video game industry seems to delight in pushing the envelope — and the bounds of good taste — with ever-gorier content. That has put it under renewed attack from legislators and activists who claim some titles must be kept out of kids’ hands, though courts have repeatedly granted games First Amendment protections.
The opponents cite new research that they say suggests strong links between violent games and aggressive behavior. They are disturbed by games’ cultural ubiquity and the always-improving technology that makes virtual gore more realistic than ever.
“Pediatricians and psychologists have been warning us that violent video games are harmful to children,” said Mary Lou Dickerson, a Democratic legislator in Washington state who wrote a law now being challenged in federal court — banning the sale of some violent games to kids. “I’m optimistic that the courts will heed their warnings.”<br>
Lawmakers in at least seven states proposed bills during the most recent legislative session that would restrict the sale of games, part of a wave that began when the 1999 Columbine High School shootings sparked an outcry over games and violence. None of the measures that passed have survived legal challenge.
Catharsis or caustic?
The game industry says legislating ultra-violent games out of the hands of children would deal a severe blow to free speech. Game companies point to the industry-imposed ratings system that gives detailed descriptions of violence in a game and labels some titles as “mature” or “adults only.”<br>
“Does it make any rational sense to you that we’re going to pass a law someplace that says we’re not going to prevent minors from buying ‘Passion of the Christ’ or ‘Kill Bill’ or ‘Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ in a local store but you can’t buy ‘Resident Evil?”’ said Douglas Lowenstein, president of the Entertainment Software Association, referring to three violent movies and a popular horror-action game.
The debate reflects a divide in the way people perceive games. Are games harmless, perhaps even cathartic, as many people who grew up playing them believe? Or are they teaching kids to be more aggressive, and in extreme cases, to kill?
To game opponents — many of whom admit they don’t play video games — it’s the latter. They point to new studies that purport to show a stronger link between violent games and aggressive behavior than ever.
“On average, there is a significant tendency for the studies to yield an increase in aggression by those who have played the violent games,” said Craig Anderson, an Iowa State University professor and leading researcher on the effects of media violence.
There is also the inescapable fact that the military uses video games to train its soldiers. A 2003 University of Rochester study found that young adults who played a lot of fast-paced video games showed better visual skills than those who did not.
Author Evan Wright ponders the effects of video games on U.S. soldiers in the current Iraq war in his new book “Generation Kill.” In an endorsement that “Grand Theft Auto” creator Rockstar Games would probably rather not get, he quotes one U.S. soldier as saying an ambush felt just like playing the game.
“It felt like I was living it when I seen the flames coming out of windows, the blown-up car in the street, guys crawling around shooting at us,” the soldier says.
