Violence in video games

The topic of violence in video games has been brought up many times, and was always swiftly ignored and pushed away by many due to the studies made showing little correlation between violent video games and violence in normal people.

However, with the upcoming generation of new graphics and game play methods (VR, and much more realistic scenery and models in games), should this not in theory eventually begin to feel very much like the real deal in real life, unlike in the past?

I don't think that the argument of violent video games making normal people violent should be the one discussed anymore. Instead, it would be better to discuss the growing realism of violent video games, and their potential effects on not just normal young people (who are easily influenced), and instead focus on young people who are at a predisposition to having potential violent tendencies, due to mental health problems sourced from other issues, and or abuse mentally/physically.

Maybe violent video games and media in the future might act as a major catalyst for potentially violent kids to commit atrocities, due to the high realism of modern and future video games, and due to negligent parents who allow their children to play video games unrestricted. It'd basically have to be a big mix of fuckups creating one big one.

What do you guys think should be done? Should there be absolutely no research or discussion about this? Is it a valid view point?
Potential solutions imo would just probably better methods of enforcing age restrictions on video games.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=gXBDkevx5lM
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unironic
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

No game in history has driven someone to kill like the character of a game they've played.

No one is arguing that user, the argmuent I'm trying to make is that video games might potentially worsen the state of a young person with mental disorders/abuse, and who have a predisposition to violence. It wouldn't be the direct cause of violence, but it can influence it into becoming an issue early on. What could be other potential sources of this sort of behavior?

Much evil and murder!
Take the games away from mutts.

>What do you guys think should be done?
I think there should be a higher investment in social programs at public schools. There is no strong connection between entertainment and mental illness and implying that entertainment has any real impact on real life violence is absurd. When literally tens of millions of people play video games and the number of people who end up with murders on their hands is in the double digits at most, then you know the connection is entirely superficial.

lots of things could potentially worsen the state of a young person with mental disorders/abuse. what are you going to do? restrict or tone down everything and penalise the majority for the potential acts of the minority? why should they be treat as potential murderers when 99.9% of kids that play video games will not go on to kill people. I played violent games with I was a kid, I didn't grow up to murder prostitutes with a baseball bat though.

Video games are the modern day equivalent of boys playing soldier or knight.

Before video games children used to have makeshift swords or guns made from sticks or whatever has the shape required to simulate such weapons.

There's also the phenomenon of play-fighting. It's the same thing. Simulating violence for the "rush."

Sure, video-games a bit more graphic, but the root concept is the same.

I would argue that for boys to respect violence. They have to play-act it out in order to understand it.

E.g. I play fight because it does no harm to anyone else and I shouldn't do any harm to anyone else unless they do it to me first.

That's the understanding that comes from indulging in play-fighting and other forms of simulated violence.

The issue isn't the simulation itself, it's deeper than that. It's the society we live in and the values it has, or lacks. If boys raised by parents with values and principles were taught those same values and principles, and were generally raised in a healthy, loving environment. They wouldn't even consider using simulated violence as a gateway to real violence.

^ /thread

And also. There is an inherent, instinctual part of the male psyche that has a natural affinity for violence / the use of force and is compelled to indulge in it in some fashion. This is likely as a result of how we've developed as males, we have predominantly been the protectors of our kin, the ones who fight off external threats.

So I would also argue that boys need an outlet for that. And video games are a perfect outlet because nobody is at any risk whatsoever of being hurt. The inherent predisposition for the use of force is channeled into such things in a healthy manner. It's essentially a cathartic process.

If we restrict boys from playing violent video games we risk repressing that part of their psyche that has an affinity for violence. Resulting in an even bigger problem in the long term. Boys growing up into grown men who for their entire childhood have had almost no healthy outlets for their male penchant for the use of force.

Good bong. If anything, the problem is the lack of actual physical play-fighting. This is just another example of invalidating any expression masculinity from boys.

>I would argue that for boys to respect violence. They have to play-act it out in order to understand it.

astute observation.

poor kitty cat that looks like a real bad burn :(

Video games are degenerate. The people should be encourage to participate in real world activities as a superior substitution to simulated activities.

& by the same logic used to say video games cause excess aggression in males, you could argue that anything and everything competitive that includes any form of simulated violence or the actual use of physical force also does the same.

Sports require physical contact. Things get extremely heated.

So by this logic, kids should also be disallowed from playing football / soccer, american football / rugby. Wresting. Martial arts. Boxing. Or even generally working out or racing with one anotherin track and field sports or whtaver. Because all of these things encourage competition and the use of physical force, simulated or actual violence.

>Maybe violent video games and media in the future might act as a major catalyst for potentially violent kids to commit atrocities

I find it hard to believe. Japan for has for a long time had very gaphical violence in their popular culture and even children's media when compared to western counterparts. This has not made their youth more aggressive and violent, it's been other way around if something.

This. I see this as a potential attempt at further neutering the masculine in society. Which it may do to a certain extent but it will also do the exact opposite and cause repression which will ultimately manifest in many undesirable ways.

I myself am an avid gamer. I love it. And I've learned a lot from it. I play a game called Warframe mainly and honestly, it's taught me a lot of things about masculinity that I never had any male peers in my early life teach me. It's taught me about competition, both healthy and unhealthy, it's taught me about the hierarchy between males, it's taught me why strength and skill are to be respected. And not once despite actually having many extreme emotional issues due to my early life have I sought to act out anything in any game or movie I've indulged in. Quite the opposite. I seek brotherhood instead. Healthy competition with the purpose of teaching other men how to better themselves.

And that last point supports my other points about it being deeper than simply an issue with gaming. If the majority of boys / men were gaming with an emphasis on co-operation and healthy competition based on principles and values, with the intention of helping others to surpass their limits while you do the same, as opposed to simply trampling on others for a quick rush. Then gaming would not be an issue at all no matter how violent it may get.

I think someone threw a slice of ham on it and took a picture. It's not a burn.

Video games are a real world activity.
There is no such thing as a non-real world activity. Because you can't just leave the real world, every interaction you have is in the real world.
However I see what you mean as poorly worded as it may have been.
But you're wrong. The fact that video-games are simulations doesn't change a thing.
Also it could be argued that all forms of competitive interaction involving the use of force are simulations because they're under controlled social circumstances and environments, have certain rules and are most certainly not even close to the real thing.
The real thing being real-world, law of the jungle, survival of the fittest competitiveness which = strive or die.

>have 12 year old retard
>buy 18+ game for him
>"ABLOOBLOO SOMEONE STOP VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES"

You're a faggot, harry

Age restrictions and better parenting, children must compleatly understand that violence in movies,video games and irl is not the way to go.Thats mental part of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Children NEED to get enlisted in mandatory army or boot camp service to feel connected with others.
They need to pick a sport to take part in,contact sports should be mandatory.If they use most of their energy in healthy competition and violence they wont be left with much to use outside of it. Also its easier to spot rogue ones with sociopathic behavior in such institutions, if they dont play along,work with others,want to be alone etc.
Then they can be helped.
Also bring back real PE classes in schools with more hours of it.

Also i might add that even if 99% of kids turn up right in head (whatever that may be) that 1% has access to guns to kill previous 99%.
Burgers should seriosly adress who can and cant have guns in their country.
Owning a gun should be privelage,like medal for outstanding citizenship, not by any retard with 200$ to spare.

Isn't the murrican culture silly about that, in the way that if game is adults only it's not sold fucking anywhere which means that 17+ recommendation is pretty much the max? Here it's against the law to give pegi 18 videogames to underage players and they're still sold normally in games sections of regular stores, you just might have to proof your age when buying it.

While it's illegal, it's not enforced though, once parent buys the new GTA they can just give it to the kid without fear of consenquences.

I'm pretty the free access to internet porn harms the mental health of children much more than video games

bottling it up wont solve anything. just like drugs and alcohol, abortions or guns ... if you tell people they cant do something, people will have more of an interest in doing it, but it wont be regulated so you have to deal with more problems because of that. You'll have people killing each other probably just as long as there are people just because of people being fucked up to each other, there's gonna be people who don't like being emasculated and retaliate, pretty cowardly but if they had an outlet rather than no outlet i think thats the best option

It harms the mental health of everyone mate.

By your logic if violent video games do not impact children, then children should also be able to watch pornography

I support age restriction recommendations by video game publishers, but ultimately this is something for the parents to decide. We don't need government interfering with things.

>fighting in some virtual world
compared to
>instant gratification of sexual desires and watching someone else fuck your object desire
I think the former hurts less.

object of desire

children watch pornography all the time , when someone is curious enough, even a kid, theyll find what they were looking for no matter what it is, and if we got videos and video games to substitute that for real life i think that's better than kids shooting each other

Holy shit not at all. If you understand anything about biology and psychology you understand that these are two completely different things handled by two distinctively different parts of the brain and psyche and have different purposes, dynamics and are just generally worlds apart.

Pornography has absolutely no positive benefits to anyone, not even adults. It damages the brain because of how sex and psychology interrelate with each other, and how it warps the perceptions of sex and its purpose. Not to mention how it actually causes chemical imbalances if you indulge in it often enough. It literally ruins your biological and psychological reward system causing massive chemical imbalance, addiction and opens you up to a ton of mental illnesses in the long-term, and other self-destructive habits.

But simulatory violence has always and will always have positive benefits because of the lessons it teaches those who carry it out, under the right pretences of course.

i agree

Nearly every single male born in the last twenty five years has been constantly exposed to increasingly realistic levels of videogame violence. Only an extremely small percentage of them have actually gone on a shooting spree. Even if the videogames had somehow "caused" the shootings, so few people die in shootings that its not a serious concern.

If you actually want to reduce shootings the only thing you can do is stop talking about them and stop watching the news when they're shilling them for weeks on end.

You make a good point with the VR. I have a VR setup for playing racing games and the level of immersion even with the low quality of the current gen VR goggles is transformative.

Just as I wrote this and thought about it, I remember it much more like I was actually there vs staring at it on a monitor.

>m*tt arguing against banning of certain things and doesn't mind children watching porn
Typical.

when parents drop the ball it is up to government(society) to step up to the plate.

Uh, except in play fighting, if you hurt the other kid, he either hurts you back, or cries. Both make you learn about empathy.

In a video game there is no equivalent. In fact, a video game makes you cold to empathy-

"Oh, look I beheaded a bunch of people and screamed the N-word to strangers who I never see their reaction to what I am saying"

Yeah totally the same as in person playing.

I wonder if the 2A protects virtual firearms.

The only thing to be considered when it comes to violence and video games, and it doesn't even have to be a violent video game to cause this, just a difficult/frustrating one, is that a person can get really irrationally angry while playing a game and react violently.

HOWEVER.. it's not going to be a school shooting or something like that that takes preparation and travel time. By then, a person no matter how gamer raged they may be, will regain their composure.

What HAS happened is like, a manchild gets frustrated with a video game while living at his parent's house and his autistic screeching wakes his parents up his parents tell him to stop or they'll pull his internet, so he shoots them. Which has actually happened but that's an impulse when someone's really angry and that's just poor coping mechanisms with frustration, and poor impulse control, aka bad parenting.

The other thing to be legitimately worried about is swatting, because that can also be done on impulse, or abuse of a child that's in the same home as the person.. something along those lines.

But again, it doesn't need to be a violent video game to trigger that. Just a frustrating/hard one. The person might think in a moment of rage about doing something awful, but by the time he leaves the house, he'll have calmed down, regained composure, and turn around and come home.

That's literally the opposite. Playing a video game- all of the violence is on screen, there is no empathy, all the aggressive words are screamed to a person you can't see their reaction.

Aggressive sports- quickly learning empathy, your own strength, suffer the consequences of making someone else cry- or the consequences that if you hurt them, they hurt you back, sometimes worse.

Video games have no real checks and balances to the violence.

Wrong.

If you play a competitive game online for example. You join a game with an understanding that there will be winners and losers. No empathy is required because nobody is losing anything of substance. And each loss is an opportunity to learn and improve.

As for AI enemies, well, they're not real. They don't feel. There are no consequences to them or you if you kill them because they didn't exist in the first place. That understanding alone is enough to make it so you don't lack empathy by partaking in these things.

Only somebody with already established mental illness would mistake videogames for reality and think that if it's ok to behead people in a game then it's ok to do it irl.

And anyone who screams niggers down their mic at randomers in a game is only doing so because they have a shit upbringing. Period. I have never EVER partaken in that kind of behaviour. The closest I've gotten to it is politically incorrect jokes made with the intention of making others laugh. So again it was about community and brotherhood and shared experience.

I cannot stress enough just how important upbringing is and how it's literally the root of all of this.

You know you can learn about empathy while playing violent games on the other side?
If vidya is the only source of action in your life, you are doing something wrong, you should combine with real life activities.

That's bullshit.
Checks and balances in sports don't mean shit when it comes to competition. There are still a ton of assholes looking to get away with whatever sly tactics they can if it means getting an edge on their opponents. You get trolls in sport just as you do in online gaming.
The defining factor behind the quality of who you're partaking in sports or gaming with is upbringing and the quality of character that comes from that, or a lack thereof, simple as.

It's more common than you'd think that people would yell at shit teammates in video games or get angry with their opponents. BECAUSE of the anonymity of the internet it's more likely, BECAUSE they're on the other side of a screen and you'll never see them face to face it's more likely. Just as it's pretty normal for people watching a sport on TV to rip into a referee for what they considered a bad call. They know they're not actually causing anyone harm and they're just venting anger.

Some people with worse upbringings take it too far, there's been a few cases of swatting because of it, one of them fatal, and cases of people in the house being harmed or things like the kid breaks his own computer/controller/TV on impulse.

But swearing and yelling is pretty common and generally that doesn't cause any real harm.

I didn't even see your first response you know, sorry mate.

I actually agree with everything you've said and desu I think it supports my point of how the root issue is a shitty upbringing and individual character, not videogames themselves.

Assholes will be assholes wherever they go and whatever they do.

yeah, and to some extent I'm guilty of being an asshole and probably so are you. I'd find it hard to believe that you'd never call your teammates shit or something like that.. cause everyone's done something like that. But.. never goes beyond that.

Please mr Trump ban videogames :)

>people called me a nigger when i was playing cawadoodty. and it hurt muh feefees
fuck off

CHECKMATE, NECKBEARDS.
You can't deny that this type of content desensitizes impressionable minds.

youtube.com/watch?v=gXBDkevx5lM

>Video games are the modern day equivalent of boys playing soldier or knight.

So, playing in a virtual world with no consequences is equal to that of playing in real life?

You are conflating playfighting IRL with playfighting in make pretend land.

Grow the fuck up.

Kids shouldn't be forced to attend government schools where they are easy targets for the vast amount of insane and evil people in the world. You aren't ever going to stop crazy or evil people from existing, so put your kids in a private institution with proper security or homeschool.

Stop trusting the government, it can't do anything right, it isn't even designed to.

did you read what I said? I was debating the guy who said anyone who yells during a video game has bad upbringing or whatever, I think it's pretty common that people might verbally lash out, as long as it stays verbal and no real action happens out of it, no real problem.

I've called people nigger online before.. it happens.

You literally do not see the difference between reality and virtual reality.

Your advocation of AI only further proves my point of children being desensitized. "They aren't real"

>"Only somebody with already established mental illness would mistake videogames for reality"
Buddy... I think it's time you take a deep look inside yourself and try to realize what it is that you are projecting.

Translation: You are mentally ill.

to be honest they only time I get pissed off is when I'm playing a co-op game and someone does something really dumb that gets in my way, but that's natural. I don't consider that being an asshole. depends on how far you go with it really. like expressing disappointment and a bit of anger is ok but if you full on rage and insult that's not ok and isn't justifiable at all.

And also, desu that's not really occured at all since I gave up caffeine LOL. caffeine really fucks your moods up so I think that's also a contributing factor because a lot of gamers drink mega caffeinated beverages for super long grind sessions and caffeine makes you irritable as fuck.

since I gave it up I've been chill as fuck and just laughing at people who do dumb shit.

Playing is playing, you fucking retard.

And don't try to use big boy words like conflate anymore, they just make you look dumb.

>"Video games are a perfect outlet"
Nothing is "perfect". Not even your argument. You seem to think that exposure to violence makes a man more of a man. Censorship is bad, but degeneracy through passive indoctrination is worse.

Not equal, but they are almost exactly the same thing, the only difference is the technology used and the type of interface you're interacting with.

Fundamentally speaking, they are the same thing. In terms of how the mind relates to them.

When you play soldier or knight there's a sense of competitiveness there and whoever loses, loses self-perceived status and self-validation.

Same goes for videogames, you lose nothing for self-perceived status and self-validation if you lose.

There is a difference between the physical and mental. Also, you can say the word "conflate" is dumb, but you and I both know that you have no actual counter argument.

"Big boy words" is not an argument. Please, I challenge you to actually rebut my original criticism.

I differ on that I think shit teammates absolutely deserve and need to be insulted from time to time. Sometimes it's the only way to get their attention and correct bad gameplay on their behalf. People say there's no need to get rude and abrasive. Bullshit. Why do you think instructors at boot camp have been using that strategy for hundreds of years.. it gets attention and gets results.

Someone will try and say "well if you want to get my attention to get me to do something try being polite and calm" bullshit. Call them out when they act like a retard and it grabs their attention and is more likely to stop it.

>Dumbass random keeps running in by himself and getting killed by enemy team
Hey man, group up with us, don't run in and die all alone we have to work together.
>Completely ignores and continues to run in by themselves and die
Dude, come on, stop doing that, we have a much better chance at winning if you group up and we go in together
>completely ignores and continues feeding
Hey you stupid fucking nigger stop feeding or fucking quit the game and uninstall. Holy fucking shit you're retarded, you're not going to beat them on your own they just keep ganking you over and over and you're accomplishing nothing. Take your fucking downs meds or whatever you gotta do to stop being retarded and lets' group up!
>Wow man, there's no need to be rude, about it sheesh, I'm just new, you don't have to be an asshole about it.

and now they group up with the team. No need to be rude my ass.

>almost exactly
WHICH ONE IS IT, FAGGOT?

>Fundamentally speaking, they are the same thing. In terms of how the mind relates to them.
NO. Physical world is far more different than virtual world. You should be concerned with your own mental state if you continue arguing this point.

>When you play soldier or knight there's a sense of competitiveness there and whoever loses, loses self-perceived status and self-validation.
You are conflating reality with fantasy by proxy of "competition". You don't understand what reality is for some reason.

Did you know that you and I would debate much more differently if we were talking via Skype?

Did you know that you and I would debate much more differently if we were sitting face to face?

The difference between the various mediums we use to communicate is that the more disconnected we are, the less empathy is necessary for feedback.

Essentially, I think you are talking about feedback loops being related in both virtual and physical realms. Yes - feedback loops exist in both worlds, but real world feedback carries more virtue. The virtual world is nothing but binary data.

Stop mixing the two.

"I personally disagree with what you're saying so you must be mentally ill."

Nice projection man, try and be a little less blatant next time.

But yeah back to the topic.

I've been consitently indicating there is a distinct difference between physical reality and virtual reality, my arguement is about how the mind interacts with the concepts at play in both real life simulation of physical force based competitiveness and virtual simulation of the same concept. They are practically the same by way of how the mind interacts with / relates to them.

Ok riddle me this.

If online video-games desensitize people to violence, why is it that despite playing video-games since around the time of the likes of Solder Of Fortune for PC, I can't hack (pun intended) any sort of video showing a human being in pain? I can't stomach real gore. I can't stomach watching things like suicides, I can't stomach pretty much anything whereby someone is seriously injured.

Shouldn't I be desensitized to this considering I'm completely desensitized to killing AI enemies made out of polgyons? I mean that seems to be your arguement.

On the one hand you say I do not see the difference between reality and virtual reality but then on the other hand you make an arguement indicating that they are one in the same, that how you perceive one affects how you perceive the other.

Which is it?

>And also, desu that's not really occured at all since I gave up caffeine LOL. caffeine really fucks your moods up so I think that's also a contributing factor because a lot of gamers drink mega caffeinated beverages for super long grind sessions and caffeine makes you irritable as fuck.
>since I gave it up I've been chill as fuck and just laughing at people who do dumb shit.


You sound kinda nuts, tbqh. How old are you? 24? Still living like you're 17? Having a hard time putting the pacifier away?

>You can't deny that this type of content desensitizes impressionable minds
>impressionable minds

yes , you're right , video games should be banned for Americans as they are very easily manipulated.
the internet should be too.

You sound mentally ill yourself, fucktard.
10/10 for acting like the typical mutt.

No I was making the point that males are more inclined towards aggression because of our role in the species. We've always been the protector and hunter and as a result have required a closer relationship with the concept of violence than women. And that instinctual predisposition is still there and it'll likely always be there. It never goes away. It can be repressed, yes, but anything repressed manifests explosively eventually.

You literally said someone who can't tell the difference between games and reality is mentally ill. YOUR WORDS - NOT MINE.

See my post about feedback loops and how they differ between the medium they are established on.

Look up the word conflate.
Look up the word empathy.
Look up the word desensitize.
Look up the word virtual.
Look up the word reality.

With your sharp computer skills, this should be easy for you. I'm not trying to be a dick. I just think you don't see there are EXTREME differences between virtual and physical worlds. Your argument deduces everything into "it's all the same if there are rules you have to follow."

Great job cherry picking the entire comment I made and isolating that singular comment.

Video games are for children, faggot.

>unironically posts anime to support non-argument

Good, so you know the difference between masculine and feminine.

Now here's the real question... do you understand how feedback loops work in the real world versus the virtual world?

Do you know what empathy is?

Video games were created to have fun and blow some steam , sometimes i just want to kill pixels so i play Battlefield 4 , other times i want to feel epic so i play Skyrim and sometimes i want to enjoy the wonders of the universe and piracy so i play Starpoint Gemini/Elite Dangerous.
i don't see the problem , at least i don't go punching people irl to blow off some steam.

>bitches about anime on an anime-discussion circlejerk forum

>yes , you're right , video games should be banned for Americans

This is a horrible method of debate. The strawman you're beating on has no relation to anything I have said.

The difference is that you have no authority over your teammates so nine times out of ten it won't work and even when it does they'll likely resent you for it and will forget what you told them anyway. Which is another reason why I try to not rage and instead see the humour in it.

In my experience it's much easier to just use your teammates instead of working with them cooperatively. Be the loner in the group and what not. Using their movements to your advantage.

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unironic

Here you go, buddy.

>Video games are for children, faggot.

that's your opinion , but my opinion says the contrary and the majority of people agree with it , so you are therefore wrong.

>I try to not rage
>In my experience it's much easier to just use your teammates instead of working with them cooperatively.
>Be the loner in the group and what not.

You literally sound like a neurotic sociopathic manchild.

Do you think children should play this:
youtube.com/watch?v=gXBDkevx5lM

>I post a dictionary so I can feel smart
The picture was related to my comment, m*tt.
I can have empathy and play vidya at the same time.

Really, you don't understand the concept of almost exactly? It means not quite exactly but close to it.

1 is a whole number.
0.9999999999999999999 is almost a whole number but not quite.

Make sense now?

I'm not making a general point about the physical and virtual worlds as a whole, I'm making a specific point about two similar concepts that relate to each other, one being within the real world and one within the virtual world. Stop responding like I'm literally merging the real world with the virtual because I'm not.

The funny thing is I wouldn't debate you any differently if I was talking to you on Skype or in person. What you see is what you get with me. I have almost no filter and I don't know how to not be myself so that doesn't apply to me.

So I think all you're doing is indicating the fact that you choose to interact with different mediums in different ways because of your own predispositions, which is fine, but that doesn't negate my points. That's your own subjective bias getting in the way. I'm talking about fundamental psychological dynamics, not what people prefer to do subjectively.

Empathy in reality =/= Empathy in Minecraft

Grow the fuck up, turd.

I guarantee that you defend and advocate the virtual world being an outlet for impressionable young men because you have failed at your own life in your sad version of reality.

COD is and has always been for faggot.
should they play this ?
sure , most of people play the multiplayer part of the game only a few percentage play the campaign (that's why they wanted to get rid of the campaign in the Battlefield serie) and it's just shooting at pixel , it's not even gore.

should children be banned from playing with plastic weapons ?
should they be banned from shooting guns or seeing their family do so ?
isn't that the same argument after all ?

>almost exactly
>1 is a whole number.
0.9999999999999999999 is almost a whole number but not quite.

So you are agreeing that you almost made an argument, but you didn't exactly make an argument. Give up with your sophist bullshit.

You don't see the difference between a conversation with someone via skype versus sitting at a table. You admit it.

I can't help you dude. You don't understand how reality differs with virtual reality.

>"fundamental psychological dynamics, not what people prefer to do subjectively"
And you accuse me of using word salads. Do you have any idea what the fuck you're talking about? There is no such thing as objective reality, you stupid fucking twat.

You put yourself in a position of authority in the match by being the one who knows what they're doing when they don't, and if they want a better chance at winning they'll listen to you, resent you or not, it gets results more often than being polite and weakly asking... that's the soyboy way. The Chad way takes initiative, maybe bruises some egos, but gets the win.

You can either answer my original question, or kindly fuck off.

And no - you are making strawman comparisons. Not actual arguments.

SHOULD CHILDREN PLAY "NO RUSSIAN"?

SHOULD "NO RUSSIAN" BE BANNED FROM CHILDREN?

Reality =/= Virtual Reality

Feedback loops travel on entirely different wavelengths.

That is ham.

You keep making this point but you're not actually indicating anything that shows mental illness on my part. So far all you've done is show your inability to grasp what I'm actually saying.

I mean ffs man you couldn't even understand what "almost exactly" meant. You indicated it had to either be almost or exactly LOL. That to me suggests retardation desu.

Yes and that's true, they are. And I'm not saying the two are the same. I'm saying that the mind can relate to things in the physical and in the virtual in similar or the same ways, but the inherent nature of those things will be different due to their different "worlds."

It seems to me like you're just projecting your own bias and subjectivity onto what I'm saying. You're taking what I'm saying and twisting it into something it's not. So there's an awful lot of miscommunication going on but it's on your part not mine, I'm being clear in my definitions and explanations, you're just corrupting what I'm saying with your own perceptions and then telling me I'm saying things that I'm not.

You don't understand what desensitize means.

You don't understand what ultra-violence is.

>What could be other potential sources of this sort of behavior?
Movies, TV Shows, Adult Cartoons, Anime, Books

average age of those who play video games has continually increased as the medium has existed. but it was never entirely centered on children. The first video games were developed by college students for their entertainment. Late teens and young adults have always been the prime video game market but now the average age of gamers is reaching the 40s because those who grew up playing them continue, because it's better than just watching TV.

No gangster rap and a homogeneous society

You have made my point for me:

1 - YOU AGREE THAT MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REALITY AND VIRTUAL REALITY.

2 - YOUR OWN ARGUMENT IS THAT EMPATHY IS "ALMOST PERFECTLY EQUAL" IN VIRTUAL REALITY AND THE REAL WORLD.

I'm sorry, but I'm done debating you at this point. Your skewed view of empathy is exactly why I feel children should have restricted access to ultraviolent content.

Video games are made for manchildren and children alike.

I agree.

Honestly I think that regular tier violence would have a worse effect than ultra-violence. For example shooting someone is something that you can do in real life, ripping both of someone's arms off and beating them to death with them is far less achievable in real life.

Not that I think that video games have an effect on real life violence, I just want Platinum and Suda to make more games

Not really. It wasn't a blanket statement. I was referring to a specific situation.
All I'm saying is that if you're playing to win and your team isn't cooperating whatsoever, if it's essentially a clusterfuck, then you change your playstyle to solo play and don't depend on them for anything.
Which is pretty much a maxim of life. If people let you down left right and center, don't depend on them anymore, go it alone and get what you want on your own. That's natural, not sociopathic.
Again your own subjectivity and personal bias gets in the way.

i replied to your question by yes they should be able and why.

you're stupid.
>video games are violent
and so are guns since you live in America when you can legally have one even if you're mentally disabled , so are films where you see tons of people die and make others suffer , such is school where people get bullied and finally snap and vaporize the entire school.

you sound like the typical anti-gun that easily forgot that most shootings are because of bullying and people snapping ending by the death of students.

>SHOULD CHILDREN PLAY "NO RUSSIAN"?
yes because 99% of people when they're not mentally ill can make the difference between fiction and reality.

>SHOULD "NO RUSSIAN" BE BANNED FROM CHILDREN?
no because you shouldn't ban what you don't like , there was never a proven correlation between video games and childrens becoming violent , like i said , most school shootings are commited by outcasts and it's about bullying.

also your only example is COD , the same argument anti-video games had when the game was released , all of this was soon debunked.
if you don't know that you either lived in a cave when COD MW2 was released or you are underage/young adult.

You keep putting words in my mouth.

>You don't see the difference between a conversation with someone via skype versus sitting at a table. You admit it.

I never said that. I said that with me, personally, what you see is what you get and I don't interact with people differently on different mediums. I am on here exactly how I am irl. I communicate in the same way. There's a big difference between that and what you claimed I admitted.

>And you accuse me of using word salads. Do you have any idea what the fuck you're talking about? There is no such thing as objective reality, you stupid fucking twat.
I didn't accuse you of using word salads. And I never said there was any such thing as objective reality.

You're actually insane lmao.

i played games more violent than this , more terrifying , yet it didn't make me become desensitized , i have even more empathy than the regular person sitting on their couch and watching people die on the news (they don't care about people losing their lifes , americans are especially bad at feeling empathy from what i noticed (result of being fed propaganda 24/7 i guess)).
i saw real videos of people dying , videos of WW2 (even when i was a kid) to modern wars , it made me stronger mentally but my opinion on it hasn't changed , war is fucking sad and makes me feel empty.

i understand what ultra-violence is and probably more than you.

>There is no such thing as objective reality, you stupid fucking twat.
So you think, a female is a male and male is a female?

>real men don't play video games!
>real men watch sports on TV!

t boomer.

Didn't Penn and Teller of all people debunk a lot of this garbage?

all of this was already debunked long ago when COD Moder Warfare 2 and the famous "no russians" mission was released , there was an uproar about muh ebil vidya's back then and all of it was debunked even by serious scientist , they found no correlation between violence and video games and violence in real life resulting from it.

Just relax, bro. People are up in arms to blame anything for the school shooting.
The reality is that vidya is a great scapegoat for the overarching problem with violence the entire human species has.
Imagine, for instance, if parents were arguing en masse that war was bad, or the military was bad, because it set a bad example for children, and made them violent monsters? What then? Would anyone take seriously the dismantling of our military? or would they simply remark how stupid parents seem to be this generation? Violence is part of our history and cultures, we wouldn't have crawled up through the milennia without it to guide our hand against those who we saw fit to destroy.
In short, stamping another censorious restriction on vidya will hardly do anything to stop school shootings. I think the robotic monotony and simpleheaded people who watch and do nothing when volcanoes are nearby gurgling, ready to roast their family alive, are to blame. All it took was a prescience the equivalent of moving out of the way of a freight train. If you see these people, do something. Vigilante justice may be the only true way to deal with this. The reliance on decrepit fbi and police systems has all but shown its hand in its inability to protect or serve.