My fan-fic(Credit to Gelatino95 at Crazy Dragon Graphics for the userbar) Author's profile
And here's an awesome RPG. It has dinosaurs!And a sprite comic, because I can't draw!
Please click my dragon(s)!
We can all agree that the second generation was either Pokémon's Golden Age or its Silver Age.
Black and White gave me a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same.
Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.
Just because video games were a part of the story does not in any mean way the video games were responsible for it happening.
Hmm. True it is dependent on who is playing the game. If the person got interested in it and became violent, do you think it is because of the person who has violent attitude got interested in it or the game that makes him interested makes him violent?
Really there are violence content in games such as FPS. I believe these kind of games make people crave for more realistic approach. Then again I did mention yes or no as my answer isn't it?
I am a double specialist. WHITE2: 0820 4834 7211. Greenwich Mean Time+8
"I battle to have fun, thus I battle to lose." (sizida's philosophy) Can you beat my record of 1096 loses from 1314 battles?
Green icon besides my username is online status, but no change in activity after 10mins, I am offline!
*~sizida's Pokémon Rakuen~* is my 5th gen trade shop! Though I prefer it to be my backyard~ Hope you guys can visit it!
Thanks dratinitamer for the kickbutt siggy!
If anyone is desensitize to anything, then the results is a lack of empathy towards those in those particular situations, which as a result can offer a kid a reason and allows a kid to easily justify their actions in which may be going out to kill people.
This is purely a physiological debate and the tests and experiments in which may have involved experimenting with the psyches of people in which had contact with these games like these always varies and thus cant be conclusive. Because the test subjects were also all different somewhat and their mental stability were all different, but the "key" demographic of people who like to play these violent games are people who are more lickly to act out those actions in real life.
Some military organizations around the world including America have recently employed some training tactics with video games because of the very good hand eye coordination in which they induce. I don't not mean to glorify any actions of the those who massacre but in some of the cases were kids in theirs schools kid and were linked to violent video games, the kills they made were mainly all head shots...
But as Trainer michael said, it creates a desensitized child. As a result a child who has a lack sof empathy towards that situation and thus creates an opportunity for thoughts to be acted out.
"Do no think that i have come to bring peace on earth, i did not come to bring peace, but a sword."
If you ask me, it has more to do with underlying human behaviours. And as I've stated, the Columbine shooting is a great example of that. Eric had pent up hatred which was well-documented in his journals, how come no one is shocked by tha? Because we always try to look for quick explanations by making assumptions through correlation and assume that it has valid causation, despite the fact that said correlation has the potential to be flawed.
Watch this short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0miGRHuayug
Penn and Teller tested the boy's desensitization by allowing him to fire a gun in a shooting range (after being an avid player of FPS games), the boy cried after firing the gun because he knew it was reality, it was no longer a bunch of pixels that he was shooting.
How come no one pays attention to the psychological/sociological/pathological profile of the video game player/murderer? It's a leap of logic when you can blame video games instead of looking up underlying behaviours.
Psychological studies invariably find a positive relationship between violent video game play and aggression. However, these studies cannot account for either aggressive effects of alternative activities video game playing substitutes for or the possible selection of relatively violent people into playing violent video games. That is, they lack external validity. We investigate the relationship between the prevalence of violent video games and violent crimes. Our results are consistent with two opposing effects. First, they support the behavioral effects as in the psychological studies. Second, they suggest a larger voluntary incapacitation effect in which playing either violent or non-violent games decrease crimes. Overall, violent video games lead to decreases in violent crime.
Psychological studies find that video game play is associated with markers for violent and antisocial attitudes. It is plausible that these markers indicate either whetted or sated preferences for antisocial behavior. I investigate whether a proxy for video gaming is associated with the prevalence of various crimes and find evidence that gaming is associated with significant declines in crime and death rates. These results are robust to various alternative specifications. Other youth-related leisure activities—sports and movie viewing—generate smaller or no effects. These results cast doubt on the desirability of proposed restrictions on video game marketing. (JEL L86, D18, I18)
http://www.springerlink.com/content/66217176984x7477/Objective Video game violence has become a highly politicized issue for scientists and the general public. There is continuing concern that playing violent video games may increase the risk of aggression in players. Less often discussed is the possibility that playing violent video games may promote certain positive developments, particularly related to visuospatial cognition. The objective of the current article was to conduct a meta-analytic review of studies that examine the impact of violent video games on both aggressive behavior and visuospatial cognition in order to understand the full impact of such games. Methods A detailed literature search was used to identify peer-reviewed articles addressing violent video game effects. Effect sizes r (a common measure of effect size based on the correlational coefficient) were calculated for all included studies. Effect sizes were adjusted for observed publication bias. Results Results indicated that publication bias was a problem for studies of both aggressive behavior and visuospatial cognition. Once corrected for publication bias, studies of video game violence provided no support for the hypothesis that violent video game playing is associated with higher aggression. However playing violent video games remained related to higher visuospatial cognition (r x = 0.36). Conclusions Results from the current analysis did not support the conclusion that violent video game playing leads to aggressive behavior. However, violent video game playing was associated with higher visuospatial cognition. It may be advisable to reframe the violent video game debate in reference to potential costs and benefits of this medium.
Last edited by BurningWhiteKyurem; 23rd August 2012 at 6:52 AM.
I think it depends on the kid playing the game itself. Biologically everything is determined, from you sexual orientation to your believes (for the most part).
I want someone to tell me, just how video games make children into violent, rabid killing machines with computer level calculation and coldness, when fourty years ago the cool thing to do was get a pop gun pistol (A real, physical object that you hold in your hands) and play cowboys 'n indians where children actually practiced taking aim, pulling triggers, and killing each other, right after watching the new episode of Bonanza or the Lone Rider.
You wanna know what really F***K'ed up that generation of children? Getting drafted into god-dang Vietnam and shooting children in the head while they ran towards them with grenades; all while the government sprays Agent Orange or whatever "rainbow pesticide" they felt like that day all over them, and then saying "Ooops, sorry, that war was actually not really needed, and we didn't know military grade chemicals sprayed for 12 acres around your squad would have any health repercussions. You'll be fine. Now drop your drug habit and come home so you can re-integrate with our bullcrap society where your 24 year old manager at McDonalds tells you to sweep the floor or your fired when you used to shoot men in the crotch just for looking in your general direction."
Our society makes me *%*&$^ing sick sometimes. It really does.
Pokemon Black Friend Code: 3353-8153-1336 -> Name: Alexis
Pokemon Black 2 Friend Code: 3010 7646 1889 -> Name: Katrina
I'm always up for any trade, if just to fill up my GeoNet.
~*~ A little bit attention horse, a little bit drama queen... I'm a pretty pretty Princess!
I think it is just another pathetic go-to excuse to excuse terrible parenting that has no real proven evidence or support, and therefore is just one of those ideas you let them look like an idiot and run their mouth about till they get it out of their systems.
Seriously there is no correlation. If anything I would say it would be a good release for anger and make your child calmer.
Thanks to Steel Sector Graphics for the userbar and banner!
The problem is usually the parents. Now idk if video games cause violent behaviors or not but a lot of parents will just buy a video game without even looking at the box. Take this as an example. In my opinion, they use it as a form of babysitting. I'm sure if a parent watched their child play Gears of War 3 online for a good minute, they wouldn't consider buying the sequel. And if they do allow it, then it is purely their fault for allowing their child to play one of the most violent video games ever. (For those of you that don't know about it, you have a machine gun with a chainsaw on it and a sawed-off shotgun that makes people explode). Now does that make the child act out in violence? Well, that's where I bring this up (watch the sequels, they're funny). Clearly he's violent. But is he violent because the game is well, sort of violent? Or is it because he was being betrayed? This is a very interesting topic and I'm interested in what everyone has to say.
Wow, I've seen quite a few arguments on both sides that seem very skewed or extreme. I think there are some things we should keep in mind in regards to this topic:
1. There is evidence supporting both sides of the argument. Some studies have suggested a positive correlation between video game-playing and violence; others showed no correlation.
2. Yes, it's wrong to assume that video games make people violent because a few crazy gamers became violent. But it's also wrong to assume that video games do not lead to violence based on a few peaceful people who play violent video games. It's the same kind of generalization.
That having been said, my own opinion on the matter is uncertain, but I'm leaning slightly to the side of some sort of correlation. No, I'm not saying that violent video games will make children fantasize about killing people. I don't even quite agree with the empathy issue Trainer Michael brought up. My opinion here centres around the issue of early interest. A person's childhood experiences can have an effect on their behaviours as an adult, though the effect is often indirect. Chances are the person won't precisely mimic the events of such experiences. Rather, it's like a seed being planted in the child's mind. One of several that interact in very complex ways to develop one's personality later on. It's basic psychology.
In the case of violence in video games, it might influence a somewhat carefree attitude toward aggression later on, but other factors--morals the person has adopted, other things they liked to do as a child, other interests, etc--could obscure that. Another factor that could obscure this influence is the video game itself, specifically the attitude it takes toward violence and how and why it's used. If a game lets people shoot innocents without punishment, for instance, the influence could be stronger. Same goes for a game where you play as a criminal, and the criminal acts are emphasized much more heavily than the protagonist's heroic efforts, if any (I'm looking at you, Grand Theft Auto). On the other hand, more light-hearted games where the violence is comical (the Super Mario games, for instance) have the violence be less believable and (sometimes) less emphasized--these games would have less of an influence. Especially if the violence is used only against the bad guys--that is, those who attack you.
But like I said before, these influences will not always lead to a violent person. It depends on the rest of their personality as well, as well as moral influences--which in this case would usually condemn the use of violence. Still, they can have an influence.
This next part is slightly off-topic, but still related. The same concept above can apply to other things present in many mature-rated games, such as sexual content and swearing. Unlike the violence example, it's not as widely understood and communicated that such things are bad. People who hear a lot of swearing early in life are quite likely to adopt swearing into their own language later on, for example.
It can even apply to more positive or not-necessarily bad things. A person who plays a lot of the more cute and comical video games, and/or watches a lot of cartoons, might adopt a more whimsical nature later on in life. (I'm certainly guilty of this. My interest in swords was influenced by video games long ago as well.)
Overall, I believe violence in video games can lead to violent attitudes in people, but mostly if the people were exposed to them as children, and also if there were other negative influences on the person's life as well. And also that people who are into the really violent video games could easily weaken their compatibility with people who don't like them at all. The latter is just a little something to beware of for those CoD fans out there...
Whoever here has a problem with videogame violence should think about this:
Pokemon is violence in nature, but WHO CARES! Animals kill eachother all the time. do you see a RATED M sign on a rabbits stomach?
OG Post: BearTown:
you sir made me laugh so hard. made my day
"...'And when the dirt hits the coffin, just go to sleep..."
Credit to Jew Bagel
Just because people play video games doesn't mean they will go out killing people. If anything, it's probably a mental illness that made him/her want to go out killing people. But of course, the media completely overlooks that part. They notice a criminal, then notice he/she plays GTA/COD/Halo/etc and try to put 2 and 2 together to make 69, and then assume that the games made them violent.
That is like if I go to a city with lots of gay people, and then have them watch MLP, would that mean MLP made them gay? No, it just means they were gay people who just happened to watch MLP. If anything, video games let you vent your anger out onto the virtual characters on your screen. Maybe you had a crappy day at school/work and want to take it out on someone, but you don't have anyone to take it out on or you don't want to, so you play COD/Halo/GTA/etc and then take it out on whoever your shooting in game, especially if it's GTA where you can freeroam.
My Black 2 Friend Code: 3182 4705 4976
My Youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/Luna874
Should you need to contact me for a Gen V battle, just PM here on Serebii. If I couldn't get it, send a PM to me on Youtube (Luna874) which is my most actively viewed inbox. Or try sending me a PM on Smogon (I am also Lunanight there too).
very true but it stimulates the violent part of the brain... and they are making games so realistic now.
for kids that maybe have a small mental illness it can be a challenge to draw the line.
and something else if you see death and gore all over the place (in games) what would you do if you saw it in real life, feel at home?!
i rest my case
Ok I don't see the big deal here. We are getting more and more protective of our poor eyes and ears when it comes to violence and profanity. Throughout history it was considered a public event to watch things like beheading, hangings, tarring, etc. And by golly did people also consider those to be family events too!! Violence wasn't just a sport during the Roman Coliseum days either.