Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A short 2 minute video from Penn and Teller
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iX60j_rlTOA

Did this video change your view about video game violence, or did it not, or did you have this all along? Discuss your opinions.

If you want replies, maybe give a brief explaiation of what the video is about so people can discuss without having to actually watch it?

My opinion has not be changed (I agree with P&T). However, I did consider their video very funny

Didn't know that many people have been killed in football. Honestly, I expected the number to be higher.

I've never had a negative opinion of violence in video games, but it was an interesting video nonetheless.

Basic gist:

Video games hypothetically being invented before Football.
Video Game School Teams.
Football is invented, people play it.
Suffer broken knees, broken arms, heat stroke, cuncussions etc etc.
People worry about video game violence instead of "Real life kids hurting real life kids".


Frankly, I don't think a forum for talking about minis with chainsaw swords is the best place to try to convince someone of video games not causing violence.

At least you get exercise with football. I've always had the opinion that some kids are too young for certain games (like COD, especially online. I can't remember how many times I have been told to feth off by a nine year old). That falls on the parents, not on the designers or marketers of the game. It has an M on it for a reason.

The Times wrote:"She just knew, from playing 'Grand Theft Auto.' She saw on there that when a car rolls over, it can blow up. She knew that could happen to us," Norris said.

Here's the link.

http://mywebtimes.com/archives/ottawa/display.php?id=366041

Humans are naturally violent, so, of course people get hurt playing football, or basketball, or tennis, or even baseball. The point is that you can't censor reality, why bother censoring media.

...im sorry i dont get the video...is going against or for video games? or some other middle point?

whatever. video games arnt that bad. half the bad stuff you learn from life any ways and as for the violence it lets you legally kill stuff,so its awesome. if it was legal to kill things and what not like in video games,of course it would win and video games would die out...well,most of humanity would die,but thats not the main point.

I think the video is a poor argument for them. It's almost impossible to realisticly make a comparison between an unintentional real injury and a completely intentional fake one. Like others have said, it comes down to the parents and authority figures in the kids life to decide. You don't hand hard core porn to a 7 year old, likewise you don't give an excessively violent video game to the same kid. This doesn't mean you outright censor them, as they have a time and place for adults. Parents need to have an interest in their kids life and pay attention to what they are playing/reading/watching. Get to know their friend's parents so you can find out what they'll be exposed to under their supervision. It's not as easy as letting them veg out in their rooms or at their friend's place, but it is doable. There is no black and white line, it's just something each parent needs to decide for themselves.

Maelstrom808 wrote:I think the video is a poor argument for them. It's almost impossible to realisticly make a comparison between an unintentional real injury and a completely intentional fake one.

So what you're saying is that people charge at each other headfirst with the intent of physically harming each other, and that's unintentional?

Oh, another fun fact: Football players have the brains of alzheimer's patients at the age of 30-40. And you are more likely to be killed by a football player than a shark.

I also agree with the rest of your argument. People put to much of the blame on Kids, not parents.

I think violent video games can be a great outlet for stress or anger.

Nothing calms me down more than driving down the sidewalk in a bus in GTA4 after a long day of retail.

Chowderhead wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:I think the video is a poor argument for them. It's almost impossible to realisticly make a comparison between an unintentional real injury and a completely intentional fake one.

So what you're saying is that people charge at each other headfirst with the intent of physically harming each other, and that's unintentional?

Oh, another fun fact: Football players have the brains of alzheimer's patients at the age of 30-40. And you are more likely to be killed by a football player than a shark.

I also agree with the rest of your argument. People put to much of the blame on Kids, not parents.

The object of hits in football is not to cause injury, but to stop another player from advancing. Injuries are accidents. Sure the mindset of completely crushing the other player is often the norm, but within the ideal of the game, injury is not the intended result.

Goddard wrote:I think violent video games can be a great outlet for stress or anger.

Nothing calms me down more than driving down the sidewalk in a bus in GTA4 after a long day of retail.

What is it with us retail guys?

I do agree, in my opinion games are very often a huge outlet for kids/adults. I just wish the kids didn't have microphones (just the annoying ones, especially the 20+ ones).

Video gets bonus points for showing the kid crying. I like that.

MrDwhitey wrote:

Goddard wrote:I think violent video games can be a great outlet for stress or anger.

Nothing calms me down more than driving down the sidewalk in a bus in GTA4 after a long day of retail.

What is it with us retail guys?

I do agree, in my opinion games are very often a huge outlet for kids/adults. I just wish the kids didn't have microphones (just the annoying ones, especially the 20+ ones).

Video gets bonus points for showing the kid crying. I like that.

You are either the most sensitive or most sociopathic man on the forum. I like you already!

Maelstrom808 wrote:

Chowderhead wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:I think the video is a poor argument for them. It's almost impossible to realisticly make a comparison between an unintentional real injury and a completely intentional fake one.

So what you're saying is that people charge at each other headfirst with the intent of physically harming each other, and that's unintentional?

Oh, another fun fact: Football players have the brains of alzheimer's patients at the age of 30-40. And you are more likely to be killed by a football player than a shark.

I also agree with the rest of your argument. People put to much of the blame on Kids, not parents.

The object of hits in football is not to cause injury, but to stop another player from advancing. Injuries are accidents. Sure the mindset of completely crushing the other player is often the norm, but within the ideal of the game, injury is not the intended result.

I can understand the point of view you are coming from. However, the ideal is not always the first mindset. When I'm playing Football, I want to deck a kid so hard it takes him a while to get up, not so he "stops". However, I know many people who just try to stop the player, so it's a crapshoot.

no change i already agree, i don't think it the games, but the people playing them. people get adicted to TV facebook and all that stuff games don't get people addited people get adited to games

remilia_scarlet wrote:Humans are naturally violent, so, of course people get hurt playing football, or basketball, or tennis, or even baseball.

Humans are good by nature and trained/taught to be violent. Empathy and disgust is innate reaction to violence but we learn to ignore it. It is only once we become tabletop and video gamers that we laugh at others misfortunes.

Ahtman wrote:

remilia_scarlet wrote:Humans are naturally violent, so, of course people get hurt playing football, or basketball, or tennis, or even baseball.

Humans are good by nature and trained/taught to be violent. Empathy and disgust is innate reaction to violence but we learn to ignore it. It is only once we become tabletop and video gamers that we laugh at others misfortunes.

look at you,believing humans are always good keep it up,it might actually be the truth one day

Funny, and very true video.

P&T make some good stuff.

lord commissar klimino wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

remilia_scarlet wrote:Humans are naturally violent, so, of course people get hurt playing football, or basketball, or tennis, or even baseball.

Humans are good by nature and trained/taught to be violent. Empathy and disgust is innate reaction to violence but we learn to ignore it. It is only once we become tabletop and video gamers that we laugh at others misfortunes.

look at you,believing humans are always good keep it up,it might actually be the truth one day

I don't believe you read what I wrote. I did not say that humans were always good.

Ahtman wrote:

lord commissar klimino wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

remilia_scarlet wrote:Humans are naturally violent, so, of course people get hurt playing football, or basketball, or tennis, or even baseball.

Humans are good by nature and trained/taught to be violent. Empathy and disgust is innate reaction to violence but we learn to ignore it. It is only once we become tabletop and video gamers that we laugh at others misfortunes.

look at you,believing humans are always good keep it up,it might actually be the truth one day

I don't believe you read what I wrote. I did not say that humans were always good.

yes,because i totally only read the 1st part. sorry,but it annoys me when people say stuff like that.

anyways. you said good by nature,you pretty much might as well because its completely false anyways. humans are vile little things. if anything we learn to be good,rather than learn to be evil.

Theres no such thing as a good human. These words are almost opposites

Soladrin wrote:Theres no such thing as a good human. These words are almost opposites

QFT every human does bad things.i have,you have,your father has,my mother has,obama has alot....

....

Why the hell would you specifically identify obama here...

That just seems weird.

Also, is you shift key broken?

Soladrin wrote:....

Why the hell would you specifically identify obama here...

That just seems weird.

Also, is you shift key broken?

no,it was a joke. i just dont like obama and wanted to see ho people would react.

yes,its it weird.

no,just just how i type,dont plan on changing anytime soon and people like you who ask make me smile and chuckle.

Stormrider wrote:At least you get exercise with football. I've always had the opinion that some kids are too young for certain games (like COD, especially online. I can't remember how many times I have been told to feth off by a nine year old). That falls on the parents, not on the designers or marketers of the game. It has an M on it for a reason.

Agreed, I'd much rather see my kids outside playing ( even if that means that..gasp...they might get hurt) , over sitting on their butts exercising nothing more than their thumbs.
I don't for one minute buy into the "video games lead to violent behavior" argument...but I do believe they contribute to kids being out of shape and generally lazy.

At least you get exercise with football.

You can keep your exercise, I would settle for waking up in the morning and not having pain in my shoulder, my knees, and one of my feet due to playing football in highschool.

My opinion is unchanged. People fretted over marksmanship teams as well, and it was a heck of a lot safer for the participants than football too.

The argument in my experience, in both the cases of video games and the marksmanship activities stems from the same thing: students being given, or learning the capacity for violence against their fellows. This argument becomes ridiculous in the face of the offered alternative for "good healthy sport" being an activity where you have a bunch of people slamming into each other at full tilt, the harder the better. It requires the listener to believe that A: Actual, intentional, physical violence on another human being with the distinct potential to cause injury is less bad than violence against a piece of paper, or violence against a digital lookalike of a human being. B: That while a rifle team member, or gamer may snap psychologically and turn on his fellows, the football player does not stand a similar chance. C: That the psychological trauma from shooting at a piece of paper or a not-real human being, or being attacked by a not-human being, does anything but pale in comparison to ACTUALLY having to attack or be attacked by another human being.

It's almost impossible to realisticly make a comparison between an unintentional real injury and a completely intentional fake one.

Oh? Why? If I, as someone who has generally outweighed the people around him by a good 30 pounds or so, decide to charge full speed at someone who is behind you, THROUGH you...am I supposed to be particularly surprised if you get hurt by the experience? It may not be my goal to cause you injury, but to expect that I am not going to is shortsighted at best, idiotic at worst. To put another way, I have in some capacity put your well being in the "I don't care." category of my brain for the next few moments for the sake of getting to the guy with the ball. If football was a game where the safety of the other players was paramount, no one would ever get tackled. The premise of the game requires that safety be, however slightly, placed subordinate to stopping/moving the ball.

While I don't really -mind- football, I feel obliged to respond to the idea that the game is A-OK from a psych/injury/violence standpoint while the others are not. As far as I am concerned, football is only one rung on the ladder under boxing in this regard, which I would probably place at the top.

Every human has also done good things in equal measure so you still haven't approached anything beyond a 'cynical teen' sort of attitude that doesn't constitute any kind of backing up of evidence that your statements are any more true than mine. You want to see people as bad you'll only see bad things, but that doesn't mean that humans are innately bad because you want it to be true.

Ahtman wrote:Every human has also done good things in equal measure so you still haven't approached anything beyond a 'cynical teen' sort of attitude that doesn't constitute any kind of backing up of evidence that your statements are any more true than mine. You want to see people as bad you'll only see bad things, but that doesn't mean that humans are innately bad because you want it to be true.

cynical teen? im ending this right now before this gets out of hand i have my opinion,you have yours,i like mine better,goodby.

lord commissar klimino wrote:

Ahtman wrote:Every human has also done good things in equal measure so you still haven't approached anything beyond a 'cynical teen' sort of attitude that doesn't constitute any kind of backing up of evidence that your statements are any more true than mine. You want to see people as bad you'll only see bad things, but that doesn't mean that humans are innately bad because you want it to be true.

cynical teen? im ending this right now before this gets out of hand i have my opinion,you have yours,i like mine better,goodby.

I said a 'cynical teen' sort of attitude, not that you were a teen. You also weren't the only person I was replying to, so you might want to put that ego in check. It is nice that you have an opinion, but just having it isn't very useful and it doesn't make you right. Have you done a lot of research into the subject? Read the great writers in psychology, philosophy, sociology, evolutionary ethics, ect? Or just going with your gut feeling based on limited anecdotal evidence? Even the most cursory of inquiry and you are getting upset.