Videogames and violence

[TheLuckyOne]

So, to steer this thread in a slightly different direction- I can respect that some people get uncomfortable playing GTA. It's a violent game, and I can certainly see how that would be off-putting. My (somewhat topical)question is, how many people who feel uncomfortable playing GTA are planning on seeing, or have already been to see, Sin City? Or Kill Bill? And of those who have- did you enjoy it? Did it arouse similar feelings of discomfort, or did you simply shrug it off?

I think it's an interesting comparison because in some ways, you could argue that in SC or KB, you're simply watching violence being perpetrated, rather than taking active control of it as in GTA. True. But on the other hand, those movies are shot with the most realistic, lifelike special effects possible, whereas GTA looks exactly like what it is: a video game. Neither medium is meant to be taken seriously; in both you're meant to realize the violence is stylized and so-excessive-it's-funny, but it's done in very different ways. So I guess my question is, do you find one acceptable but not the other? And if so, why?

-D

[pfrsue]

I know this is an older thread now, but I just noticed Drew's last post and thought I'd respond. I find GTA nauseating, but yes I did see Sin City. Twice.

I do think there's a difference between watching violence, and actively contributing to the violence - even in an entertainment format. There is, to my mind, a huge psychological leap between seeing a little old lady get mugged in a movie, and making the decision to mug her yourself and then following through with it. Sure neither of them are real, but if we weren't willing to buy into fantasy, there'd be no movie industry, fiction publishing or video game market.

When I see a movie, or read a book, I'm there as a spectator. It's someone else's story. In a game like GTA, you create your own story within the (admittedly limited) setting you're given to work in. It's an entirely different point of view - the difference between passive and active.

In any case, I would respectfully disagree with my distinguished colleague. When I 'test-marketed' GTA, at no point did I ever find the violence so excessive that it was "funny". Just call me an old fuddy duddy. I know that's what they call me in the staff meetings when PoolMan thinks my hearing aid is turned down.

And I'm not letting my son see Sin City for at least two more years. Maybe three.

Sue

[Head Mutant]

I just had a mental image of all of us as old farts, really old farts, still doing this website. "EH? MATRIX WHAT? WHERE'S MY PILLS!"

Man, I hope that happens. That would be great.

[maconlon439]

My take on video games and violence.

Life isn't fair.

We've got a president who has trouble completing basic sentences. I've got a BA yet I'm doing menial industrial work. All over the world people declare wars based on the most stupid reasons. Life will continue to be this way until the day all of us are DEAD.

And I'm sure everyone here is angry about some things too, albeit not exactly what I'm angry about.

It makes me want to hit someone, and who do I hit? No matter who I find there will be consequences and even if there aren't I'd probably feel bad about it afterwards.

Answer: Hit people who can't feel it because there simply simulations of people.

I've played video games all my life and I think that I'm considerably less violent because of it, since I vent my agressions at things through them.

[Al]

Not exactly on the topic, but since the thread was dead anyway...


Gamer Murdered Over Virtual Property
by David Adams

June 8, 2005 - In an extreme example of gamers taking a hobby (obsession?) too far, Shanghai gamer Qui Chengwei stabbed Zhu Caoyuan in the chest, killing the fellow gamer, according to the BBC News.

The motive for the murder? Zhu sold a virtual sword in the online game Legend of Mir 3 -- a sword Qui Chengwei had loaned him.

Qui had apparently tried to take the virtual property dispute to the police, but China lacks laws covering virtual property like an online sword. Zhu had offered to pay Qui the money he'd earned from the sword, but Qui refused.

Qui Chengwei now faces a suspended death sentence, meaning he could spend his life in jail, but that he may also be released on "good behavior" in 15 years.

Victim Zhu Caoyuan was 26 years old. His parents are currently seeking appeal for an immediate death sentence.
-----------------------
source: IGN.com

Al

[DocD83]

Suspended death sentence, with a possibility of parole in 15 years...that's a much more lenient sentence than "Red Corner" led me to expect from the Chinese courts. Gere has led me astray once again!

[Hucklebubba]

It's probably a bad sign that I came away from that article thinking, "Hmm. Legend of Mir 3. Sounds interesting."

Mostly I'm just curious as to whether or not there's a dilapidated space station involved.