Critics, the Trolls for videogames

...At least gamers can finally agree on one thing...

I find it hard to believe that so many critics jump to the conclusion that youth violence is the result of violent video games. In a world that prides itself in knowledge and research, you'd think they wouldn't make such accusations without the sufficient evidence, yet in this case they do it anyway. It's as ridiculous as saying Pacman causes worldwide obesity and the 'Need for Speed' games can be linked to the high percentage of road toll casualties.

One major point that critics seem to overlook is the fact that games are not real life, they are games, and we as gamers know the difference. The main concern for them is that violent video games cause violent and aggressive behaviour  But have they ever considered the reversal? That games in fact allow for users to vent their everyday frustration and anger through a controlled domesticated environment? That instead of going out and inflicting pain onto others, they take refuge in video games to perform aggressive behaviour in a fantasy world without any real-life consequences. Gordon Calleja somewhat explains this when talking about  affective involvement, in which video games can be used to express or channel their emotional states:

"The compelling nature of games makes them ideal for shifting one's attention to a performative domain that suits the players needs: vent frustration through intense first person action, get absorbed  in the cognitive challenge of a strategy game..." (p. 86)

It is not then, that players are becoming more violent through video games, but in fact less violent, because it acts as a personal stress relief.

Another thing that seems to be another concern is that violent video games desensitize people from violence, and by violence, they mean 'real life' violence. Critics must also think, then, that video game graphics are BLOODY AMAZING, so amazing that people feel it's exactly like real life. Well I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't think shootings, stabbings and other violent behavior in video games would be as nearly traumatizing as it would if it were happening in front of my very eyes in real life.

If anything, violent video games desensitize people from FICTIONAL VIOLENCE, because real-life violence is in a league of it's own. No computer generated violence can prepare anyone for the equivalent in a real world situation. It's just too different.


This negative discourse surrounding video games reminds me of Vincent Mosco's notion of 'Historical Amnesia' where the world continues in an ongoing cycle of criticism when the newest form of technology comes about, claiming it to be changing "life as we know it". Video Games seem to be going through the same scrutiny that television, film and even printing press went through, and critics continue to experience a sense of historical amnesia towards the technological advancements that have gone before.


In my opinion, critics are just using video games as a scapegoat for circumstances that they simply cannot explain. But not all is bad. There is evidence that video games can be beneficial in people's lives. A New Zealand father created an interactive video game app that helps his autistic son complete simple daily routines such as brushing his teeth. And more recently, I came across this article about skills from WoW that actually saved lives!

Video games are just going through the same criticism that every new technology has gone through. Once something else comes along, video games should be safe from the negative limelight.