Graphic Video Games

[Resistance Thinking]

Should there be a line in the sand when it comes to game classification? How about from a personal perspective? Should we be feeding our minds with imagery from these games?

Click here to read an article on the refusal of the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification Board to classify the new Left for Dead 2 game.

[Nicole]

"It certainly does restrict choice to a small degree, but that is the price of keeping this material from children and vulnerable adults. In my view, the small sacrifice is worth it,'' Mr Atkinson said.

He said the interactive nature of video games meant they had a much greater influence than viewing a film or reading a book. "People are participating and `acting-out' violence and criminal behaviour when they are playing a video game,'' he said.

But Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls says he believes Australia is now "out of step'' with the world.

I'd rather Australia be out of step with the world when it comes to R18+ video games if they are more likely to cause people to "act-out" violence and criminal behavior.

[Jenny]

Computer games are a very different situation to movies because they are 'interactive'. In violent video or computer games young people actually use the controls to kill people and carry out violent acts.

Some years ago Lt. Colonel Dave Grossman wrote a paper called Killology.
In it he wrote that he used to have to train new army recruits to kill - they had a natural aversion to actually pointing a gun at someone at firing.
In recent times he had noted that young men were much easier to train - in fact they had lost their inhibitions about firing and killing.
In school shootings the number of people actually killed has risen. Previously a shooter would fire and miss - now they aim and fire more accurately and without fear.

He attributes these situations to the increased use of violent computer games.
Since then he has set up a whole website - check it out: Killology
He is now part of a combined organised called Warrior Science Group
One feature article was printed in Christianity Today in 1998.
Trained to Kill: Are We Conditioning Our Children to Commit Murder?

So we need LESS computer games with violence NOT MORE!

[Nathan]

From personal experience, video game playing does various things. I played a lot of shoot-em-ups and that seriously affected my thought life. Many people will say, well I'm not going to act it out--but the Bible exhorts -- commands -- us to think on noble and pure things. This is quite difficult to do if you're day-dreaming about shooting all the bad guys that just invaded Australia.

Another major point is this: they make you live in a fantasy world, and contribute to the overall 'adolescent' culture, where, particularly boys stay boys until they are 35 except that they are only labelled 'adolescents'. People play games when they should be working, or building friendships, or spending time with their parents/spouse, or doing their homework or whatever.

Even decent games can become bad if you play them too much and ignore the rest of the world. It takes you out of reality and makes you ignore responsibility.

[Nicole]

Thanks for sharing that, Nathan. I'm actually really concerned about how much time goes into things people would classify as "harmless" games. Or even "educational" games. Why are we as a society relegating a child's development to a computer screen when there is nothing better than physically spending time with the child and engaging them in the learning process?

But back on topic, I am personally sensitive to overtly violent imagery. I actually found it almost impossible to read through sections of "Frankenstein" for CLASS because I suffered bad nightmares. Hence I choose to avoid them. However, as a solution to overcoming them, I was advised (by peers, not my teacher) to simply "watch more horror movies" to become desensitized.

Of course, it's this desensitization that is particularly worrying. The more we watch, the more normal something becomes, the less it bothers us, the less we notice it, and the more it perpetuates, influences and shapes our society. It's like the image of cooking a live lobster. Sticking it in boiling hot water and it will jump up and retaliate. Cooking it slowly from cold water and slowly warming it up, and the lobster will hardly notice the rising temperature until it's too late!

And the biblical principle of thinking on noble and pure things is extremely important. Your mind and body soaks up whatever you feed it. If you feed it junk, violent imagery, etc. then that's what it will crave. If you replace that with healthy images, noble and good and pure things, then that is what your mind and body will crave. That's a fairly simplistic view, of course. But the principle in general DOES work. You desire what you feed yourself.

[lochok]

Personally, I'd more then welcome an R18+ rating for computer games. If there was an R18+ rating for computer games, then overly violent or pornographic video games would be able to be in controlled distribution. At the moment, the ratings authority is actually fairly leniant about what they give an MA15+ rating to, because every time they restrict distribution of a game through refusing to rate it, there is generally a rather large uproar by gamers. The practical result is that there have been many games released under an MA rating that should have been restricted.

As well, having the R18+ rating for games wouldn't readily increase availability of these games to minors. The internet (before or after new filter) won't limit the illegal downloads of these games at any rate to those minors who choose to download them. However, parents will be far less willing to buy their kids an R-rated game as opposed to an MA-rated game - as often the rating is seen as a mere inconvenience.

I don't think blocking the R-Rating is the way to go here.

[Nathan]

The practical result is that there have been many games released under an MA rating that should have been restricted.

I'm not so sure that it's that clear cut. What they normally do is release a different version of the game where the really bad R-rated bits are cut out.

So in that case, not having an R18+ category would actually prevent that type of sin coming here somewhat.

Of course people can always illegally download anything as you say - but you must understand that what is illegal by law is often associated as wrong, and what is legal as right.

And following your own logic: why not allow certain people to murder --- they'd do it illegally anyway?

[bondy034]

hmm... i'm wondering whether to comment on video games in general or on violence in video games, as a few of you seem to be of the opinion that Christians shouldn't play video games. Well... i guess i'll just assume you all agree with me that video games are just as legitimate a means of relaxation as tv or sport or whatever you're into, so i'm free to give my comments on violence in video games without needing to justify video games in general...

One of the key issues i have with this debate is that i fail to be conviced that playing violent video games is really more "interactive" than reading books with violent descriptions or watching violent movies. The problem with the killology dude in my opinion, is that he can observe changed behaviour in young people and their willingness to kill, but attributing it to violent video games is kinda ridiculous without any conclusive scientific evidence. And let me say, there is none. There is no conclusive or even plausible link between violent video games and violent behaviour anywhere in the literature. There's no consensus at all and no proof of causation. Plus check the figures, in the U.S., the rate of violent crime has actually not changed much since the rise of more "graphic" video games in the last ten years. I've even heard it quoted that the rate has decreased not increased. Food for thought hey?

In regard to the R18+ rating, i think it should definitely be adopted. You must understand that video games are rated much more harshly than movies in general. For instance, i'm much more hesitant to watch an MA movie without knowing its content than to play an MA game. There's just no comparison. On one hand you can have Saw and its sadistically violent bretheren, on the other hand, a game like diablo 2. There is no comparison at all between the sheer level of violence and gore and its realistic brutal depiction in cinema. And the R18+ rating will not change the attitude of ratings boards in determining to allow games through or not. For instance, Fallout 3, a game i've played would have become an R18+ game, but instead, they forced the developer to change 1 thing: the name of an in game combat boosting drug from morphine to med-x.

What a joke! that was enough to change the rating? you get my point though. Its not like we're talking about allowing hardcore pornography in games (why would anyone bother with a game if that's what they wanted? 5 mins on google will find far more explicit sexual and even violent content than would ever be allowed in a video game anyway) I don't buy that an R18+ rating will open the way for more explicit content. i think instead, like lochok suggested, it will help control distribution. I think Fallout 3 should have been R18+ in relation to other MA games. instead, they change one name and allow it through. And now 15 year old kids can buy and play it over the counter...mind you, i think watching a horror movie will do them more harm but still... And it will become necessary to have the 18+ rating in the future as, given the harsher rating system for games, and the increasing realism of the graphics, a game that contains virtually the same content and themes as a game that was MA this year, in 5 years, will be R rated, simply because the depiction of that content is more realistic.

okay this is too long, i know, one more comment. Underneath this whole discussion lies a complete misunderstanding of where violent tendancies, or thoughts come from. Violent video games don't hurt our society. Its the people playing them. Video games are not what's wrong with our culture. They don't cause sin. Sin comes from ppl. From our hearts. That's what Jesus says in Mark 7. I'm inclined to believe what he says. Hearts are the issue, not external things. Not video games. Yes external things can influence our hearts, but that's a very individual thing, and i'm not a fan of ppl generalising regarding that. Your thought life is your thought life, you are responsible for it, maybe games don't do you good, well avoid them. that's your call. but we can't be imposing that on others. And certainly not on our secular culture in general.[quote="Nathan"]

[Jenny]

Hi 'Bondy' - thanks for all your comments. It’s hard to know where to start, so I’ll just pick up on a couple of points here.
First, under Australia's classification system, the classification guidelines are the same for films and for computer games.
The Guidelines are posted online.

The major problem with the Guidelines, and something we have commented on each time there has been a review, is that the Guidelines are much too vague and allow far too much 'content' in each level of rating.
For instance in the MA15+ rating, it says "Violence should be justified by context."
That means violence is allowed if the context suits! But what does it really mean?

At the last review, we suggested that what is currently in MA15+ should be moved to R18+!
Perhaps having the MA15+ rating re-named as an 'MA17+' would be an improvement.
We certainly don't want to see more violent games available as we would if R18+ games were allowed. On the other hand, we are very concerned about what is allowed into the MA15+ category.
Even now, a game will not just be 'allowed into' the MA15+ category unless the Classification Board believes it meets the criteria for that rating.
When Alien v Predator was refused classification last year, the game owners refused to 'alter' the game and appealed against the decision. The Classification Review Board then rated the game MA15+. However, they used the SAME Guidelines used by the original decision.

Secondly, for Christians it shouldn't just be a matter of what is allowed or what is 'legal'. Pornography is legal but that certainly doesn't make it 'right' for Christians. We are to be discerning about what we do, what we read or watch, what games we play, what we view on the internet... The Bible tells us our body is a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) - thus we should be cautious about our actions. It also tells us to think on things that are good and noble (Phil 4:8). Many movies and video games don't pass this test!

[Nathan]

One of the key issues i have with this debate is that i fail to be conviced that playing violent video games is really more "interactive" than reading books with violent descriptions or watching violent movies.

Yep so stop reading those books and watching those movies too!

There's no consensus at all and no proof of causation

You are right that sin comes from our hearts, but here's the question: should we enflame or encourage that sin to manifest, or, have an opportunity to come out?
Jesus said, if you cause someone else to sin, it would be better for you to tied to a massive stone and be tossed into the ocean than to face the wrath of God. (Matthew 18:6) So why even contemplate giving people that opportunity?

[Jenny]

Bondy, I want to address another of your statements - about the evidence...

One of the key issues I have with this debate is that i fail to be convinced that playing violent video games is really more "interactive" than reading books with violent descriptions or watching violent movies.

I agree with Nathan that any of these forms of 'entertainment' can be harmful - it isn't just a matter of whether there is 'more' harm!

However, there has been a considerable amount of research done on the harmful effects of playing violent video games and the interactive nature of them.

In March 2010 Dr Craig Anderson, the Iowa State University Distinguished Professor of Psychology, released his latest research - a meta-analysis of 130 research reports on more than 130,000 subjects worldwide. He found that the research "proves conclusively that exposure to violent video games makes more aggressive, less caring kids -- regardless of their age, sex or culture".
The study has been published in the March 2010 issue of the Psychological Bulletin, an American Psychological Association journal. The study "reports that exposure to violent video games is a causal risk factor for increased aggressive thoughts and behavior, and decreased empathy and prosocial behavior in youths."
Read a summary of the research.

Professor Anderson's previous research, from two studies regarding the effects of violent video games, was published in 2000 - "Study 1 found that real-life violent video game play was positively related to aggressive behavior and delinquency" and "In Study 2, laboratory exposure to a graphically violent video game increased aggressive thoughts and behavior."

In fact, the APA was so concerned about the harmful effects of watching violent films and TV and playing violent video games that they passed a Resolution noting the effects (backed up by many research studies).
Three parts of the Resolution are
"THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that APA advocate for the reduction of all violence in videogames and interactive media marketed to children and youth."
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that APA publicize information about research relating to violence in video games and interactive media on children and youth in the Association’s publications and communications to the public" and
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that APA engage those responsible for developing violent video games and interactive media in addressing the issue that playing violent video games may increase aggressive thoughts and aggressive behaviors in children, youth, and young adults and that these effects may be greater than the well documented effects of exposure to violent television and movies."

All that seems to provide a great deal of evidence that violent video games can be harmful and that the 'interactive' nature of the games is a significant factor!

[bondy034]

yeah, that study would be very convincing IF it were the only meta-analysis of such a magnitude and it reached such a conclusion. Problem is its not. I'm familiar with a similar meta-analysis of over 200 independent studies that found the exact opposite conclusion. The problem is that there is no way to conclusively demonstrate that more violent video games = more aggressive thoughts and behaviour because of how complex aggression is, having loads of cultural and biological influences.

As i said, i still fail to be convinced by the scientific evidence that theren is a link. And personally, my own experience as someone who has played lots of violent video games supports my doubts. Mind you, even though i'm arguing that violent video games in general aren't an influence on aggression, i believe content should be restricted from younger kids and even teens in some cases. Hence why i support the R18+ rating and believe its primary application would be to games that exist already as MA15+ games just so they can be distributed. Its not like there are great tides of games that are turned back because we lack an R18+ rating anyway, instead they are altered, sometimes very insignificantly and are then permitted. The way ratings systems work are vague enough that without the R18+ option, MA15+ might seem perfectly reasonable for a particular game that really should be R18+

i would actually argue that violent films and literature fall in a similar category. And as a Christian i believe it comes down to preference and wisdom when i'm decided what is helpful or unhelpful for me. But i don't think its a call you can make for me or that i can make for you. In a similar way i might find playing contact sports make me more aggressive, but i'm not gonna tell you not to play them because of that. Personally i'm not that aggressive in general, and i see no link between my video game playing and my thought life... so for me, i'm convinced its a non issue. others? well, that's for you to judge not me

[Jenny]

Bondy, it would be helpful if you gave references to the meta-analysis you refer to... then we could read what it says.

One important point here is that not all people are necessarily made more aggressive or violent by watching violent films or playing violent games. Naturally, research results cover the overall results, not those for individuals.

The main issue for us as Christians is: 'Is it appropriate for us to watch violent or sexually explicit films or play violent or sexually explicit video games or look at pornography or take drugs and so on?' - not whether we can do them but is it good and right (Phil 4:8).
Our lives should be an example to others - the verse about not being a stumbling block to a weaker brother is relevant here (1 Cor 8:9).
We are also to keep our bodies pure - in whole lot of ways - as a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1).

[Cameron]

As a reasonable gamer in the day I'm a bit torn two ways. Video games provide a source of entertainment that is unlike any other for many reasons. For instances:
1. Games interact with people more (that's part of the real appeal of games). Particularly RPGs (role-playing games) which are my personal favourite. You become the characters and manipulate their actions.
2. Games provide a person the ability to space out from every other aspect of what is happening at that time. More so than movies. It also gives you the ability to do things that you couldn't (or perhaps shouldn't) do in real life. As such it does become surreal and acceptable. I know this when I don't feel as anxious when I'm walking around dark corners in the game.
3. Good games are really addictive. Hey I spent hours upon hours playing games like Generals, Max Payne and Oblivion. I remember at school part of the real attraction to these games was because my friends were really into them. So the peer pressure does rub off.
4. Games take up time and move other priorities back. Life is outside the console.
So one must be wary of games. I am reminded of 1 Cor 6:12 saying "everything is permissible to me but not everything is beneficial". Just because we can do something not sure it means we should.
Having said that I still play the occassional game but don't really have time as I don't generally class video games as a very relaxing form of recreation.
I try to avoid the really graphic games. Once you fill your mind with that sort of stuff there is no undoing it.

[Nathan]

I am reminded of 1 Cor 6:12 saying "everything is permissible to me but not everything is beneficial".

Yes, so if you're convinced, bondy, that violent/sexual games don't influence you, and that we can't judge you, let the Word of God judge you. Just how is playing violent games beneficial?