Whenever a new form of entertainment rises in popularity, the mostly good remarks made are always mixed with a few disgruntled people worried about the potential harm a medium can inflict. This can be seen in television, cinema, YA novels, and even comic books in the early 20th century. The same can be said for video games. There is a long-standing stigma against video games, and it comes in many forms. They are said to damage the user`s eyesight, lead to behavioral issues and even lower the user`s IQ. However, the most notable one is without a doubt the idea that video games cause violence. This claim was given a more mainstream platform by the rise in school shootings around the world, particularly in the United States, where children and teenagers are committing mass murder.
Though not all video games have a violent theme, it is very prevalent in today`s enormous roster of available games. FPS (First Person Shooter) games have the player see through the eyes of a gun-wielding protagonist, allowing for brutal assassinations of enemies with enough blood to make even the most battle-hardened veteran squeamish. But the teenagers playing these games are completely unfazed. There are also 3rd person shooting games, which make for a less immersive experience but a wide-angle view of the havoc your character wreaks.
Violence in video games isn`t just limited to guns. Attack on Titan: Wings of Freedom (2016) is a 3rd personal game based on the anime Attack on Titan (2013). With its source material being described as Very graphic and disturbing (IMDb, 2013), and featuring sword-wielding teenagers cutting off the limbs of huge giants, you can imagine that the game adaptation is not exactly child-friendly.
But why are we attracted to violent video games? Why is there enjoyment to be found in killing hordes of zombies or being thrown into a WW1 battlefield surrounded by enemies? As Gentile, D. (2005) states, primal instincts are to blame. If a bear were to come into a proto-humans camp, killing its friends and stealing their food, a rush of hormones like adrenaline, testosterone, and cortisol flood its bloodstream, creating a higher sense of awareness and allowing the proto-human to think more rationally about what to do. Obviously, being attacked by a bear isn`t your perfect idea of fun. But that mixture of hormones with the knowledge that you are completely safe is what creates the fun part of violent video games. It`s the same with horror films, where you know you can`t be stabbed by the killer but you still get a rush from seeing him stab someone else. The excitement created can be almost intoxicating, which explains why people all over the world have collectively played over 25 billion hours of Call of Duty (Uberfacts,2020).
As previously stated, violence doesn`t play an integral part in every single game. For instance, Pong is widely regarded as the first video game. It features two rectangles and a bouncing circle but no fighting or death. The bloodier side of gaming is said to have its origins in Wolfenstein 3D (1992) (GamesRadar,2017). While other first-person games existed before, Wolfenstein 3D had better character models, ran smoother, and had more realistic environments. It was the first game to properly tap into that primal instinct and, as noted by GamesRadar (2017) it took the gaming world by storm. It is now known as the spiritual ancestor of Doom (1993), one of the most influential games of all time, as well as Goldeneye (1997), Half-Life (1998), and of course the Call of Duty franchise.
Call of Duty Mobile (2019) was downloaded 28.5 million times in the United States of America (0.086 per capita), 12 million times in Brazil (0.056 per capita), and 17.5 million times in India (0.013 per capita) (Statista,2019). Call of Duty is the most well-known FPS franchise globally at the moment, so is an appropriate example for this purpose. The US had 7 murder cases per 100,000 people in 2020, much less than Brazil`s 24 per 100,000 people and more than India`s 2 per 100,000 people (Statista,2020). These statistics don`t show either side of this argument to be completely true and aren`t a very good way to demonstrate the issue due to the sheer number of variables at play (a murder could be caused by anything). This is an example of how difficult it is to come to a single conclusion with this argument, and why it is a debate that still goes on today.
One obvious argument that can be made against the claim that video games cause violence is the fact that the vast majority of murderers are between the ages of 25 and 44 (Statista,2020). The average consumer for video games such as Battlefield or Call of Duty is much younger than this, being closer to 18. Naturally, there is a counterargument to be made, being that a childhood of playing these games can have an effect on the player in later life, even if they stop playing. Specifically, the hormonal boost received from violent video games can become such a regular part of one`s life that one becomes addicted to it, craving more potent doses from other sources, leading to them killing or harming others in real life to receive such a boost. But using this logic, horror films should also be breeding grounds for future murderers and psychopaths, which is completely unheard of.
The difference between horror films and gory games is that in an FPS you are the one doing the killing, and this is what makes parents and guardians worry about their child`s mental well-being after playing such games. I believe this is where the idea that video games cause violence has its origins (Parents thinking their children are playing violent games simply to kill without consequences).
Although gory video games do provide an adrenaline rush, that isn`t the only reason people play them. Logging on to a game with your friend to fight a common enemy is an underrated aspect of gaming. To be fighting off an advancing army and see your friend doing the same next to you creates a sense of comradery unlike what can be made from, for example, reading the same book. It takes a small sliver of the brotherhood formed in actual army battalions and brings it back to civilians.
Additionally, a large majority of the games that have come out in recent years feature violence of some kind, whether it be against aliens, animals, or Sith lords. In fact, 8 out of 10 of the best games to come out last year feature some form of violence, the two outliers being Animal Crossing: New Horizons and Tell me Why (Softonic,2020). This means that in order to play a next-gen game with up-to-date speed and graphics, it is almost impossible not to be exposed to violence no matter your intention.
It is very common to experience short bursts of anger (sometimes leading to violence) while playing video games. But this has nothing to do with getting hooked on adrenaline. In actual fact, the vast majority of real-life violence caused by video games is due to frustration (Gentile, D., 2005). This can be caused by failing a level right before a checkpoint, losing a game by just a few points, or the opposition scoring just before the buzzer. The reactions to these events have been known as raging. This can manifest itself in throwing a controller, smashing a keyboard, or swearing profusely, but rarely with violence directed at other people. It is similar to the emotions you feel when your favorite character dies in a book or film but heightened by the sense of connection you feel with a character you can control the actions of.
That is another reason why games, in general, are so fun and popular. When you not only observe the experiences of the protagonists but also experience them yourself, you become more attached and invested in their story, leading to louder cheers at their victories, longer cries at their deaths, and stronger anger at their losses. For example, Red Dead Redemption II`s (2018) protagonist Arthur Morgan is diagnosed with tuberculosis around halfway through the game`s story. After that point, his condition gradually worsens, with his face getting visibly more gaunt and sickly as the game goes on. As well as that, if you were to check on Arthur`s health in the character menu at any point, you would be met with a skull symbol, indicating his inevitable death. After this, players searched every store in the Read Dead world for some sort of tonic to save Arthur, but to no avail. When he eventually dies in Chapter 6 of the game, it can go one of two ways, depending on the choices the player made in-game. In one ending, Arthur slowly passes, watching the sunset. On the other, he has his face blown off with a revolver. The way that the player has a part to play in Arthur's end only serves to make his demise even more gut-wrenching.
One aspect of this debate that isn`t arguable is that children can be exposed to vulgar language in games that they then choose to repeat in real life. Whether the source is a scripted cutscene or another real person in multiplayer, children hear these words in a game they love so think it is okay to say them. Multiplayer written chats do have banned words, usually resulting in a line of asterisks where the foul language was, but voice chats are harder to regulate. Verbal abuse can be considered violence, hence why I feel it is relevant.
To summarize what has been stated, there is no evidence that real-life violence is directly caused by the violence seen in video games. Almost all modern games feature an aspect of violence, so it is sometimes hard to weave around it. Games that do feature violence do not exclusively feature violence, but can also hold heartwarming stories and characters. A child isn`t a psychopath for enjoying killing people in-game but is rather being affected by instincts that once protected us from harm. However, there are negative issues that can arise from young children playing games meant for an older audience. Nevertheless, the origins of the idea that video games cause violence (concerned parents) lead me to believe that violence in its more extreme forms abuse, murder, and lashing out cannot be sourced back to violence in video games.