Can Enhanced Authenticity Be A Dangerous Progression?
BayonettaThis story really got me thinking.
Not so much about the inherent difficulties for gamers when their interactive hobby continues to resemble virtual reality more and more with every passing year. That's what Medal of Honor executive producer Greg Goodrich was talking about, but it led me to the interesting question: can more realistic violence create serious problems? Most will quickly say that violent games have ratings and that movies have been putting horrific stuff on the big screen for decades. But at the same time, we have to acknowledge that gaming is an interactive hobby, and the belief that we're actually "doing something" is more potent with more realism and authenticity. As we continue to advance in this area, might it be dangerous, even for well-adjusted adults? Essentially, if you really think about it, some of the more over-the-top action games could be accurately considered to be "killing simulators" in the not-so-distant future. I'm not in favor of censorship here but I've always been a firm believer that you can always go too far.
Personally, I think I'd start to feel a little uneasy when we get to the point where killing someone really does look too much like killing a real human. Take last year's Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, for instance: just about everyone I know, Arnold included, felt - at the very least - uneasy during that airport scene. This proves something to me. I just saw it and I didn't really find it enjoyable; in fact, I didn't want to watch any more of it. Looking five, ten, fifteen years down the road, I'm starting to wonder if I'll even be able to play those games that make me feel this way. But perhaps the question is, will it have a marked psychological impact? Gamers often frown at studies but I really think this is one bit of research thought ought to be conducted.
P.S. The pic here is an example of "cartoon-y violence" from Bayonetta. This obviously isn't the type of violence I speak of, but it's a solid picture, no?
4/14/2010 9:09:59 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (156 posts)
kevinater321
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 9:39:30 PM
Reply
1 up, 1 down
Scarecrow
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 9:43:06 PM
Reply
But the more real things get, the more gruesome it could be. Fine for most genres, except for shooters. Unless they handle it "properly."
0 up, 0 down
piratedrunk
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 9:47:51 PM
Reply
When the victim is someone who is obviously a terrible person themselves it makes it easier but if it is without any sense of provocation I think it would be taking it too far to make it feel anything close to real.
6 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:00:52 PM
Reply
But maybe that says something though, because I'm completely non-violent, and against violence in real life situations unless there is no other option.
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 4/14/2010 10:01:47 PM
11 up, 0 down
rogers71
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:07:18 PM
I would agree with Ben on his point about gaming 10 or 15 years down the road. If they released a manhunt in 1080P and you were executing someone with ultra realistic graphics, it could do a number to someone whose psyche is already tweaked. It is definitely a fine line and one I am sure will be crossed. Start your psychology class now Ben. We may need you in the near future.
2 up, 0 down
VicTheMighty
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:16:46 PM
And yeah there is nothing wrong with it beeing too realistic. You know the point is that you won't be trying to rip your buddies head off outta curiosity since anyway you already know what it looks like thanks to a game :D :D :D lol
Last edited by VicTheMighty on 4/14/2010 10:17:48 PM
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:48:51 PM
0 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:03:24 PM
Reply
GoW at least has context. Ancient Greece was bloody and brutal. To dumb it down just wouldn't be accurate. Man Hunt creators should be ashamed of them selves.
The MW2 airport scene was kinda weird, but it had context. So i didn't squirm over it.
4 up, 2 down
rogers71
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:10:19 PM
As for Saw, that is definitely violence and gore just for the sake of violence and gore.
1 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:12:56 PM
Last edited by Jawknee on 4/14/2010 10:18:12 PM
1 up, 1 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:53:57 PM
2 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:57:34 PM
Last edited by Jawknee on 4/14/2010 11:01:35 PM
1 up, 0 down
SvenMD
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 8:53:07 AM
Would you watch?
0 up, 0 down
Akuma07
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 9:21:39 AM
A scene from a game will NEVER make me uneasy, because no matter how real it is, i will ALWAYS be able to distinguish between reality and virtual reality.
End of story.
1 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:35:58 PM
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 4/15/2010 2:36:16 PM
1 up, 0 down
rogers71
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:30:02 PM
1 up, 0 down
CaptRon
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:09:44 PM
Reply
5 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:15:07 PM
0 up, 1 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:56:08 PM
0 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:01:03 PM
I mean really, where do we draw the line?
Last edited by Jawknee on 4/14/2010 11:05:51 PM
1 up, 2 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:08:28 PM
More people have been maimed or killed in the name of censorship than by the lack of it.
5 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:30:33 PM
I don't think anyone should be censored, we just need boundaries. For children...haha
Last edited by Jawknee on 4/14/2010 11:31:42 PM
2 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:49:51 AM
0 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:51:10 PM
I also like the direction Ben is taking with his approach to this sort of thing. While I understand things like this aren't going to make people go out and kill people, there is an inherent problem from a psychological point of view if you find yourself desensitized to this sort of content. It would actually be fairly accurate (although shallowly analyzed) to say that if things like MW2's airport scene made you squeemish, you probably have a more-or-less healthy psyche.
As a rule (ignoring the low-percentage of exceptions), humans are wired naturally to rely on other humans and protect one another's way of life. That's why most people, despite their upbringing, have such a problem with death and violence. How often do you hear of soldiers or police needing follow-up counseling after their first kill or extremely violent encounter? Often. Because it isn't natural. In fact, it's natural to raise a child in non-violence, but takes mental breaking points to make or raise them into killers.
The most efficient front line soldiers are desensitized ones, for obvious reasons. I am not indicating that games and movies are going to one day make us all natural killers or make us unmoved by murder, but it is definitely something to seriously mull over, in terms of mental health, if there's any risk for desensitization.
The only thing for me, as a counseling psychologist, that would severely worry me, is that there is plenty of research to support the fact that desensitization can adversely impact any forward progress of an individual (especially youth) that could be at-risk for being suicidal. Obviously, in that case, you are dealing with someone with a very insecure psyche, and interactive violence with extreme realism could easily have a negative impact. That's my only "serious" worry.
1 up, 0 down
VicTheMighty
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:14:17 PM
Reply
Bring on the simulator I say!!!! You never know when those alien b@st@rds are going to fall on us!!!!! lol XD
3 up, 0 down
Alienange
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:16:03 PM
Reply
It already has a marked psychological impact. Youtube taught me that.
I personally think games need to stay games. I'm all for better graphics and sound, but at a certain point, realism just doesn't have a place in games. Especially the "violent" type of realism.
7 up, 2 down
VicTheMighty
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:19:31 PM
Man I am still waiting for an NHL game where your actual hockey stick is a samurai sword.
But I get your point. And that is why there is a rating on games.
Mature games should not be sold to children and parents need to be responsible.
3 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:23:38 PM
Yup.
5 up, 0 down
Tim Speed24
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 7:53:10 AM
I mean when I hear some of the comments in the forums that somebody just let their 5 yr old play MW2....I shake my head.
How many '5 year olds' are being allowed to play GOWIII because Dad is playing it?
0 up, 0 down
DemonNeno
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:30:43 PM
Reply
YES! Realism can screw with people, including adults. If it can make you think twice about it, odds are it's left some sort of an impact on you. Is it any worse than a sad ending? Or getting stuck in traffic? I don't know.
1 up, 0 down
The CEO
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:34:01 PM
Reply
6 up, 1 down
NeoHumpty
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:51:30 PM
Reply
P.S. I love horror movies.
And yes, "No Russian" was a slaughter. Just as much of a slaughter as in Dragon Age when I killed all of those elves for the trophy. They were pixels.
5 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 10:58:14 PM
Reply
3 up, 0 down
SvenMD
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 8:58:54 AM
1 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:04:44 PM
Reply
Last edited by LittleBigMidget on 4/14/2010 11:09:17 PM
1 up, 6 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:48 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:51 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:52 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:53 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:54 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:54 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:54 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:54 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:56 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:25:57 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:03 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:03 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:04 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:04 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:05 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:05 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:09 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:10 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:12 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:12 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:12 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:17 PM
0 up, 0 down
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:26:19 PM
0 up, 0 down
SvenMD
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 8:25:13 AM
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:50:09 PM
1 up, 0 down
Banky A
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 9:36:38 AM
Trust me though, GT still has most of the transmission physics right. Who would actually want to stall in a game when racing online? Haha. No kids and no adults hopefully.
Besides, that's what getting a G25, G27 or a Fanatec wheel is for, since they have clutches so you can practice heel-and-toe.. like a pro'.
;D
0 up, 0 down
SolidFantasy
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:23:51 PM
Reply
Nobody is doing the kind of things they do on GTA. I always thought those games proved other wise to the VG violence naysayers.
2 up, 0 down
BikerSaint
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:27:05 PM
Reply
Now with that said, I hate most censorship so I'm for realism, & besides I seriously doubt that any of those real killings were caused by playing video games.
No "snuff" video games though, that's where I think every gamer would draw the line in the sand for censorship on that.
2 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:57:09 PM
2 up, 2 down
MyWorstNightmar
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:18:49 AM
World, I see masked Tom Cruise is back.
I still miss the hawaiian shirt ninja. Bring him back sooner rather than later! At least that is my girlish fantasy.
1 up, 1 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:21:37 AM
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 4/15/2010 12:28:59 AM
2 up, 1 down
Jawknee
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:19:24 AM
it was right wingers calling bush those nasty names! Damn you wingnuts!
2 up, 2 down
Highlander
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:45:48 PM
Reply
Personally I think that we are too close to the uncanny valley on violence already. Any closer to that situation where the game resembles an enhanced authenticity, "more real than real" so to speak, and I think we will cross a line we don't need to cross.
For me a game is a game as long as it's clearly a game. If a first or third person action game is so realistic that when an enemy is beheaded you can pick our anatomically correct arteries, spinal column, esophagus and other details of the bloody stump, then it's gone too far. It's ceased to be a 'game'. When someone is disemboweled and their insides fall out precisely as they really would because the physics are so real and the modeling of the enemy body is so real that the results of being disemboweled can be accurately modeled in real time, then again, we have gone too far.
In a first person action game, a shooter for example, when shooting enemies they fall and die in a realistic manner with photo-realistic detail, then once again I think we have have crossed from game to something else.
The scene you mention feeling uncomfortable about, that's the kind of thing that people will argue should be there because it's artistic, it makes you think. Well, perhaps, but is Call of Duty really a game that's laden with social commentary, or is it an action game?
BIker, you said no "snuff" games. OK, but we're at the point where a video game that was rendered in 480p could present photo-realistic deaths of characters and enemies. Remembering that the experience of the gamer is what matters, how is it different that the gamer experiences a photo-realistic simulation of a deal instead of a real one when they can't honestly tell the difference?
If a game can be realistic enough that it's possible to be unsure of whether the scene depicted or not is real, aren't w getting to the point where a virtual snuff game could be made? Have we already got there and we're just desensitized to it and ignore it?
I think that violent entertainment is more dangerous socially speaking than sexual entertainment. I think that the interactive nature of video games makes them potentially more dangerous because you are acting out the fantasy. We live in an increasingly violent society. Have video games simply reflected the increasing violence, or have they re-enforced it in the more vulnerable minds of the young? I'm not blaming video games for it, but could they be a contributing factor? Possibly.
Perhaps it's time to concentrate on the art of games and not the realism?
Last edited by Highlander on 4/14/2010 11:49:16 PM
1 up, 1 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:54:36 PM
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 4/14/2010 11:55:08 PM
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:07:11 AM
I think that the distinction is that the centaur is clearly unreal, but a realistically modeled human enemy would be more difficult to separate from real. However, it's still an interesting question.
Perhaps we should be asking ourselves the question "Just because we can, should we?"
1 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:22:19 AM
3 up, 0 down
BikerSaint
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:26:00 AM
There's some very thought provoking questions here.
Just beacause on one side I don't like any censorship, but on the other hand I wouldn't want to see video game violence become too damned real either.
OH BTW, I left you a article to check out in yesterday's "PSP/Touchscreen Functionality" thread.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:35:04 AM
...Interesting. That would be a great controller to have around in case a controller for any of your game systems broke - you'd have an instant replacement. Nice.
Last edited by Highlander on 4/15/2010 1:37:51 AM
0 up, 0 down
booze925
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:55:27 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
RadioHeader
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 5:28:55 AM
1 up, 0 down
wano
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 8:06:35 PM
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 11:56:37 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
frostface
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:12:04 AM
Reply
I think games will follow in much this fashion. To see nudity in a game is nothing now much the same as it is in the movies but years ago at the pinacle when the people behind the games/movies where pushing the boundarys on what was common decency of the time, of course there where people who had something to say about it but did everyone who watched these movies where a lady flashed a pair of boobs become perverts? Sure some people did but the rest of us just acted like adults. Then again it's not about being adult, it's about being well adjusted and more to do with your natural surroundings, where you live, the type of life you live and how the everyday trails and tribulations of life affect you as person. This could also attribute to the types of games you enjoy most. Some people play for fun some to escape reality. Some play Rathet and Clanks for fun, some play CoD's because the boss is a pain in the arse in work and it feels nice to shoot up some baddies to vent that stress. Some take it too far and grab a real gun and shoot the boss but just because one or two people take it to the extreme and live that dream, the rest of us are contant to leave it in the fictional world and would never even realistically consider it.
Hi to lot of yis from Thailand btw, was just popping in to say hello!!!
Last edited by frostface on 4/15/2010 12:34:32 AM
1 up, 0 down
rogers71
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:31:08 AM
5 up, 1 down
frostface
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:37:42 AM
3 up, 0 down
Ultimadream
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:57:45 AM
1 up, 0 down
bigrailer19
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:12:46 AM
Reply
So which game was worse? well on a personal level MW2 didnt sit well with others, that scene as you said Ben you wanted it to be over as did I. I tried not even firing my gun but i got to a point where to get past it i had to take on the riot squad eventually.
But as far as how far can violence go I dont think GOW3 was pushing it because its all so fairy tale like. I mean greek mythology is just that a myth. a very brilliant story for the GOW series but we cant relate that to real life situations so both games are on a different level. One is about how we feel personally towards a scene, the other part of it would be how we react to how realistic violence in games has become, due to the graphical capabilities of this generation of consoles.
Its tough to say but im ok with the way things are now, and i had no problems with GOW3 in fact thats what that game was bread on, CHAOS!
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 4/15/2010 12:16:31 AM
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:23:57 AM
0 up, 0 down
bigrailer19
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 9:20:23 AM
0 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:44:49 PM
lol
And with her having a minor in psych and me having a major, I can't pretend she's wrong or feign ignorance that she is probably wrong... Afterall, we were in some of those classes together! Know how hard it is to argue with "Remember when Dr. Nydham showed us those various studies about yada yada yada blah blah blah" ??
I'll tell you how hard it is... that is generally the moment I resign to either switching games or turning it off. lol
0 up, 0 down
bigrailer19
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:15:13 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:24:31 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
rogers71
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:33:50 AM
As for your earlier question about the Roman Gladiators. You wouldn't be able to find tickets to those events if they started that back up.
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:42:06 AM
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:39:00 AM
Reply
It doesn't matter if it's fake. It matters how our brain perceives it. That's part of psychology: sadly, our minds are easily tricked and when it comes to this, it can have an impact. It might be subconscious, but it'll be there.
5 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:44:34 AM
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 4/15/2010 12:47:48 AM
5 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:47:25 AM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
Dante399
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:48:30 AM
Reply
Those games with such violence should be rated as such and the consumer should be warned before buying them. And plus, violence nowadays is everywhere, movies depict more violent realistic scenes than video games.
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:50:26 AM
2 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:19:28 AM
That's a pretty scary justification.
1 up, 0 down
Dante399
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 5:52:48 AM
0 up, 0 down
___________
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:27:17 AM
Reply
why is violence and games the scape goat?
i mean look at some of the sh*t south park gets away with and thats only rated M here which has absolutely no age restrictions what so ever!
family guy at times can be just as bad.
i know there shows, so in a seance there not interactive but so freaking what?
take the episode where cartman freezes himself because he cant wait for the release of the nintendo wii, towards the end theres a fight where multiple heads get blown off with copious blood.
now thats ok for a M rated cartoon show, but have the same thing in L4D2 and its not ok for a MA rated game which has a age rating of 15 appose to no age restriction.
or take another episode of south park, the one where theres a talent show and jimmy cant stop getting a boner, so multiple people give him advice on a solution.
than he ends up sticking it too a hooker.
so a 8 year old boy having sex with a hooker is ok for a M rated TV show which again has no age restrictions what so ever, but removing a few heads in dark sector is not ok for a mA rated game.
which is worse?
underage sex, or a few heads blown off?
and another thing, i really would not mind if at least ratings were consistent but there not.
i mean look at god of war 3, it is the goriest thing i have ever seen, video game, movie or whatever.
i have never seen something more gory than GOW3, thats ok for a MA rating but dark sector, silent hill homecoming, L4D2 are not ok for a MA rating.
GOW3 is 10 times worse than all of those games put together!
i really can not see the logic in that.
0 up, 1 down
Highlander
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:31:50 AM
The point is not the cartoon violence, it's the "real" (as in more real than real) violence in the interactive and photo-realistic games that are possible.
Oh, and BTW, South Park is a cartoon. You can't compare South Park - a relatively crudely produced cartoon - against a game that has realistic imagery.
I could go on to discuss more than the simple visual differences, but to be honest, I don't see much point since it's crystal clear you're trying to create a false comparison.
Last edited by Highlander on 4/15/2010 2:34:38 AM
1 up, 0 down
___________
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 7:46:30 AM
0 up, 1 down
just2skillf00l
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:45:09 AM
Reply
However, as the industry progresses, games which take on a photo-realistic art style while also containing very violent and graphic events and activities; it is plausible to expect said actions to be taken too far. I believe if Heavy Rain ever meets GOW3 and produces a child, that game will go too far.
Last edited by just2skillf00l on 4/15/2010 2:47:48 AM
1 up, 0 down
Ergi
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:41:12 AM
Reply
Science just solves this whole where do we draw the line problem by using an ethical committee.
This would however give more censorship and more restrictions, which I don't really want but it may be necessary. Otherwise who is gonna draw the line? I'm out of ideas.
I sure don't know when real gets too real for the masses.
0 up, 0 down
wano
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 8:29:13 PM
0 up, 0 down
OriginalSin
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:48:24 AM
Reply
Needless to say is I saw some pretty F***** up sh!t. Bike crashes, stabbings, gun shots...dead and mutilated people...
(Now many might ask why I would do that. Well at a stage I thought of becoming a trauma doctor... I realized then I do not have a stomach for it and I really don't like blood...well not that much blood anyway and luckily for me I wasn't that smart to become one, but still i was curious to see what I gave up on so I went)
Now to the point I would like to make. Sure video games are becoming pretty realistic but the have a LONG way to go before we reach that type of realism. That is a whole different story.
And let's say for argument sake that we do get to that point, in my opinion anyone who'd want to play games that show that type of realism and gore are sick f***** puppies. And even worse are the ones who will make them. Snuff games so to speak (even if made) won't sell well. If they do I have lost all faith in our future and humanity.
Now with 3D gaming literally around the corner it might get tricky to draw a line between too much and not enough. But for now and for the near future at least I think we are okay.
Even thou GOW was super brutal once I switched the game off those images didn't haunt me and stay with me.... when I helped out at the Trauma Center that stuff screwed me over for a long time. That for me is the difference. One is a well done HD graphic based video game with brutal violence the other is real life with ,real blood and real pain and fear...
If they ever get to that level in games I won't want that experience at all and the people who do will leave with their minds a bit more twisted, and they would have problems to begin with. This is a very interesting issue and I would like to see a study being done,hell I will even take part in such a study...
Do games breed inner violence?....maybe not, but somewhere there might be one or two individuals that have a unstable minds not knowingly unlock something that would otherwise not have happened...
One last thought. What about small kids that witness a brutal killing or murder or witness a father committing suicide in front of them... they might suppress those memories for years, until something a game like that or even movies might trigger... Just a thought.
1 up, 0 down
little dreamer
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 4:37:18 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
DemonNeno
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 6:22:13 AM
Reply
As you mentioned Ben, when your brain is tricked, things do change. When I worked in the EMS system, things get gut wrenching at times. Holding apart a obese mans' surgical incision so the doctor could dab all the fluid out with a piece of gauze really makes you tighten up a little bit! I'm talking about a 450lbs+ man with a incision approx 7" deep just above his hip and inches away from his knee.
I don't get that feeling from a game. People wonder about the graphical realism of a game, but don't realize that many people think by associating themselves to a situation. This is how we get our personalities.
Regardless of how realistic a game is, there are plenty of people who walk away from it feeling "different". It's subtle, but you may recognize it if you think about it long enough.
This is where we face a problem. Something that may cross your mind as a possibility for yourself may land you into a handful of issues. Not only do I think that just the violence of the game is bad if it comes photo realistic and incredibly accurate, but I also see a problem with where some of these story lines drag your mindset.
The problem is, the more we look up to our characters as people of our own society, instead of pixels of a video game, the more the psychological threat becomes relevant.
Realistically, we DO know what we are engaging in. It's what we make out of it that'll change this. It's how we game that'll change this. It's the personal traits that'll either leave you vulnerable or probably not phase you as a whole person.
Those who play games for hours after endless hours, day after day are obviously at the greatest exposure rate and will have the most issues. You can OD on gaming. If it's your job, that's a different story. You're kinda screwed, then... Although I'd love such work! lol
I also think a lot of this character personalization needs to get tamed just a tad. If we can copy our OWN faces into these games, which a few games I know of did and did it well enough, I think that's gone too far. We don't need to associate ourselves at such a personal level that we see ourselves killing and what-not. I personally think that'll trigger some Schizophrenia.
Will it cause people to become Schizo? I highly doubt it, but there are certain things that'll progressively make it worse. I do believe something like this, which such a person can learn to enjoying being, can indeed make a bad situation for someone a lot worse.
2 up, 0 down
LightShow
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 6:56:26 AM
Reply
Most people I know play games to get away from realism, whether its to play football without getting wore out or to smash robots with a multi-purposed wrench. as games become more real, they will lose their appeal to the majority of gamers, myself included.
Developers might want to listen to their "centrist" population of devoted, yet not hardcore or casual, gamers. the centrists are by far the most populous
0 up, 0 down
JackC8
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 7:35:41 AM
Reply
As far as "scientific" studies, whenever people look for a relationship between cause A and effect B, anyone demonstrating effect B has it blamed on cause A, when it could actually be caused by a whole host of other factors. Those things are quite often biased. Usually the people who want to conduct that sort of research have some pre-existing opinions that they're looking to validate with the research, no matter what the research actually shows.
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 10:22:22 AM
Short-term and long-term studies do indeed exist for a reason.
0 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:08:07 PM
The most trustworthy studies are rarely published in any sort of public forum, especially since it costs money to publish anything, period. The ones you hear in the news are either highly relevant or supported financially by someone who could benefit from a bias. True psychological research using the scientific method and a variety of research strategies easily avoid bias.
In any controversial study, you will have studies set up to support both sides, and then a couple organizations will do honest research with the best interests of health care clients. If you know where to look, (Ebsco Host is a great resource for any of you who have access through academic institutions or know someone in a field related to psychology or research. Get help from your school librarian on how to conduct useful research using that tool) you can find honest to goodness research. Often this type of research can be confusing to read to someone not used to analyzing data, but any psychology undergrad could help you out.
Just be careful not to dismiss research that doesn't support facts you want it to support with a predisposition like "researchers are gonna fudge the numbers". The fact remains, as Ben just said, researchers know how to research. If any one person had a nickel for every time a researcher set out to prove something and changed his hypothesis, well... they'd better give a lot to charitable research!!
0 up, 0 down
DeathOfChaos
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 8:33:41 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 10:21:04 AM
It's a change most people don't recognize in themselves. This is what can be harmful, even to adults.
5 up, 0 down
DeathOfChaos
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 11:22:13 AM
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:32:00 PM
5 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:09:08 PM
EDIT: I mean I second what Ben said.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 4/15/2010 1:09:51 PM
1 up, 0 down
DemonNeno
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 6:49:58 PM
"Smart" people are generally the weirdest people you'll meet. It seems like they meet some sort of boredom with the general population and float into their very own little worlds. I have a couple friends who are absolute genius' and a blast to hang out with, but their personalities stick out like a sore thumb.
"Smart" and "stupid" mean nothing in regards to your mental state of mind. This is a build of a character formed from what we experience. That experience is what worries people.
I have absolutely no masters' degree in anything. I have ASE certs and an EMT-B license. Dealing with psych patients for years teaches you mental conditions do not mean these people are stupid.
Just to be clear, psych patients are on the deep end of the pool, I'd imagine standing on the shallow side. The rest of that gap between is where anyone in the world can possibly be. Calling people "stupid" well do yourself absolutely nothing to understand. Not that Im offended by what you said, just trying to pitch in my 2 cents about things.
Keep it real! And sane. :D
0 up, 0 down
DeathOfChaos
Monday, April 19, 2010 @ 12:41:22 PM
Last edited by DeathOfChaos on 4/19/2010 12:46:45 PM
0 up, 0 down
Arvis
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 8:35:58 AM
Reply
-Arvis
0 up, 0 down
spiderboi
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 10:07:59 AM
Reply
kidding aside, this isn't something we should limit to realism, or games for that matter. A kid holding a toy gun. Isn't that enough for him to wonder "hey what if i tried pulling off the trigger on someone?" this isn't a question of realism. This is a question on the people playing these games. If they can handle them, thats the big ?. So many times some random kid decides to play rambo for real not because of games or media (but it did have some influence), the main reason is that he could not handle it.
0 up, 0 down
Captain Cod
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 11:24:51 AM
Reply
Even so, people enjoy watching / playing these things yet when they watch a video of e.g...a real Russian excecution where someone gets his head sliced off by a combat knife, they pretty much want to barf out their breakfast. Hypocrisy I tell you.
But the fact is some can still bear this kind of stuff from fictional entertainment because it simply isn't real.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:28:52 PM
Reply
Regarding violent video games and realism. Perhaps the majority can bear this stuff without apparent change. However, the more vulnerable members of society may not come through it completely unscathed.
What if the effect on 99.9% of players is to slightly loosen their innate self control of their aggression? Could it be that the cumulative effect of playing violent games loosens the control of more vulnerable people sufficiently that they do become more aggressive? Could it be that the increased aggression leads to violent confrontations? Could it be that in a small number of cases those confrontations lead to deadly violence?
We used to talk about the butterfly effect in various fields. You know the concept that in complex and chaotic systems a small, almost insignificant, change to the initial conditions can lead to drastically different outcomes. Is it really too much to consider that subtle changes in the sub-conscious ability to control aggression and violent behavior of some people might result in more violent confrontations?
Laws in our society exist to prevent extremes of behavior. We wouldn't all drive at 100MPH if there were no limit, but some would ad at that speed any error is fatal and could be fatal for others, so we have a law to prevent speeding. We have all sorts of laws that moderate our behavior in society. Sometimes it's not laws but simple rules, such as rules about the content of movies.
If there is a chance that extreme violence and realism in action games could contribute to more violence, then isn't it better for society as a whole if the extreme violence in games is held in check?
See for me the logical end of the argument that says "no censorship" is that games simply become more depraved. Where do we draw the line? If there is no censorship, what if a game is created (well in truth, as deplorable as it is, such a 'game' already exists) where the player - in full HD first person glory - commits a rape? The no censorship argument says we shouldn't do anything, it's just pixels, it's just 'art', or it's just a game. Is it just a game now?
Is it?
I don't think so.
4 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 12:33:53 PM
There is indeed a line where art can and will become dangerous, and I think people need to understand that.
3 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:35:11 PM
However, there is a fundamental difference between the societal reasoning of history and now in present day during this video game 'no censorship' philosophy. And that difference is this: In the past, the argument for artistic change has been due to things like personal expression and hurt or political commentary. The difference now is that we just want a new way to be entertained. Certainly art has always been entertaining, but NEVER for the sole purpose of entertainment. At least not in terms of forward progression or artistic freedom. There was ALWAYS a motivating factor to promote change to BETTER the human condition. Definitely not the case in this situation, especially in terms of the rape scene Highlander is referring to or the violence Ben predicts in this article.
The concept that "games" (if you can call it a game) exist with such perverse motives is a commentary in itself to the desensitization we experience today, as well as to our inability to recognize or appreciate what is truly artistic.
This should not even be an argument of whether or not someone could handle it. How many people truly even possess the ability to completely block out any form of influence from the things you subject yourself to? Shouldn't we all know by now that "What goes in, must come out"?
It might not make you a killer, but I'm a firm believer that in essence...
"You are what you eat!"
4 up, 0 down
coverton341
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:42:38 PM
Reply
What I think is more to the point and what I take from this and Ben stated it earlier in the comments is what happens when the line between game and reality gets to the blur point. What happens when technology takes us to a point where we cannot differentiate to whether the character is live action or graphic design.
I will go on record right now as saying that as well adjusted as I like to think I am and as well as I can separate my entertainment from reality if and when we get to that point, dismembering a person will have an effect on my psyche and I feel that is a given for just about everyone regardless of what you want to think.
There was a video from a Bosnian or other Eastern European country leaked to the internet that was evidence in a string of serial killings. I came across this video by happen-stance and watched it. I kept telling myself it wasn't real because I just couldn't process what I was watching. I eventually had to dig up the truth about the video and found out that I had indeed just watched an honest to (insert whatever here) snuff film. It didn't sit well with me then and it still doesn't now. It had a profound psychological effect and now when I see yellow bags I cringe and my gut gets tight. That is after a 10 minute video that I was not interacting with in the least.
This makes me very concerned about the effects of watching and interacting with a game that can last anywhere from 5 to 50 hours and have that game be so realistic it is impossible to differentiate between life and pixel. Especially when that game is depicting killing other human beings be it for an artistic point or be it out of shear gratuity. I have no idea if it would make me personally neurotic about more things than yellow shopping bags or if it would desensitise me to the point where if a person was disembowelled in front of me would I care. Either option doesn't sit well with me because I like the fact that I can use a shovel and not become squeamish and I feel it is healthy that if I witnessed a person die I would have a strong emotional reaction instead of a flat affect.
I will argue against censorship until I am blue in the face but I think we as a society should at least have higher standards and drive the industry away from such things and like someone said towards a more artistic approach to games.
Again taking from someone else, games should remain games, life should remain life, let's move a step back from needing to have games mimic life and have them strive to touch our imaginations instead.
Done ranting sorry for the novella.
5 up, 1 down
Grown_Gamer
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 1:48:52 PM
Reply
I don't think that any developer should hold themselves back for fear of crossing some line that may or may not exist. If a game has a great story and just so happens to be violent, should the developer then scale down the graphics and gameplay for those who can't handle it mentally?
There will always be impressionable types out there who will be easily influenced by various forms of media, but they don't represent the majority, therefore guidelines and ratings shouldn't be based around those individuals.
As an adult that has never been in trouble with the law, and someone who opposes violence except for self-defense purposes, I feel like I have the right to play video games that contain realistic violence, and I shouldn't have to come under any kind of scrutiny or feel as though I am flawed morally for doing so.
0 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:00:45 PM
"If a game has a great story and just so happens to be violent, should the developer then scale down the graphics and gameplay for those who can't handle it mentally?"
EDIT: You raise a good point with the "great story-happens to be violent" bit. This edit is just to make clear that I liked what you said here, which is why I quoted.
Certainly we open up a very good argument if there's purpose. In art, it is never frowned upon to talk about something dark in the human psyche if there's a purpose. Some of the best modern plays, for example, center around sever hurt in one or more character's lives. Canadian playwright Judith Thompson does this wonderfully and potently, I might add.
Would you not even slightly be opposed to senseless violence for the sake of being violent being accompanied by more real than real graphical detail? I still stand by the fact that any realistic violence can have an adverse effect on anybody of any background or psychological security.
Have people become so naive that something that glorifies violence is somehow artistic? It's one thing to admit and portray the reality of violence as something that happens in real life, but the direction games are going in today glorify the violence in a way that entertains instead of one that disdains.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 4/15/2010 2:03:22 PM
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:50:38 PM
I too don't buy into the concept that "everything" can be considered art, or that gratuitous violence can be considered art. I use as an example director Quentin Tarantino: now, I'm not saying he isn't an extremely talented and artistic individual, but it seems to me he is only capable of making a point - or rather, in some cases, attempting to make a point - through insane violence and in general, twisted situations. I'm wondering if he's capable of communicating his thoughts in any other manner.
There are lines to cross and regardless of ability and the inherent quality of the product in question - movie or game - I do believe we can go past the point of artistry and enter in the realm of dangerous pictures and ideas that can worm their way into even the most intelligent, well-adjusted minds.
2 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:23:31 PM
I'm reminded of the baying crowds that used to pack the Colosseum. They watched ever increasing levels of violence and violation, cheering and glorifying in the brutality. I don't think we doubt whether Roman society was damaged by the bread and circuses that accompanied the fall of Rome. Why do we doubt the danger of similar excess today?
0 up, 0 down
Arvis
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:40:40 PM
Because everybody everywhere truly believes that their world/country/sovereign state will be around forever. Sure, all the great empires of yore that controlled most of the world all ended eventually, but not theirs. Right?
If only moderation and balance were valued at all... *sigh*
-Arvis
0 up, 0 down
Grown_Gamer
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:13:26 PM
Reply
If a game has gratuitous violence with no real plot or storyline to back it up, I'm not interested. But I would hate to see a great game scaled back for fear of being "too realistic". I just think people should be more turned off by gratuity than by realism.
Last edited by Grown_Gamer on 4/15/2010 2:19:45 PM
0 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:18:54 PM
Last edited by Underdog15 on 4/15/2010 2:20:12 PM
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 2:42:26 PM
Reply
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 4/15/2010 3:04:41 PM
0 up, 0 down
rogers71
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:35:59 PM
Just kidding.....I think?
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:42:29 PM
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 4/15/2010 3:45:24 PM
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 9:23:29 PM
0 up, 0 down
Arvis
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 3:38:47 PM
Reply
-Arvis
4 up, 0 down
coverton341
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 5:25:19 PM
Seldom do men learn from the sources that have the most to offer. I mean history isn't there for us to learn from the mistakes of old is it...
0 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 11:04:52 AM
0 up, 0 down
dirdiggler
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 5:42:46 PM
Reply
Last edited by dirdiggler on 4/15/2010 5:44:10 PM
1 up, 2 down
Underdog15
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 9:12:11 AM
You sound like one of the many kids I immediately mute when playing MW2 for shouting ignorant insults at people like the N-word or telling me about your love affair with my middle-aged mother...
2 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 6:22:50 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
JMO_INDY
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 7:02:51 PM
Last edited by JMO_INDY on 4/15/2010 7:10:11 PM
2 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 7:20:40 PM
2 up, 0 down
JMO_INDY
Thursday, April 15, 2010 @ 7:36:50 PM
Last edited by JMO_INDY on 4/15/2010 7:38:20 PM
2 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 12:32:24 AM
You know what, the Romans didn't think they were affected by the goings on at the Colosseum either. It's like the 'boiling frog' story.
If you were to drop a frog into boiling water, it would most certainly jump out immediately, but if you were to drop it into tepid water and heat it gently, bu the time it realized it was boiling hot, it would be too late, and frog soup would be ready to serve.
You can't always perceive the change in yourself, you may not feel the temperature increase until it's so hot you are unable to do anything about it.
0 up, 0 down
JMO_INDY
Sunday, April 18, 2010 @ 10:13:54 PM
1 up, 0 down
dirdiggler
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 7:56:46 AM
Reply
0 up, 3 down
Underdog15
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 11:07:37 AM
Please see aforementioned comment about muting kids in MW2, as it seems to apply to you as well... it's only 8 or 9 comments up....
0 up, 0 down
dirdiggler
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 1:34:11 PM
Reply
0 up, 1 down
Underdog15
Friday, April 16, 2010 @ 3:11:01 PM
I think the point Highlander was trying to make towards your comment says it all. Basically, there are a ton of quality comments just prior to your post supporting numerous angles, then you come in with a very shortsighted and almost ignorant comment. It can be frustrating to those of us who have invested time in the discussion making quality observations only to have someone skip it all and add their fraction of what could be worth two cents with a comment that neither provokes thought nor offers a realistic point of view to consider.
In terms of this most recent post, a couple of things bug me that, on a normal occurrence, I would typically ignore.
First off, having a headset in a game like that is not pointless. Being a part of a clan or group of friends who are familiar with game styles and maps make good use of their communication abilities. By all means, add my PSN Underdog15 and play with my friends and I. We don't have high K/D and win ratios for nothing. I find it frustrating to play with people who don't communicate, hence why I only play MW2 if some of my RL or PSN friends are playing it.
Second, your comment on "if you don't like it, don't play it" philosophy has been addressed already by a few people who have made some intelligent observations (again... that's why it's frustrating for you to come in guns a-blazing without looking... like your MW2 strategy perhaps?). None of us want to re-write or paraphrase what we have already written. To fully grasp the truth behind the lack of understanding you're portraying, I recommend you read a bit, if it doesn't take you too long to do so.
Thirdly, I didn't call you a kid. I merely compared your comments to the ones you typically hear from the immature folks playing shooters online. If you want to get technical, I was merely comparing your words through the use of a simile. My quote said "You sound like...", and was not even originally directed towards you. So... I referred you to a simile that was used to describe someone else, which makes you a bit upset because you assumed that a child MUST be how I view you.
Well... in actuality... that is quite funny.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 4/16/2010 3:20:33 PM
0 up, 0 down
Dridion
Reply
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 @ 9:34:38 PM
Last edited by Dridion on 4/14/2010 9:35:07 PM