There are thousands of titles that don’t use death as a penalty: Look at the scores of puzzle games, racing games, arcade/reflex style games (Shooting Gallery titles as old as Duck Hunt and as recent as Police Trainer/Dance Dance Revolution). The musical titles like Para Para Paradise, Guitar Freaks, Guitar Hero, Rock Band and so on. Nintendo titles like Wario Ware, Wii Sports, Wii Fit and so on.
There’s a few dozen games right there pulled out of the hat. We can go even more in depth and get to the PC side of things, with games like Sim City, Diner Dash, Chess and so on.
What bugs me about this arguement and any arguement leaning towards “gentler games” is that they’re all around you all of the time, but if you are only playing games where you personally die or the goal is to kill others, then chances are you put the cash down and the time into it because you found the concept interesting… and I believe that’s what it comes down to: How far can you go in a virtual game to deal with virtual consequences that you are unwilling/unable to do/take in real life.
Many millions of people out there played Grand Theft Auto, sure… but many millions more played Super Mario Brothers. “Death” is a consequence of both titles, but one allows you to steal cars, murder entire populations and have war declared on you: While the other requires you to wiggle a wiimote, shoot stars at the screen and soar through a galaxy via star-portals.
Whichever you choose, I feel, is up to you. Me? I love Mario, but I also love super violent video games just because I find them kind of comical. Ever see bodily mutilation in some of the older Mortal Kombat titles? It’s like, while a person explodes, 12–15 legs will fly out of the blood geyser: Just for effect.