I think that war-based video games glamorize war. Agree or Disagree?

So do movies, other people that have not been to war, commercials etc.

I was going to include movies too but thought I’d keep it to video games for now. Is it right or wrong though?

Yes, agree.

I’m a Battlefield Bad Company 2 type of guy.
I wonder who would play these games if you got a drop to the floor electrical shock, every time you got shot.

Yes, I think they do. I can’t imagine how this new batch of young men who’ve played these video games their whole lives are going to react when they are in a real combat situation (if they ever are). Harsh.

@ChazMaz ha ha ha! Yes what?

@tranquilsea That’s my point! I find it disrespectful to the people that are in real combat! Plus as a teacher, a lot of kids in my class want to be soldiers but have no idea of the reality of it. Also, irresponsible parents let their kids (aged 7–10) play these 18-rated games and it messes with their sense of morality – and what hurts!
If someone gets shot on the game, they just get back up. How do you explain to them that it doesn’t happen like that in real life.
Wrong wrong wrong…

VR is not necessary a good thing.

In the past years, kids played outside. There were physical risks to most things. That was a lesson learned in itself.

Now we can play God and hit the reset button when things don’t work out as planned.

alot of things do. If you want a society without war. you wont find it on this planet.

I’m not sure. It’s a big step from manipulating characters on the screen to real life combat. Personally, I have a hard time with the images, but war is a fact of life in our society, and we shouldn’t protect our children from knowing it exists.

Some say that seeing pictures of dead bodies de-sensitizes them to it, but how is that any different than the daily news reports? It’s a matter of debate among psychologists and behaviorists.

P. s. Nobody seems to think dressing up like pirates glorifies thieving, raping, murderers, its just a matter of perspective.

@Mikewlf337 I completely agree. But isn’t it bad enough that there is real war without having children playing pretend war games where it’s graded on it’s life-like graphics and ‘blood’ splatters on your screen impairing your view when you get shot?
@YARNLADY I see where you’re coming from- and I don’t think we should shelter children from war. We learnt about WWII this year and the children were fascinated by the Nazis and concentration camps. Obviously as they’re only 8–9 we didn’t go in to too much detail as parent’s would have complained… but should they be seeing war as a ‘game’... that’s the centre of my argument…

@YARNLADY But dressing up as a pirate is a long way away from manipulating a pirate on the tv to thieve, rape and murder.

I suppose they do. Is that bad? Meh.
A love for violence is part of our genetic heritage as sophisticated monkeys. Whatcha gonna do?

I don’t think many game players are as mind-bogglingly stupid as to end up thinking real life war is just like in the video games, not even little kids. Of course it’s not the same thing. It’s fiction.

Hopefully one day entertainment will be the only thing that’s left of warfare.

Some do, others don’t. Some games focus on the history of war and expose people to important historical events that they might not otherwise be exposed to. If done correctly, games can also emphasize the destruction and sacrifice of war.

Not all war games are “fuck yeah let’s mow down these Nazis muhahaha”.

Regardless, there’s no reason to single out video games here. Plenty of movies, books, and TV shows glamorize war.

They’re not something that interests me at all but I don’t think they’re wrong to the point that they should be banned. Otherwise where do you draw the line? Movies too? Books? What about graphic but factual accounts? The lines between these things are blurred and defining what should be banned would be a (pardon the pun) legal minefield.

You are probably 100% right about this… but I don’t want to give up my Call of Duty :\

I think that gratuitous portrayals of violence is much worse than gratuitous portrayals of sex.

@MissCupid War is violent and in the entertainment industry violence sells. I guess people like to pretend to shoot at one another. I see no harm in it as long as the player knows reality from fantasy

Glamorizes? I don’t think so. I believe that it desensitizes people to the horrors of war, but Resident Evil is a popular franchise, as are Saw and Final Destination, yet I don’t hear nearly as much outcry there.

Also bear in mind how our society (in fact, our species) has been since long before the invention of video games, movies, etcetera. People are inherently violent. True, the entertainment industry capitalizes on that, but can you really blame people for making money giving other people what they want?

Everyone I know who have been in a war-zone (a real war-zone, not just camping in the desert) want no part of it.

these “games” are made to desensitize youth, so when they get sent to a real war, they won’t realize there is no replay in real life.

@DrBill

I just want to let you know how old and out-of-touch you sound right now.

I will admit to old, but if you ever see the horrors of war, you won’t want to see it ever again, not even on a simulated game screen.

@DrBill

I don’t doubt that, but the notion that war games delude children into thinking that real war is a virtual playground, that’s just ridiculous. The “youth” aren’t even the ones playing these games, but I guess that depends on your definition of the word “youth”.

I think that it is not me who is out of touch.

You’re right. Only young children play video games, and they are desensitized into thinking that killing people is okay, war is a game, and that they’ll just get to hit the reset button when they die. Also, rock and roll music turns children into devil-worshipers, and swing dancing is corrupting the innocence of our youth.

Me personal opinion again – I see online/video game violence as a reasonable alternative to acting out ones aggressions. It is only when a few mentally unbalanced individuals use the images as an excuse to act out in real life that there is a problem.

Yes they do glamorize war which is unnecessary, imo but that doesn’t mean when one plays these games, they are becoming more likely to consider war a good idea…some people who can’t separate reality and video games might be like this but their issues are bigger than video games.

I have played a lot of First person shooters and other war-like games, but I am still able to distinguish reality and electronic entertainment.

In my opinion, the people that take these games seriously and try to make it a reality are already mentally unstable and the video game just helped bring it out?

I love first person shooter and and violent video games.. and I’ve been playing them since I was a kid. I’m 28 now. I still don’t want to go out and actually shoot/injure/maim/kill another living creature. I also think that war is a tragedy. I’m with the others that believe that people who blame (or become obsessed enough with video games or movies to act them out) were already off to begin with.

I agree with @jerv.

Also, it’s just a medium. You make of it and take from it what you will.

It might, to a point, but play the game, and then go hit the front lines for real. I’m sure you’ll find that these games fail at depicting real war, and I don’t have to have been in a war to know that. (I’m sure Normandy didn’t actually have zombies, but yeah.)

As for glamorizing war in itself, it might be hard to believe, but a lot of these serious war emulation games concentrate on gameplay, (Tactics, evolution through success.) rather than reality.
I’ll say what I always say, if someone thinks war is awesome and truly defined by video games, then that’s not the game’s fault if that person has no common sense or any urge to check out some actual history, or at least, nasty online websites that always show a buncha dead prisoners and stuff such as.

Having done it there is no way to glamorize war. But since war is an historical constant, it is not surprising that the images show up in entertainment media. Sort of like asking if prime time TV glamorizes depravity

I shot a guy in Modern Warfare 2, American dollar bills instantly exploded from all parts of his body almost like a blood-splatter. What the fuck kind of feature is that in a game where every single detail is supposed to be devoted to being as realistic as possible?

I call subliminal conditioning! Someone has to wear the subliminal-conditioning-of-the-world’s-youth-to-be-violent-paid-murderers-hat!

@zophu I don’t understand that. Is it supposed to be the “money shot”?? The first few times it happened to me I was so confused.

That’s a good point though, about how certain things are thrown into an otherwise realistic game that are totally out of left field and take it down a notch.

I believe it does glamorize war, but that’s mainly what most people want.

Why else would there be so many war games? I don’t know how to phrase it, but “people are inherently violent” as said by @jerv sounds right to me.

People supply what others demand, if people are not entertained by the “realities of war”, then it’d only be sensible of them to make games that make people feel good and entertained about; themselves, the nation, whatever.

Nothing like mashing up hordes of mutha fucka Nazi zombies.Or owning noobs online. Xbox live, pure escapist unadulterated yee haa shoot the little bastards balls out fun. No more no less.

All video games glamorize their subject matters. Farmville sure takes all the pain out of being a farmer! War video games help others to experience things they may not necessarily want to experience in real life, and can elicit emotional responses that really make one think. For example, in Modern Warfare 2’s story line, there is a mission early on in which you have to act with other terrorists in killing an airport full of civilians. This mission has a twist at the end which I will not spoil, but the end result really makes you think about the realities of war and meddling in others’ affairs, etc. As far as I’m concerned, war video games are just another way for one to reflect on life, just as one could by reading a war novel or watching a war movie.

@zophu I think the money is supposed to be coming out of their backpacks. There are blood spatters, like when I snipe a noob standing still against a wall, the blood spatters all over the wall. But I still don’t know why these special force guys have bags of money in the first place lol.

The money thing is a humorous way of showing that you achieved a “payback.”

That is, when you kill someone who had just previously had a streak of killing you.

Wow! I’ve just read through the comments above and I’ve lost count of people I was going to reply to. There are some very valid points.
I would like to add to this situation that I teach 7–9 year olds and they don’t see it as fiction. When explaining why air gets colder the higher you get, I was faced with the question “if it’s cold in the clouds, why doesn’t Mary Poppins freeze when she sits on them?”
Kids don’t get it. I have a boy with learning difficulties who plays these games and he has started swearing at other children using language heard in games like this. Now – I’m not just blaming the game here. It’s also bad parenting for letting your 9 year old play games rated 18.
My other comment is that on COD 2 there is a level where you can be the terrorist and shoot as many innocent people as possible. Surely that’s morally wrong? What kind of sick b*stards do that? What’s next? A Wii game that flies planes in to sky scrapers?! Where’s the line?
What was wrong with Sonic the Hedgehog!?!?

I find it funny, how the games provide bravado to individuals that would not have as much as in “real life.”

Over time that “confidence” carries over to the “real world”. Not a good social learning tool. Good way to get hurt or to hurt. In some cases.

A spoiler warning for anyone here, I’m talking about Modern Warfare 2’s Airport level below.

@MissCupid, first off I wish to make it clear that 7–9 year olds aren’t to be playing these types of games. The level of violence is inappropriate, flat out. These are adult rated games, and any parent letting their 7 year old child play is only a part of the problem. Teenagers, sure, everyone matures at a different rate, but never a sub 14-year old.

The COD2 airport level is very interesting. You play as an American soldier who has infiltrated the Russian terrorist group who has taken the airport hostage. To keep up the disguise, you HAVE to kill the civilians, otherwise the terrorist group would think it was suspicious and they’d kill you (not actually in the game, but it should be). But at the end of the level, they shoot you point blank in the head – they knew you were a spy all along, and now it looks like American soldiers did the massacre. That was their plan all along and you foolishly played into it.

The point of the level is not to shoot as many innocent people as possible. That is not the goal. You can shoot zero people and still progress with the level. The point is that you, as an American soldier, have been ordered to do this mission of infiltrating the terrorist group and yet it is so inhumane and disgusting, but that’s what your orders were. The level is making you reflect on the nature of the chain of command, about doing what is morally right or wrong. At the end of the game you discover that the general who commanded that terrorist-infiltrating character was corrupt to the bone, which again is exploring the nature of war and command.

So it it morally wrong to have this level? It sure did make the news when it was released, the game even gives you an option to skip over the level. What kind of sick bastards do that, you ask? I must ask you, to what are you asking? What kind of sick bastards code a level like that? I would argue some of the most evocative storymakers have done so. To craft a game that elicits such a strong reaction is itself a work of art.

But these thoughts are not things that a child can consider. They simply do not have the mental capacity to do so. To them, the game is a shoot shoot game.

Nothing is wrong with Sonic, just as nothing is wrong with a peanut butter sandwich. Some people simply prefer jam sandwiches, and some people prefer more gritty realistic war games. But I would never give a child an alcoholic drink, just as I would never give a child this video game. We should take aim to differentiate the two topic matters of “whether violent video games are suitable for children” and “whether war video games glamorize war”.

@dynamicduo, nicely done.

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard, thank you. And your name sounds absolutely delightful!

@dynamicduo, thanks!

@dynamicduo Well! Very thorough. I can completely see your point. I think to be honest – when it comes down to it – I am a very sensitive person. I don’t like war (does anyone really?) and to have blood and shouting and screaming blaring from my TV on a daily basis makes me upset. So I moan. And yes – most of the time, I do just go upstairs and watch something a lot more agreeable…
But… I still like the occasional self righteous rant ;)

@MissCupid I too enjoy the occasional rant. It’s interesting, one year ago I did not understand what my male friends saw in UFC (ultimate fighting), I thought it was unnecessarily vicious and bloody. I found my own thoughts on it to be interesting and perplexing, so I took the time to sit with my friends and have them guide me through a few matches, explaining why some things were impressive etc. I gained an entirely new level of appreciation for that sport, and now I even consider myself a fan of it. I find this situation to be similar to your distaste for war games, and while I certainly don’t expect you to become a fan of those games, perhaps my experience in a similarly perplexing circumstance can help enlighten the situation.

Side note: Shooting unarmed civilians in a game also isn’t actually much fun.
If your enemies can’t effectively fight back, they don’t pose a serious threat, so there’s no challenge. If you can’t lose anyway, it becomes less like an epic battle and more like a gardening chore.

Though I suppose there are ways to make it challenging, for example by setting a time limit or giving them a chance to get away.

I tend to try and make the games like Call of Duty more fun by playing as unrealistically as possible. (i.e. using exclusively riot-shields and stun grenades as weapons or “SHEILDFAG11!!!!”). I enjoy pissing off the “pros” that take the realism too seriously.

I don’t see the point in making violent games realistic unless there’s some real drama to be had, and not just repetitive killing. But I guess that’s what they could have legitimately been going for with the civilian murdering you guys mentioned.

I don’t know, I mean, the game obviously has great potential for conditioning children and teens to have unhealthy tendencies and perspectives, but it still falls within the realm of artistic expression.

The real problems extend outside videogames and media in general. Although demand does not completely define supply as a lot of consumerism-propaganda would have people to believe, it is a strong influence upon it.

Let us not forget the games that come about as a result of this sort of outrage and intentionally offend people. Anyone here ever play Postal 2? You heal by smoking “health pipes”, can use cats as silencers for your shotgun or M-16, fight Gary Coleman, Osama nin Laden lookalikes, and a guy dressed up as a giant scrotum, spend a level running around a brewery full of rednecks in a gimp suit, and the only way to extinguish yourself if you get set on fire is to unzip your pants, aim straight up, and urinate all over yourself. And if you kill somebody by whacking them in the head with a shovel, you can kick their recently detached head down the street!

Obviously this game is not meant for small children, but look at it this way; if people didn’t get all upset over how some video games are, I seriously doubt a game like Postal 2 would have been made. However, this game actually got a live-action movie!

Lets hear it for public uproar inciting some people to be deliberately crude and offensive!

@jerv I like to think people enjoy most crazy-violent games for the sense of freedom it gives the player (loved Saint’s Row 2), but you have a point.

I love cats, but something about standing on the rooftop chucking cats into a puddle of napalm so that they run around flaming and setting everything/everyone else in town on fire is rather amusing in a sick sort of way. Maybe it’s the only way to safely satisfy my inner pyromaniac?

I never played Postal 2, but I did watch the Uwe Boll Postal movie and found it absolutely hilarious! In fact, it being my first Boll movie, I enjoyed it a surprisingly lot more than I thought I would, based on his reputation for crap video game movies. Well that and for him boxing his critics, which I was double amazed to see as a behind the scenes feature on that DVD!

sticky explosives + street hookers x 200mph on busy highway = Saints Row 2

I agree that it does feel wrong playing as a terrorist on multiplayer on COD 2. Doesnt seem to big a big outcry against it since COD2 is one of the most popular online games of all time.I dont think much of it though. I see it as just a game. I do however see your point Miss Cupid

@Mikewlf337 Yeah, the videogames themselves don’t necessarily corrupt a kid. It’s just when you multiply the effects they do have by a few million, things start looking a little unhealthy—ominous even.

But, unhealthy media is a symptom more than the disease itself, even if it does play a big role in perpetuating the sickness. The way to help most would be to allow the media to be as free as possible. Let some make their unhealthy videogames, and others will make pieces worth having in our history.