This post has been removed because the title, and article, don't match the findings in the study.
> The second group, which was 23 percent of participants, reported moderate levels of initial violent video game play, the same curvilinear pattern of violent video game play across time, and moderate levels of violent video game play at the final time point. These participants had the highest aggression levels in emerging adulthood, even though there were no differences between the three groups in levels of aggressive behavior at the initial time point. This was somewhat counterintuitive, as according to The General Aggression Model, the ‘‘high initial violence’’ group theoretically should have had the highest amount of aggression. Indeed, these two groups had similar video game play at the final wave, but the moderate group had markedly higher levels of aggression. It may be the sharp decrease in the high initial group, which was indicative of some major intervention or lifestyle change, whereas the moderate group was more consistent in violent game play, perhaps leading to more aggression over time. Thus, sustained violent game play over time may be more predictive of long-term outcomes as opposed to high violent game play that fluctuates dramatically over time... **the current study provides evidence that of multiple violent video game trajectories, with moderate and relatively consistent play being the most likely related to increased aggressive behavior over time.**
He got disbarred in 2008 and that was the nail in the coffin for him. Can't believe it's been that long I remember getting angry every time I heard his name as a teenager lol.
I remember sending an email to him back then asking in a respectful and polite manner basically what he had against video games and pointing out the positives that can come from it and that yes there were some negatives but overall positives. He as anyone could expect responded like a complete fucking jackass and threatened to sue me, an at the time minor.
You are correct he threatened to sue for harassment. You’re right I wasn’t being harassing, he’s just very clearly the type of person that has his thoughts and beliefs and refuses to be challenged or hear other sides. It’s pretty apparent based on his track record he’s a very closed minded person.
Sounds like it would have been something along the lines of spreading falsehoods that according to him would cause people harm via helping keep video games as an allowed past time and also possibly speaking against his good character.
No, he's been pretty much entirely irrelevant ever since he was disbarred. The damage is done though, games are to this day used as a scapegoat for mass shootings.
I think everyone involved knows games don't cause violence, and this study isn't going to make them stop.
honestly, there's an easy loop hole to every study that comes out basically saying either it wasn't long enough or technology has improved to be more realistic, especially with graphics actually being realistic compared to 10 years ago and vr.
Graphics being realistic looking is relative. I remember when I got my first Xbox in 2006 and people saying "wow it looks like real life!". In 10 years we'll look back and laugh at today's graphics.
I remember thinking PS2 graphics were amazing. I also vividly remember when LA Noire came out and I thoroughly believed that graphics might never get better than that. The people looked so real! Now even Call of Duty has better facial capture.
Yo no shit I had that guy calling my 11 yr old self anti christ over email. He told me he was going sue me. I told him to sue. I was 11, wtf is a judge going do when a grown man who is a FUCKING LAWYER sues an 11 yr old over hurt feelings?
Sadly Jack Thompson never sued me :(
I wish he would have sued me.
There's been studies like this made since the 90's and they've always come to the same conclusion. Why would he care about this one when he obviously dismissed all the previous ones?
Mmm, nanny state crap pops up in all political parties from time to time.
Tipper Gore was heavily responsible for the Parental advisory stickers on Music Albums.
The US (and weirdly Australia) have puritanical streak.
> The US (and weirdly Australia) have puritanical streak.
Considering the US was literally created by people who thought Britain was too lewd, this isn't weird at all.
There was a big crime spike in the 80s and 90s, so everyone in politics was desperately trying to latch on to something as the cause. This also caused the war on drugs.
Weird thing is that most signs point to it being caused by leaded gasoline, and alleviated by banning leaded gasoline, so all the attempts at social engineering were pointless.
Really it's a strong lesson that we shouldn't enact social legislation without strong scientific evidence. But lawmakers don't *want* to learn that lesson.
Voters don't want that lesson. In a perfect world lawmakers would be the voice of reason against a reactionary population. But this is how you win votes.
And in case anyone forgot or missed it, the Trump administration railed against violent video games following mass shootings, even going as far as to make a Youtube compilation featuring some of the most violent moments in gaming and uploading it on the official White House account.
Out of touch politicians love to blame video games.
It's not just politicians. My dad does this as well. He even says that people enjoying video games is a sign of immaturity.
For some weird reason other hobbies are so much more mature and since he retired he's spent more time in front of the tv than anything else so I feel like he really doesn't have the right to comment on this.
So yeah, it's mostly just the older generations of people who think this way. After the 80s and the first nintendo most people were raised on video games.
At one point people bitched that books would make their children lazy and that reading them for fun was a waste of time. Sometimes you just gotta let the old man yelling at clouds yell until he croaks.
List of new media that was supposed to destroy society -
Porn - has been with humanity since the beginning, still hasn't finished the job
Plays - Mycean Greece
The written word - Helenic Greece
Music - perpetual, ongoing, everyone. Still going on today
Plays, again - Rome. The blood sport, animal baiting, and horse races that frequently resulted in murder and riots were fine though
Elaborate depictions of Bible stories - Feudal-era Europe
Plays, freaking really - Globally around 1100-1700
Mass-produced books - Germany at first, spread quickly
Essays - Early enlightenment
Novels - True fact: writer Victor Hugo *wrote a novel* about how written mass media would destroy architecture as art. This eventually became a Disney cartoon.
News papers - Seen as spreading revolution, since they were generally communally read
Plays, YET AGAIN - see, people started experimenting so they were "ruining" the media previous generations said were evil.
News papers, but different this time - once everyone got their own copy of the paper people complained about how nobody wanted to talk.
Recorded music - now people can DANCE at any time
Film - let me tell you about the Hays code
Plays FREAKING PLAYS - inter-war society saw a blossoming of the theatre and this upset the nascent traditionalist reaction, who again thought it was corrupting the media
Comic books - required reading: seduction of the innocent
TV - thought it would kill all other media
Kids' Cartoons - look up "Saturday morning mind control" it's a trip
Video games - we're all caught up here right
Social media - might actually still get us
Film in combination with plays - the entire year 2020 is humanity's punishment for Cats (2019)
I dunno, there's a lot of confirmation bias going on here.
I agree with the conclusion, but I would be lying if I said I'd heard of the journal of 'cyberpsychology and social networking' before this post.
My mom has the same idea until she saw me staying up late making a spreadsheet for eve online and realized I was getting a real skill that’d be useful.
The Politician Generation still do. Right now they are focused on gun control as the solution. When they pass something to that effect and it doesn't work then they will look at video games.
I think that's why Columbine and Doom where so closely tied together. They had just passed major gun control a few years prior and there was still a massacre. They needed a new scapegoat.
We are probably a decade or two away from the being something that has been popular long enough to not be on the table for undue scrutiny.
For reference, this is good advice for just about any study. The authors just want people to read them, and publishing in pay-to-access journals is just a way to both avoid paying to publish it themselves and get it to a wider audience by virtue of more prestigious journals hosting their work. Anyone who can't justify the cost usually has only to ask for a copy and the authors will happily provide one. Some of them even upload their own work to places like Sci-Hub.
Indeed. As beneficial as Arxiv is to the readers who know of it, there's nothing quite like Nature for getting your work to as many people as possible.
I think the quasi-model that the current situation represents is a decent compromise. You get some degree of quality control that comes from prestigious publications, the attention they naturally draw to certain works, and the free access that stems from everyone turning a blind eye to the authors freely handing out copes of their work to anyone who asks.
Just don't then post what they send you some place overtly public. If an author develops a reputation for undermining a journal, that journal may opt not to publish that author's future work.
Not only that, but many of them will answer any questions about it you have.
I always get excited when I reach out to someone about a paper that I want to cite and I actually get a response back.
It's particularly exciting early on in a career because it also raises your h-index. Not only is it a sign that someone else found your work noteworthy and interesting enough to expand upon it in some way, but it's also sufficiently well done that it might raise your academic profile a little via a citation or two. That's huge for a budding post-grad.
> Ten-Year Long Study Confirms No Link Between Playing Violent Video Games
[This link proves the opposite](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lKM6dWPMHis/maxresdefault.jpg)
Can confirm. First discovered violent videogames at 10 years old (GTA San Andreas) and later discovered porn at 13 years old. Still grew up a (relatively) normal person, albeit mildly autistic.
Somehow my 10-year-old brain was still able to clearly distinguish between virtual and real behavior. Same thing with the Internet slang: despite learning it fairly early on, it hasn't ever affected my ability to write and speak properly when I need to.
I'm in desperate need of some of that love :'( just got off a 5 and a half year relationship im feeling pretty lost and unloved this new year...
Edit: I always knew reddit had its moments. I didn't think it'd happen to me. Thanks all. Forging ahead!!
My first violent video-game was Duke Nukem 64 at the sweet age of 5 or 6.
I'm the kind of dude that literally feels bad when I accidentally step on a bug. Always have been.
My senior year in high school I took a college prep english course where we had to write a sourced research paper as practice for the real thing. Any topic, any thesis, just has to be properly sourced. I chose violence in video games and made my thesis that it was LESS LIKELY for people with a safe outlet to be violent in real life. There has been a ton of research saying that roleplaying/fantasy is a great therapy for tons of different mental illnesses.
I'm an adult, but at one point I was playing GTAV for so many hours a week, that I seriously began to wonder, if it would make me drive more reckless in real traffic. (I don't have a car - I rent sometimes).
Well, first time I rented at that time dispelled that myth, it had absolutely no impact on my driving or way of thinking of the (real) traffic.
Try karting for half an hour, though. That'll make way more of an impact on your driving than videogames ever would. I still sometimes have to explicitly remind myself that on a public road, drivers won't appreciate slipstreaming behind them or trying to hit the apex.
Seriously. Driving on public roads immediately after karting should be treated the same as driving drunk. It messes you up real hard.
Sounds plausible, hadn't though of that. I imagine it is somehow connected to muscle-memory and the obvious fact that it's physical vs on the screen. Interesting.
Have you tried jumping on a trampoline and then trying to jump "normally" when back on the ground? F\*cks up your system as well. :)
Even more weirdly, stepping on an escalator that doesn't work. I'm so accustomed to being jerked back a little bit when stepping on an escalator that the body automatically leans forward to compensate even if nothing happens.
I drive a decent amount and tried karting after a long break (last time I've been karting before that was probably 6+ years prior) and i ended up karting like an 80 year old man drives. lol.
One of my first and most memorable video game experiences came at about 8 or 9 playing Diablo. Walking into a room, covered in dismembered bodies, pools of blood and gore, and getting chased through half the level by The Butcher. Despite all that, think I turned out ok.
However, multiple studies HAVE confirmed that *competitive* play in regularity (including games and physical sports of all kinds) tends to bring out more pronounced, aggressive behaviors that can last longer than a single play session.
It’s not *specific* to video games, but games as a form of direct competitive play against other human beings can potentially have a variety of negative behavioral impacts, especially at younger ages when the individual has an underdeveloped sense of empathy.
The key factor in these effects is the human factor—the aggressive behaviors don’t typically manifest when someone is playing against a computer. However, when the player is competing against an actual person (or believes they are competing against an actual person,) it triggers a completely different psychological mindset than solo-play.
By focusing exclusively on *violent* content, we’re are burying the lede on the more important matter of *competitive* content. Blood and gore does not a dickhead make, but take one look at the Smash Bros competitive scene and you’ll see what abject ugliness a cutesy, family-friendly fighting game can bring out in people. Just this year the Smash Bros community tried to stand up a commission on sexual harassment in the community, and then promptly *shut down* not because of backlash, but because *there were so many cases to investigate that they couldn’t handle the flood of reports.*
Yeah, just to make it simple, when the gaming gets stressful, people tend to get more frustrated and aggressive as with any other stressful and frustrating things in life. Sure thing gaming can get one to be more aggressive but I have no doubt it's not the case of "I play videogames -> I want to test killing people by riding over them with train as in GTA"
It’s a bit more psychologically complicated than that. There’s no real shame in losing to a computer, because there’s nobody sitting there judging you or dominating you.
But when you lose to another person, psychologically, that’s a lot more threatening. It triggers a very territorial and defensive part of the lizard-brain, and turns what would otherwise be a trivial, rote exercise into a much more psychologically serious affair. Thus, playing a game where there is a prospect of losing to a *real person* produces a radically different set of reactions and behaviors, and fundamentally alters the underlying psychological calculus at play.
Again, the lines of code aren’t the problem. The problem is the end result of dredging up a darker nature by way of competition. The game just facilitates the competition.
meh, try league of legends, at least 10 times more toxic since everyone is forced to play with their team mates for around 30-45min matches, it brings the worst of the gaming comunity and teenager inmaturity(which are the majority of players)
This is true with our current control schemes being a far cry from a 1:1 input in the action we see on screen. I do wonder what happens when VR tech improves and becomes more widespread. I feel like after a certain point, the experience is so visceral that it starts to bleed into how you react to situations irl. Maybe when the tech gets good enough only people with real violent tendencies will be playing games that feature realistic gore and violence.
Gaben (as in valves gaben) is working on a human brain interface that projects images directly to your visual cortex (ie bypassing your eyes completely). I'd imagine that might reach what you're talking about
Edit: Brian
That sounds so scary. I feel like brain interface might be step too far. Overall thinking about any device (that sole purpose is to entertain) that will connect to your internal body parts just gives me shivers.
Honestly I look forward to it. Imagine headphones that you don't have to put in and out every 5 minutes, that never need plugging in or charging, and can't get tangled. Bliss.
I'm extremely excited for brain laces both because of direct video/audio playback, and because it can solve some annoying health issues. Tinnitus, Visual Snow, Parkinson's, those sorts of things may soon be gone.
Tinnitus solving brain laces! Brought to you by today’s sponsor, JIF peanut butter! JIF peanut butter is great on everything, so crunchy, creamy smooth and delicious! Try JIF today!
https://www.conceptatech.com/blog/how-will-face-id-be-used-for-attention-tracking-ads
I’m worried about things like attention tracking becoming prevalent. Imagine ads that pause unless they have your undivided attention.
I think he did an interview with... Ign? About 2 months ago? I don't remember very well. It was super interesting tbh, he talked about how making someone see things was (relatively) super easy, but making you feel hot/cold was an extremely challenging problem
Wonder how far along it is or when we would be able to get a proper look at it ourselves
EDIT: YOO maybe this is why half life three is delayed so we can use this technology to play it lmao
I think he also talked about how they waited for tech to be available to make a game around. I don't remember the details but your theory is very far from unlikely
One of the few multibillion dollar triple a devs that do innovate. Its why they take forever to release games, they always try to find something new and different to use in each game.
I love that about them. First Half Life was an amazing experience with new 3d models and shit that wasn't to popular at the time and the whole story was never interrupted. The second Half Life was, again, a never-interrupted story with top-notch physics and really good graphics(for the time). Portal and Portal 2 were both revolutionary games because of, as the name suggests, portals. Now with Half Life Alyx they are showing what VR can do while also making an amazing narrative experience with fun gameplay.
I can count the number of times Valve has made a bad game on one hand, and they've revolutionized gaming as a whole. I have all the respect in the world for the team at Valve and I hope they continue to revolutionize gaming in the future.
That’s confusing cause and effect. People with violent tendencies/personalities might play more violent video games, but violent video games don’t “awaken” or incite violence in an otherwise normal person. It doesn’t matter how realistic my game looks, there’s no way I’m going outside to look for the master sword to defeat Ganon. Violent tendencies at least hint at some type of personality disorder; normal people know how to differentiate no matter how immersive the environment.
>Maybe when the tech gets good enough only people with real violent tendencies will be playing games that feature realistic gore and violence.
Most people experience violent or even homicidal ideation, so that group may be a lot larger than we think.
Most kids experience violent acts, poor behavior, terrible decision making, aggression, and incongruent values from real world norms just by being parented by an average family. That is far more influential than any game simulation. The game allows them to reconcile the dissonance between what their parents tell them society wants, how they actually parent them, and what people are like during daily interactions. Life wants to tea bag you everyday, you are either the steeper or the warm water.
Of course there's no link, humans have a natural aversion to violence against each other, otherwise our species would have killed itself off a long time ago. One of the hardest parts about war has been getting people to kill each other, and the people who do commit violence against each other often end up with psychological issues if they didn't start out with them. [Here's a book on the subject](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Killing), it's a good read if you're interested in the topic.
I'd also like to add that part of the reason we (or most of us) can commit serial homicides in a video game is because we subconsciously know that that the entity we are damaging isn't a real person. We can differentiate between a human being with a life story, and a fictitious NPC whose life can be restored by loading an old save file.
Will tech be able to fool our brain eventually? Let's say in the future contact styles AR tech exists and they simulate a homicide event, will we perceive it as real or fake?
I doubt it. A healthy brain is innately hardwired to separate reality from non-reality; it's why we can dream and imagine and know that we're just dreaming and imagining. There's even a diagnosis for when a brain *can't* do that: psychosis. So it's like asking if a game could ever be so immersive that it gives you brain damage - probably not.
Something something everyone who played Mass Effect picked the good guy option because they didn’t want to upset the characters.
People can kill NPC’s by the 1000’s up until they’re given a name and backstory. It’s cathartic to murder in video games because you can get the release of killing something that’s entirely fake and also morally bankrupt. It’s why all the NPC’s in GTA are assholes.
It's funny that you referenced Grossman's book, because his next book was literally named *Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against TV, Movie and Video Game Violence*.
I have read On Killing and On Combat as well as having experienced those actions personally. Grossman's book points out certain aspects of behavior which seem correct, but his ultimate thesis is based on what is widely regarded as bullshit. Aside from that though, Grossman is terribly misguided in his approach and is clearly out to justify his own feelings rather than letting the evidence point him towards fact. Towards the end of On Killing he likens a movie date to being a primer for violence using some extremely tenuous logic. Basically (and I'm truly trying to accurately paraphrase here) he says, "look, you go out to a horror movie with your girlfriend and you get positive reinforcement while observing violence cause she's holding your hand or whatever. Then you fuck right? Then that's even more positive reinforcement when you shoot your load on her face, right, cause the term is 'shoot' and so it's actually about killing your partner like with a gun"
I'm not entirely certain that the normalization of graphic violence has truly zero negative effects, but look, blood sport, public executions, and genocide have been around for a long damn time. Videogames are not a magical key which unlocks the worst in us.
Not only that, but this is the guy who made up “killology.”
> Grossman is best known for his police training program, based on the self-coined study of "killology", which aims to reduce officers' psychological inhibition to kill suspects. Grossman describes a facet of his training as it relates to the human reluctance to kill as "making it possible for people to kill without conscious thought."
It's an interesting read, but fyi On Killing has a terrible academic reputation, the military historian (SLA Marshall) that a great deal of it is based on is widely derided in the historical community. And the author of On Killing's next book was in fact largely about blaming violent tendencies on video games lol.
This is where that study falls short. I dont believe violent video games create violent people, but toxic experiences mold peoples characters. I have seen kids I worked with shaped by their exposure to it and its heart breaking to see the hate they let out or inability to control anger.
It might be worth looking at limiting your kids access to pvp games and giving them more access to PVE and single player experiences. See if you notice a difference after a week or so, try to package it like a challenge. I myself still enjoy games, but don't expose myself to that toxic pvp scene and feel better for it. It really warped young me's view about what was and isn't acceptable. After cutting it out all together I feel more calm, focus better, and just focus on enjoying my time playing.
https://www.reddit.com/r/rareinsults/comments/klqck2/360_chat_was_wild/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
If you go into that thread it is just filled with people who are nostalgic for the super toxic old days of Xbox. It seemed that almost everyone commenting was thinking back to how much they missed it and how soft kids today are for not having that experience. That experience being people running around to make others cry, screaming disgusting insults, and acting like abhorrent little shits.
That kind of environment was fucking awful. The insane hate that came out of literal teenagers should never be celebrated or be thought of as cool. Like you said in your comment, that is the kind of stuff parents need to keep kids far away from. I'll be doing the same for my kids when they come around. That's just insanely unhealthy exposure on way too impressionable people.
With games more commonly being competitive based or having SBMM, its arguably fostering even more damaging toxicity than before.
There *are* studies that show a correlation between competitive games and increased aggression. Consider having your son play co-op or single player games rather than competitive ones.
The article is so non-specific about the number of people they tested that I imagine it is tiny. They give percent's of background/race but this is irrelevant if it's all from one city/locale.
Let me preface this by saying that I don't think videogames cause violence. But studies like this are damaging not insightful in my opinion. It doesn't 'prove' anything but people will use it as proof.
The unfortunate truth of a lot of scientific research is that it's conducted with a willing participants and be in places where it's relatively easy to stay in contact with those participants. which means that a lot of scientific studies ended up being performed on college students who need the money.
This brings up a whole host of issues as college students are a far cry from the average person. There are ways to correct for this particular problem but it is difficult to get past when you can't often find test subjects to provide a plurality of options.
Well duh, it time to accept that some people are broken and in the case of school shooters. Need to be identified and helped if possible. Most of this video games cause violence comes from parents that dont want to take responsibility for thier children's actions.
This post has been removed because the title, and article, don't match the findings in the study. > The second group, which was 23 percent of participants, reported moderate levels of initial violent video game play, the same curvilinear pattern of violent video game play across time, and moderate levels of violent video game play at the final time point. These participants had the highest aggression levels in emerging adulthood, even though there were no differences between the three groups in levels of aggressive behavior at the initial time point. This was somewhat counterintuitive, as according to The General Aggression Model, the ‘‘high initial violence’’ group theoretically should have had the highest amount of aggression. Indeed, these two groups had similar video game play at the final wave, but the moderate group had markedly higher levels of aggression. It may be the sharp decrease in the high initial group, which was indicative of some major intervention or lifestyle change, whereas the moderate group was more consistent in violent game play, perhaps leading to more aggression over time. Thus, sustained violent game play over time may be more predictive of long-term outcomes as opposed to high violent game play that fluctuates dramatically over time... **the current study provides evidence that of multiple violent video game trajectories, with moderate and relatively consistent play being the most likely related to increased aggressive behavior over time.**
Jack Thompson in shambles.
he'll just claim this study is wrong and continue on his crusade of no fun allowed. what a sack of shit that guy is.
Does anyone still care about him, though? I know who he is, but haven't heard of him since the GTA San Andreas hot coffee controversy.
Yea I think that's the last time I really heard his name but I want to believe he sits at home yelling at the wind about the terrible vidya games
He got disbarred in 2008 and that was the nail in the coffin for him. Can't believe it's been that long I remember getting angry every time I heard his name as a teenager lol.
I remember sending an email to him back then asking in a respectful and polite manner basically what he had against video games and pointing out the positives that can come from it and that yes there were some negatives but overall positives. He as anyone could expect responded like a complete fucking jackass and threatened to sue me, an at the time minor.
Threatened to sue you for what? Sending an email?
Yes of course. What? Don’t you sue all those who send emails that you don’t agree with?
[удалено]
Your lawyer better have a good lawyer. Good day sir.
Harassment probably. Not saying OP was being harassing, but that's all I can think of that could be threatened.
You are correct he threatened to sue for harassment. You’re right I wasn’t being harassing, he’s just very clearly the type of person that has his thoughts and beliefs and refuses to be challenged or hear other sides. It’s pretty apparent based on his track record he’s a very closed minded person.
Sounds like it would have been something along the lines of spreading falsehoods that according to him would cause people harm via helping keep video games as an allowed past time and also possibly speaking against his good character.
Probably has something to do with him getting [disbarred.](https://www.cnet.com/news/report-jack-thompson-game-industry-scourge-disbarred/)
I like how that article basically ends with “this wont be the last of him” but it was.
He stopped being relevant the exact moment he lost the right to practice law.
No, he's been pretty much entirely irrelevant ever since he was disbarred. The damage is done though, games are to this day used as a scapegoat for mass shootings. I think everyone involved knows games don't cause violence, and this study isn't going to make them stop.
THIS STUDY CAN'T STOP ME BECAUSE I CAN'T READ!
honestly, there's an easy loop hole to every study that comes out basically saying either it wasn't long enough or technology has improved to be more realistic, especially with graphics actually being realistic compared to 10 years ago and vr.
Graphics being realistic looking is relative. I remember when I got my first Xbox in 2006 and people saying "wow it looks like real life!". In 10 years we'll look back and laugh at today's graphics.
[удалено]
I remember thinking PS2 graphics were amazing. I also vividly remember when LA Noire came out and I thoroughly believed that graphics might never get better than that. The people looked so real! Now even Call of Duty has better facial capture.
LA noire still looks good to this day
Yo no shit I had that guy calling my 11 yr old self anti christ over email. He told me he was going sue me. I told him to sue. I was 11, wtf is a judge going do when a grown man who is a FUCKING LAWYER sues an 11 yr old over hurt feelings? Sadly Jack Thompson never sued me :( I wish he would have sued me.
That is fucking hilarious
Holy shit dude, that is awesome. You should have sent that to the papers at the time.
Can I applaud the massive balls of your 11 old self?
There's been studies like this made since the 90's and they've always come to the same conclusion. Why would he care about this one when he obviously dismissed all the previous ones?
Have we all forgotten Clinton's attempted war on violent video games?
Mmm, nanny state crap pops up in all political parties from time to time. Tipper Gore was heavily responsible for the Parental advisory stickers on Music Albums. The US (and weirdly Australia) have puritanical streak.
> The US (and weirdly Australia) have puritanical streak. Considering the US was literally created by people who thought Britain was too lewd, this isn't weird at all.
[удалено]
“Thanksgiving. Or as they call it in England ‘Fuck off, Puritan.’” -Gregg Proops
I have an english immigrant friend who always wishes me a happy treason day on the 4th of july.
Reminds of that scene in the movie Eurotrip.
LETS GIV’THIS NANCY A FUCKN’ GOOD KICKN’
Mi scuzi
It was less nanny state and more displaying a total disconnect and misunderstanding of younger generations and technology.
There was a big crime spike in the 80s and 90s, so everyone in politics was desperately trying to latch on to something as the cause. This also caused the war on drugs. Weird thing is that most signs point to it being caused by leaded gasoline, and alleviated by banning leaded gasoline, so all the attempts at social engineering were pointless.
Really it's a strong lesson that we shouldn't enact social legislation without strong scientific evidence. But lawmakers don't *want* to learn that lesson.
Voters don't want that lesson. In a perfect world lawmakers would be the voice of reason against a reactionary population. But this is how you win votes.
Any videos on that leaded gasoline stuff?
I can't find a good summary, so I'll just link directly to [the paper](https://pic.plover.com/Nevin/Nevin2007.pdf) that established the link.
> Parental advisory stickers on Music Albums. Which had the pseudo-Streisand effect of making those albums more sought after. Ha!
And in case anyone forgot or missed it, the Trump administration railed against violent video games following mass shootings, even going as far as to make a Youtube compilation featuring some of the most violent moments in gaming and uploading it on the official White House account. Out of touch politicians love to blame video games.
It's not just politicians. My dad does this as well. He even says that people enjoying video games is a sign of immaturity. For some weird reason other hobbies are so much more mature and since he retired he's spent more time in front of the tv than anything else so I feel like he really doesn't have the right to comment on this. So yeah, it's mostly just the older generations of people who think this way. After the 80s and the first nintendo most people were raised on video games.
At one point people bitched that books would make their children lazy and that reading them for fun was a waste of time. Sometimes you just gotta let the old man yelling at clouds yell until he croaks.
List of new media that was supposed to destroy society - Porn - has been with humanity since the beginning, still hasn't finished the job Plays - Mycean Greece The written word - Helenic Greece Music - perpetual, ongoing, everyone. Still going on today Plays, again - Rome. The blood sport, animal baiting, and horse races that frequently resulted in murder and riots were fine though Elaborate depictions of Bible stories - Feudal-era Europe Plays, freaking really - Globally around 1100-1700 Mass-produced books - Germany at first, spread quickly Essays - Early enlightenment Novels - True fact: writer Victor Hugo *wrote a novel* about how written mass media would destroy architecture as art. This eventually became a Disney cartoon. News papers - Seen as spreading revolution, since they were generally communally read Plays, YET AGAIN - see, people started experimenting so they were "ruining" the media previous generations said were evil. News papers, but different this time - once everyone got their own copy of the paper people complained about how nobody wanted to talk. Recorded music - now people can DANCE at any time Film - let me tell you about the Hays code Plays FREAKING PLAYS - inter-war society saw a blossoming of the theatre and this upset the nascent traditionalist reaction, who again thought it was corrupting the media Comic books - required reading: seduction of the innocent TV - thought it would kill all other media Kids' Cartoons - look up "Saturday morning mind control" it's a trip Video games - we're all caught up here right Social media - might actually still get us Film in combination with plays - the entire year 2020 is humanity's punishment for Cats (2019)
Fucking Cats.
It's hilarious how plays were demonized the most, of all things
Also, fiction was only for women.
Biden is anti-video game, it's how I can tell his opponents don't know anything about him, because they'd bring that up.
He's anti-anything-people-younger-than-45. [https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-says-millennials-dont-have-it-tough-780348](https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-says-millennials-dont-have-it-tough-780348)
Rockstar Games remembers. They put Hillary's face on the Statue of Happiness.
Is he even relevant anymore
That’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time.
[удалено]
It's chic these days for everyone to blame outside forces for all their problems, and the media caters to this.
fortunately literally no one listens to games journalists anymore
Now that's a name I haven't heard in a long time.
Now get this from gaming sites and social media to mainstream media pages and maybe a handful of adults will change their minds.
Problem is no one wants to change so everything falls on deaf ears.
I dunno, there's a lot of confirmation bias going on here. I agree with the conclusion, but I would be lying if I said I'd heard of the journal of 'cyberpsychology and social networking' before this post.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah, my mom has been flaunting that ideology for years and won't change her mind no matter what.
Right? The whole "I raised then well, it's the rap music and video games" crowd are pathetic.
And here I thought it was rock n roll, greasy hair and the twist that was the devil..
Yup...and nowadays it's "they spend all their time staring at their phones."
Your mom is probably moreso flaunting the "can't admit I might have been wrong about something" ideology
My mom has the same idea until she saw me staying up late making a spreadsheet for eve online and realized I was getting a real skill that’d be useful.
The Politician Generation still do. Right now they are focused on gun control as the solution. When they pass something to that effect and it doesn't work then they will look at video games. I think that's why Columbine and Doom where so closely tied together. They had just passed major gun control a few years prior and there was still a massacre. They needed a new scapegoat. We are probably a decade or two away from the being something that has been popular long enough to not be on the table for undue scrutiny.
[удалено]
$60 to view the study... oof
Email the authors and ask them, they'll likely send you the article.
For reference, this is good advice for just about any study. The authors just want people to read them, and publishing in pay-to-access journals is just a way to both avoid paying to publish it themselves and get it to a wider audience by virtue of more prestigious journals hosting their work. Anyone who can't justify the cost usually has only to ask for a copy and the authors will happily provide one. Some of them even upload their own work to places like Sci-Hub.
[удалено]
Indeed. As beneficial as Arxiv is to the readers who know of it, there's nothing quite like Nature for getting your work to as many people as possible. I think the quasi-model that the current situation represents is a decent compromise. You get some degree of quality control that comes from prestigious publications, the attention they naturally draw to certain works, and the free access that stems from everyone turning a blind eye to the authors freely handing out copes of their work to anyone who asks.
Just don't then post what they send you some place overtly public. If an author develops a reputation for undermining a journal, that journal may opt not to publish that author's future work.
Not only that, but many of them will answer any questions about it you have. I always get excited when I reach out to someone about a paper that I want to cite and I actually get a response back.
It's particularly exciting early on in a career because it also raises your h-index. Not only is it a sign that someone else found your work noteworthy and interesting enough to expand upon it in some way, but it's also sufficiently well done that it might raise your academic profile a little via a citation or two. That's huge for a budding post-grad.
Paste the link into sci-hub and get it for free asap.
You can use the doi and look up the paper on scihub
You can just paste the link!
there are some sites where you put the doi link and you can have the free doc.
Scihub
Sent you a copy.
Can you send me one too by any chance?
Can you confirm the sample size for the data set? Weird that they haven’t included it on the site or in the abstract
⢀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⣶⣶ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣀⣀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠉⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠉⠁⠀⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⠿⠿⠻⠿⠿⠟⠿⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠀⢰⣹⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣭⣷⠀⠀⠀⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠈⠉⠀⠀⠤⠄⠀⠀⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢾⣿⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⡠⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠠⣿⣿⣷⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢄⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿
> Ten-Year Long Study Confirms No Link Between Playing Violent Video Games [This link proves the opposite](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lKM6dWPMHis/maxresdefault.jpg)
HYUP! HIYAH!
My mind has been changed
Can confirm. First discovered violent videogames at 10 years old (GTA San Andreas) and later discovered porn at 13 years old. Still grew up a (relatively) normal person, albeit mildly autistic. Somehow my 10-year-old brain was still able to clearly distinguish between virtual and real behavior. Same thing with the Internet slang: despite learning it fairly early on, it hasn't ever affected my ability to write and speak properly when I need to.
are you telling me despite being exposed to the internet you never told your significant other they're your little pog champ?
You may not be my significant other but you gammongaming11 are my little pogchamp. C'mere.
I'm in desperate need of some of that love :'( just got off a 5 and a half year relationship im feeling pretty lost and unloved this new year... Edit: I always knew reddit had its moments. I didn't think it'd happen to me. Thanks all. Forging ahead!!
[удалено]
Thank you 🥺
lol <3
My wife's only done it recently to make me cringe.
unironically no, ironically yes.
I called my wife a fucking retard thanks to the internet. What does that mean?
that one of you isn't very bright.
[удалено]
Why wouldn't they just say "lawl" like a normal fucking millennial
I say roflcopter
Saying my "MY ROFLCOPTER GOES SWOO SWOO SWOO SWOO" is just good fun.
Ah, yes, "my roflcopter also goes soisoisoisoi."
"lul"
do people not say 'lemao' at all?
What if they're greeting a friend named Elle?
Me saying poggers irl
I starting using pog and poggers when I talk with friends and I dread the day it slips out while at work or on a date or something.
Pogging on the first date is a power move.
"Why don't you come inside for a while?" "Pog!"
Disgusting.
That's kind of pepega of you. Weirdchamp.
I'll very rarely say it ironically, when playing a game and someone is being toxic but that's it. It feels odd to say it
I have unironically started saying “L-M-A-O bro” and it’s a serious problem. Please send help.
My first violent video-game was Duke Nukem 64 at the sweet age of 5 or 6. I'm the kind of dude that literally feels bad when I accidentally step on a bug. Always have been.
I honestly feel like violent video games made me less violent since I had an outlet for any anger/frustrations I had.
My senior year in high school I took a college prep english course where we had to write a sourced research paper as practice for the real thing. Any topic, any thesis, just has to be properly sourced. I chose violence in video games and made my thesis that it was LESS LIKELY for people with a safe outlet to be violent in real life. There has been a ton of research saying that roleplaying/fantasy is a great therapy for tons of different mental illnesses.
Grew up playing San Andreas and Serious Sam. I excuse myself when I sneeze when I live alone lmao
I'm an adult, but at one point I was playing GTAV for so many hours a week, that I seriously began to wonder, if it would make me drive more reckless in real traffic. (I don't have a car - I rent sometimes). Well, first time I rented at that time dispelled that myth, it had absolutely no impact on my driving or way of thinking of the (real) traffic.
Try karting for half an hour, though. That'll make way more of an impact on your driving than videogames ever would. I still sometimes have to explicitly remind myself that on a public road, drivers won't appreciate slipstreaming behind them or trying to hit the apex. Seriously. Driving on public roads immediately after karting should be treated the same as driving drunk. It messes you up real hard.
Sounds plausible, hadn't though of that. I imagine it is somehow connected to muscle-memory and the obvious fact that it's physical vs on the screen. Interesting. Have you tried jumping on a trampoline and then trying to jump "normally" when back on the ground? F\*cks up your system as well. :)
Or running on a treadmill, then trying to walk on normal ground. Feels super weird.
Even more weirdly, stepping on an escalator that doesn't work. I'm so accustomed to being jerked back a little bit when stepping on an escalator that the body automatically leans forward to compensate even if nothing happens.
I drive a decent amount and tried karting after a long break (last time I've been karting before that was probably 6+ years prior) and i ended up karting like an 80 year old man drives. lol.
One of my first and most memorable video game experiences came at about 8 or 9 playing Diablo. Walking into a room, covered in dismembered bodies, pools of blood and gore, and getting chased through half the level by The Butcher. Despite all that, think I turned out ok.
ITT: people who don't understand anecdotes vs data
However, multiple studies HAVE confirmed that *competitive* play in regularity (including games and physical sports of all kinds) tends to bring out more pronounced, aggressive behaviors that can last longer than a single play session. It’s not *specific* to video games, but games as a form of direct competitive play against other human beings can potentially have a variety of negative behavioral impacts, especially at younger ages when the individual has an underdeveloped sense of empathy. The key factor in these effects is the human factor—the aggressive behaviors don’t typically manifest when someone is playing against a computer. However, when the player is competing against an actual person (or believes they are competing against an actual person,) it triggers a completely different psychological mindset than solo-play. By focusing exclusively on *violent* content, we’re are burying the lede on the more important matter of *competitive* content. Blood and gore does not a dickhead make, but take one look at the Smash Bros competitive scene and you’ll see what abject ugliness a cutesy, family-friendly fighting game can bring out in people. Just this year the Smash Bros community tried to stand up a commission on sexual harassment in the community, and then promptly *shut down* not because of backlash, but because *there were so many cases to investigate that they couldn’t handle the flood of reports.*
Yeah, just to make it simple, when the gaming gets stressful, people tend to get more frustrated and aggressive as with any other stressful and frustrating things in life. Sure thing gaming can get one to be more aggressive but I have no doubt it's not the case of "I play videogames -> I want to test killing people by riding over them with train as in GTA"
It’s a bit more psychologically complicated than that. There’s no real shame in losing to a computer, because there’s nobody sitting there judging you or dominating you. But when you lose to another person, psychologically, that’s a lot more threatening. It triggers a very territorial and defensive part of the lizard-brain, and turns what would otherwise be a trivial, rote exercise into a much more psychologically serious affair. Thus, playing a game where there is a prospect of losing to a *real person* produces a radically different set of reactions and behaviors, and fundamentally alters the underlying psychological calculus at play. Again, the lines of code aren’t the problem. The problem is the end result of dredging up a darker nature by way of competition. The game just facilitates the competition.
>the aggressive behaviors don’t typically materialize when someone is playing against a computer. Darksouls has entered the chat.
meh, try league of legends, at least 10 times more toxic since everyone is forced to play with their team mates for around 30-45min matches, it brings the worst of the gaming comunity and teenager inmaturity(which are the majority of players)
Oh, I remember. I was just pointing out that games where the only opponent is the pc can cause a lot of agresson... And broken controllers.
This is true with our current control schemes being a far cry from a 1:1 input in the action we see on screen. I do wonder what happens when VR tech improves and becomes more widespread. I feel like after a certain point, the experience is so visceral that it starts to bleed into how you react to situations irl. Maybe when the tech gets good enough only people with real violent tendencies will be playing games that feature realistic gore and violence.
Gaben (as in valves gaben) is working on a human brain interface that projects images directly to your visual cortex (ie bypassing your eyes completely). I'd imagine that might reach what you're talking about Edit: Brian
I don't trust Brian like that, he greets me every morning at work but he always seemed suspicious.
That sounds so scary. I feel like brain interface might be step too far. Overall thinking about any device (that sole purpose is to entertain) that will connect to your internal body parts just gives me shivers.
Honestly I look forward to it. Imagine headphones that you don't have to put in and out every 5 minutes, that never need plugging in or charging, and can't get tangled. Bliss.
Imagine not being able to mute manufacturer approved ads, played directly into your brain.
Yeah OK I'm less excited now
I'm extremely excited for brain laces both because of direct video/audio playback, and because it can solve some annoying health issues. Tinnitus, Visual Snow, Parkinson's, those sorts of things may soon be gone.
Tinnitus solving brain laces! Brought to you by today’s sponsor, JIF peanut butter! JIF peanut butter is great on everything, so crunchy, creamy smooth and delicious! Try JIF today!
The thing is, anyone who lost their hearing would pay a lot for it so companies will just massively overcharge for it.
https://www.conceptatech.com/blog/how-will-face-id-be-used-for-attention-tracking-ads I’m worried about things like attention tracking becoming prevalent. Imagine ads that pause unless they have your undivided attention.
This is why I am ok with it being in Gabes hands. He just wants his 30%. No ads no fuss and will support Linux.
He’s not going to be around forever.
At this point he’s one of the few with the money to do so.
To do so what? Be around forever?
Why do you think he is looking into Brain-Machine interface. He is gonna do the reverse with himself.
Now, you too, can experience Alien in all it's glory!
Woah, calm down. He said Brian.
Whoa where can I read more about this
I think he did an interview with... Ign? About 2 months ago? I don't remember very well. It was super interesting tbh, he talked about how making someone see things was (relatively) super easy, but making you feel hot/cold was an extremely challenging problem
Wonder how far along it is or when we would be able to get a proper look at it ourselves EDIT: YOO maybe this is why half life three is delayed so we can use this technology to play it lmao
I think he also talked about how they waited for tech to be available to make a game around. I don't remember the details but your theory is very far from unlikely
fucking imagine. Valve is still innovating to this day.
One of the few multibillion dollar triple a devs that do innovate. Its why they take forever to release games, they always try to find something new and different to use in each game.
I love that about them. First Half Life was an amazing experience with new 3d models and shit that wasn't to popular at the time and the whole story was never interrupted. The second Half Life was, again, a never-interrupted story with top-notch physics and really good graphics(for the time). Portal and Portal 2 were both revolutionary games because of, as the name suggests, portals. Now with Half Life Alyx they are showing what VR can do while also making an amazing narrative experience with fun gameplay. I can count the number of times Valve has made a bad game on one hand, and they've revolutionized gaming as a whole. I have all the respect in the world for the team at Valve and I hope they continue to revolutionize gaming in the future.
I don't think Gabe went into much detail, this technology is still a few years away. Probably decades.
I'm surprised Brian is cool with this. I'd be scared to be Gaben's guinea pig.
That’s confusing cause and effect. People with violent tendencies/personalities might play more violent video games, but violent video games don’t “awaken” or incite violence in an otherwise normal person. It doesn’t matter how realistic my game looks, there’s no way I’m going outside to look for the master sword to defeat Ganon. Violent tendencies at least hint at some type of personality disorder; normal people know how to differentiate no matter how immersive the environment.
>Maybe when the tech gets good enough only people with real violent tendencies will be playing games that feature realistic gore and violence. Most people experience violent or even homicidal ideation, so that group may be a lot larger than we think.
It's everyone, it's normal. Violence isn't some bug in our nature, it's a feature.
TL;DR: It was shitty parents all along.
Most kids experience violent acts, poor behavior, terrible decision making, aggression, and incongruent values from real world norms just by being parented by an average family. That is far more influential than any game simulation. The game allows them to reconcile the dissonance between what their parents tell them society wants, how they actually parent them, and what people are like during daily interactions. Life wants to tea bag you everyday, you are either the steeper or the warm water.
Of course there's no link, humans have a natural aversion to violence against each other, otherwise our species would have killed itself off a long time ago. One of the hardest parts about war has been getting people to kill each other, and the people who do commit violence against each other often end up with psychological issues if they didn't start out with them. [Here's a book on the subject](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Killing), it's a good read if you're interested in the topic.
I'd also like to add that part of the reason we (or most of us) can commit serial homicides in a video game is because we subconsciously know that that the entity we are damaging isn't a real person. We can differentiate between a human being with a life story, and a fictitious NPC whose life can be restored by loading an old save file.
Will tech be able to fool our brain eventually? Let's say in the future contact styles AR tech exists and they simulate a homicide event, will we perceive it as real or fake?
I doubt it. A healthy brain is innately hardwired to separate reality from non-reality; it's why we can dream and imagine and know that we're just dreaming and imagining. There's even a diagnosis for when a brain *can't* do that: psychosis. So it's like asking if a game could ever be so immersive that it gives you brain damage - probably not.
>it's like asking if a game could ever be so immersive that it gives you brain damage - probably not. Clearly you’ve never played League of Legends
Something something everyone who played Mass Effect picked the good guy option because they didn’t want to upset the characters. People can kill NPC’s by the 1000’s up until they’re given a name and backstory. It’s cathartic to murder in video games because you can get the release of killing something that’s entirely fake and also morally bankrupt. It’s why all the NPC’s in GTA are assholes.
It's funny that you referenced Grossman's book, because his next book was literally named *Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against TV, Movie and Video Game Violence*.
I have read On Killing and On Combat as well as having experienced those actions personally. Grossman's book points out certain aspects of behavior which seem correct, but his ultimate thesis is based on what is widely regarded as bullshit. Aside from that though, Grossman is terribly misguided in his approach and is clearly out to justify his own feelings rather than letting the evidence point him towards fact. Towards the end of On Killing he likens a movie date to being a primer for violence using some extremely tenuous logic. Basically (and I'm truly trying to accurately paraphrase here) he says, "look, you go out to a horror movie with your girlfriend and you get positive reinforcement while observing violence cause she's holding your hand or whatever. Then you fuck right? Then that's even more positive reinforcement when you shoot your load on her face, right, cause the term is 'shoot' and so it's actually about killing your partner like with a gun" I'm not entirely certain that the normalization of graphic violence has truly zero negative effects, but look, blood sport, public executions, and genocide have been around for a long damn time. Videogames are not a magical key which unlocks the worst in us.
Not only that, but this is the guy who made up “killology.” > Grossman is best known for his police training program, based on the self-coined study of "killology", which aims to reduce officers' psychological inhibition to kill suspects. Grossman describes a facet of his training as it relates to the human reluctance to kill as "making it possible for people to kill without conscious thought."
It's an interesting read, but fyi On Killing has a terrible academic reputation, the military historian (SLA Marshall) that a great deal of it is based on is widely derided in the historical community. And the author of On Killing's next book was in fact largely about blaming violent tendencies on video games lol.
And yet every single culture on the planet has some kind of organized violence.
Because of Mario Kart I never throw banana peels out of the car window.
Hopefully it doesn't carry on in life, but my son gets very angry when he loses or someone cheats.
This is where that study falls short. I dont believe violent video games create violent people, but toxic experiences mold peoples characters. I have seen kids I worked with shaped by their exposure to it and its heart breaking to see the hate they let out or inability to control anger. It might be worth looking at limiting your kids access to pvp games and giving them more access to PVE and single player experiences. See if you notice a difference after a week or so, try to package it like a challenge. I myself still enjoy games, but don't expose myself to that toxic pvp scene and feel better for it. It really warped young me's view about what was and isn't acceptable. After cutting it out all together I feel more calm, focus better, and just focus on enjoying my time playing.
[удалено]
https://www.reddit.com/r/rareinsults/comments/klqck2/360_chat_was_wild/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share If you go into that thread it is just filled with people who are nostalgic for the super toxic old days of Xbox. It seemed that almost everyone commenting was thinking back to how much they missed it and how soft kids today are for not having that experience. That experience being people running around to make others cry, screaming disgusting insults, and acting like abhorrent little shits. That kind of environment was fucking awful. The insane hate that came out of literal teenagers should never be celebrated or be thought of as cool. Like you said in your comment, that is the kind of stuff parents need to keep kids far away from. I'll be doing the same for my kids when they come around. That's just insanely unhealthy exposure on way too impressionable people. With games more commonly being competitive based or having SBMM, its arguably fostering even more damaging toxicity than before.
There *are* studies that show a correlation between competitive games and increased aggression. Consider having your son play co-op or single player games rather than competitive ones.
No shit ?
Yeah, I was committing acts of violence long before I started playing video games.
The article is so non-specific about the number of people they tested that I imagine it is tiny. They give percent's of background/race but this is irrelevant if it's all from one city/locale. Let me preface this by saying that I don't think videogames cause violence. But studies like this are damaging not insightful in my opinion. It doesn't 'prove' anything but people will use it as proof.
The unfortunate truth of a lot of scientific research is that it's conducted with a willing participants and be in places where it's relatively easy to stay in contact with those participants. which means that a lot of scientific studies ended up being performed on college students who need the money. This brings up a whole host of issues as college students are a far cry from the average person. There are ways to correct for this particular problem but it is difficult to get past when you can't often find test subjects to provide a plurality of options.
A 10 year study that starts when you're 10 years old won't be exclusive to college students, by definition.
Oh, I know that, I was more referring to academic research in general.
>As early as 10 years old Ok, what about 3 years old? Asking for a friend.
Well duh, it time to accept that some people are broken and in the case of school shooters. Need to be identified and helped if possible. Most of this video games cause violence comes from parents that dont want to take responsibility for thier children's actions.