Introduction

Video game violence has been a big topic in the last few years and as a result of these protests many american parents have taken advice from the critics/politics rather than their own judgement. So my protest is that if your going to be a so called "responsible" parent then do the right thing for your kids and watch over the games they play or have played and judge whether or not they should be inticed in such violence because with the thoughts and feelings of the parents, game industries will be able to create games without the hassle of a game protest. Therefore, with this action, can in the future, help stop the term video game violence from being used in media.

Some examples that is tied together with the idea that video games emmulate violence and/or sex are Grand Theft Auto, Bully, Mortal Kombat, and Manhunt. These games as long as time has gone on have been the most highest top rated violent games that have ever hit stores. This can be considered a problem for our kids but if you take the time to think about the controversy it only leaves one question, "Where are the parents' protests?" Believe or not their decisions as a whole can disrupt where and how video games are put together.

Before we jump the gun and assume that video games reflect violence towards are growing society of teens and under aged gamers, we should look back at what excatly video games were made for. The early stages of videogames was an escape or entertainment for the average life (in a sense), it's primary purpose was onlt to keep us Americans from the regular old boring lives that we've always had. The idea of a game being violent is due to the fact that the person that's probably playing that game is essentially under age of the rating placed bluntly on the game's case.

Now, these ideas of games not being any harm to teens may be a bit controversal for those who disagree, but the simple fact is games are going to be games and if the parents don't take part in their child's choice to play these so called violent games then to them (the adults) the game is considered violent and to the kids it may be considered violent. But overall that so called violent game is still a game like any other, its up to the parents to recognize and realize what ratings are meant for and take charge.

To conclude, the responsibility of the parent plays an extreme part in what polotics call video game violence. So with that in mind, parents need to get involved with their kids' gaming history and nullify or accept the rating on that game for the child.This may politics won't ramble on about how violent video games should be banned and rather should be cautiously looked over by the guardians of today's teeage society and in the long run this may be able to help the gaming industry to flurish instend of worrying about the next complication.

Grand Theft Auto: "Sickest Game to Ever hit the Shelves!"

Sex controversy over GTA game

The investigation centres on the PC version of GTA: San Andreas

Best-selling game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is being investigated in the US over reports that it contains sexually explicit mini-games hidden in its code.

The controversy surrounds a download available on the net which is said to unlock secret sex scenes.

Game makers Rockstar said they were complying with the inquiry, by the industry body that sets age ratings.

If the findings were to lead to an adult-only age rating, it could limit sales from major retail outlets.

Explicit acts

The Grand Theft Auto series of crime games have proved phenomenally popular. They are credited with kick-starting the driving-and-shooting genre of gaming.

The PlayStation 2 version of San Andreas sold more than a million copies in the first nine days that it was on sale in UK last year.

But the game has also attracted criticism from those who say it encourages gratuitous violence as players immerse themselves in an underground world of LA gangs and gun-ridden ghettos.

We also feel confident that the investigation will uphold the original rating of the game, as the work of the mod community is beyond the scope of either publishers or the ESRB Rockstar statement

Now it is under fire over whether the game contains hidden graphic sexual content.

Software code developed by GTA Dutch fan Patrick Wildenborg is said to have unlocked mini-games in the PC version of San Andreas that allows players to make game characters perform sexually explicit acts.

The industry body which regulates games in the US, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), said it had opened an investigation into the so-called Hot Coffee modification.

The aim is to "determine if there has been a violation of ESRB Rules and Regulations requiring full disclosure of pertinent content," ratings group President Patricia Vance said in a statement.

The results of the investigation could determine if San Andreas retains its M rating, which is given to games for ages 17 and older, or is reclassified as an adults-only title.

This kind of rating could lead big stores in the US to limit sales or take it off the shelves altogether.

'Leftover material'

Rockstar has said it is complying with the investigation.

"We also feel confident that the investigation will uphold the original rating of the game, as the work of the mod community is beyond the scope of either publishers or the ESRB," said Rockstar in the statement.

The fan at the centre of the controversy, Patrick Wildenborg, has said he did not create the sex scenes, but enabled them with his modification.

"But all this material is completely inaccessible in an unmodded version of the game," he said in a statement on his website.

"It can therefore not be considered a cheat, Easter Egg or hidden feature But is most probably just leftover material from a gameplay idea that didn't make the final release."

The PlayStation 2 version of San Andreas was one of the best-selling games of 2004. The title already has an 18 age rating in the UK

From Sex controversy over GTA

"Bully": Quality or Controversy?

Will controversy — or quality — sell 'Bully?'

'Grand Theft Auto' makers are a lightning rod for critics, watchdog groups

Rockstar Games, a company that's made a fortune angering soccer moms, has finally shipped its controversial new game, 'Bully.'

Rockstar Games By Kristin Kalning Games editor MSNBC updated 11:28 a.m. ET Nov. 2, 2006 Kristin Kalning Games editor Rockstar Games has finally shipped its latest title, “Bully.” Thank God. So much controversy. So much hand-wringing. And all before anyone had even laid eyes on the game — much less played it. From the minute Rockstar announced “Bully,” at the Electronic Entertainment Expo in May 2005, the critics were up in arms. And while the violence is decidedly less lethal than in other games, like Rockstar’s own “Grand Theft Auto” franchise, where one can kill a cop or stab a hooker, watchdog groups say “Bully” glorifies something that is very real and very applicable to kids at a vulnerable time in their lives. “Kids are killing themselves because they’ve been bullied,” says Jayne Hitchcock, president of Working to Halt Online Abuse. “Why pick a subject that didn’t need to be made into a game?” The answer is, because this is Rockstar — a company that’s made a lot of money targeting suburban teenage boys and gotten tons of press by angering soccer moms. And they’ve done it successfully for nearly 10 years. So now “Bully” is out on store shelves. Will it sell because it’s a good game, or because it’s controversial? And as a PlayStation 2-exclusive game in the era of next-gen consoles, will it sell well at all? Reviews of the game, including MSNBC.com's, have been overwhelmingly favorable, with most terming the post-announcement freak-outs as much ado about nothing. Rockstar, for its part, dismisses the criticism, saying “Bully" tells adolescent angst how it really is. And, that "Bully" isn't all about bullying, or even fighting. The game's ending depends on how you, the player, pilot your 15-year old character, Jimmy, through his first year at the unfriendly Bullworth Academy prep school. If you choose to defend the geeks, they’ll have your back if you run afoul of the jocks. If you team up with the bullies, you might find yourself at a disadvantage with the preps. All realistic scenarios, says company spokesman Rodney Walker. “If you’re a gangster in 1990s L.A., you say dirty words,” says Walker. “We couldn’t have a game where [Jimmy] could only be good, because that’s not realistic.” Until recently, only a few news organizations had seen the game. In August, a handful of journalists were invited to Rockstar’s New York offices to watch the developers play through chunks of the game. Based on their short look, the journalists concluded that Rockstar had made another darkly funny game with its signature free-wheeling, explore-at-will style. And unlike “Grand Theft Auto,” where you can mow down pedestrians in your stolen car, wedgies and baseball bats are the best ways to take down your enemies in “Bully.” But the critics still wouldn’t let up. “Schools in the U.K. have considerable discipline problems involving low-level disruption and disrespect for authority,” says Liz Carnell, director of the U.K.-based Bullying Online, which initially called for a ban on the game. “We don’t think that a computer game which shows incidents of violence in school will do anything to make teachers’ jobs easier.” And here we are again at the decades-old question: Will a 15 year-old who plays “Bully” act out what he sees onscreen? The answer depends on who you talk to. Industry groups like the Electronic Software Association cite scholars such as Loyola University Chicago’s Lorraine Buerger, who in 2006 wrote, “Social scientific data to demonstrate a causative relationship between perceived harms associated with violent video games remains unproven.” Bruce Bartholow, assistant professor of psychology at the University of Missouri, Columbia, disagrees. “There is voluminous evidence that young people act out what they see onscreen,” he says. “And the process of imitating onscreen behaviors appears to be similar to what happens when young people imitate behaviors they witness firsthand.” In September, the Electronics Software Ratings Board (ESRB) granted “Bully” a Teen rating, which is the equivalent of a PG-13 for movies. A month earlier, the famously strict Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification awarded “Bully” a moderate rating. Rockstar changed the name of the game in Europe to “Canis Canem Edit,” or “Dog Eat Dog” in Latin. Despite this apparent attempt at appeasement, the game was given a 15 certificate, meant to ban its sale to minors under the age of 15. And British retailers Currys and PC World opted not to stock the game. As a last ditch effort, Florida attorney (and so-called anti-violent video game advocate) Jack Thompson, who to date has filed lawsuits against Wal-Mart and Rockstar over the title he calls a “Columbine simulator,” convinced a circuit court judge in Miami-Dade County to play "Bully" himself and determine if it should be sold to minors. Judge Ronald Friedman acknowledged that the game was violent, but cleared it for sale in Florida anyway. Tweens and teens are notoriously fickle consumers, and this holiday buying season will be dominated by the battle of the next-gen consoles. But the PlayStation 2 has an enormous established base — one that's not going to evaporate this year, or even next. Take 2 won't comment on early sales figures, and Wal-Mart will only say that its pre-orders of the game were about what they expected. A few calls to various game retailers around the country (in Mobile, Ala., Milwaukee, Wis., and Bellevue, Wash.,) reveals that the game is selling well. In fact, months before the game landed on store shelves, patrons were reserving copies at the GameStop in Bellevue. Rockstar and Take 2 can thank their loyal fans and the positive reviews for their sales. But they can also thank the critics. In an era where all publicity is good publicity (how, otherwise, could we explain Paris Hilton?), "Bully" has had more than its share. © 2006 MSNBC Interactive From Will conroversy - or quality - sell Bully? by Kristin Kalning

Games among games: Violence among violence

Computer Games - Violence - Case Study: Mortal Kombat and Manhunt

Mortal Kombat

Mortal Kombat was released in 1992. It became a sensation in the video arcades of the 1990s because of its real-life graphics and never before seen images of blood and gore. The game was based around the premise of hand-to-hand combat fighting between two characters on screen. The player would assume control of one of the characters and co-ordinate certain combinations of kicks, punches and special moves to inflict as much devastation on the opposition as possible. By today’s standards, the graphics in Mortal Kombat were tame but in the early 1990s, they heralded a new type of visual experience. Adding to the novelty of the game were a variety of finishing moves with such names as ‘Fatality’ that allowed players to complete especially elaborate actions such as decapitating the opposition.

Media reactions to the game around the world and in Australia were particularly negative. Many people believed that the blood and gore contained in the game was unnecessary and harmful. ‘Mortal Kombat depicts one of the heroes of the game decapitating a victim, another prefers electrocution, a third rips out the still beating heart of his victim with his bear hands’ (Setzer and Duckett, 1994: 5). Games such as Mortal Kombat and Night Trap prompted the extension of the film and television classification scheme to videogames to limit the distribution of objectionable material. Attorney-General of the time, Michael Lavarch said "Ministers believe a tougher approach is necessary to reflect concerns about the possible harmful effects of the interactive nature of the games - especially on children too young to distinguish between fantasy and reality in playing them� (Reuters, 1994).

The negative reaction also prompted Mortal Kombat distributor Nintendo to release a second version of the game. Known as the SNES version, the gore fatalities were changed to tame ones and the blood was changed to white sweat. The Sega version of the game used a code mechanism to make the gore features optional in gameplay. Nevertheless, the Sega version with the gory details still intact sold more copies than the SNES version.

Mortal Kombat was one of the first videogames to provoke widespread negativity about violent themes in videogames. It prompted a review of the Australian classification system in place at the time and signalled to game producers that there were many groups in society concerned about violence in videogames that needed to be addressed. However, Mortal Kombat went on to become a cultural icon with many sequels spawned in the series, as well as two movies, a live action television show and an animated series.

AmandaTaylor 12:35, 27 Oct 2004 (EST)

Manhunt

Manhunt, by Rockstar Games, was released at the end of 2003 and has become one of 2004’s biggest selling titles. It has been described as one of the most visceral and intense videogames ever made. The objective of the game is to escape from a prison and in doing so to kill as many people as possible for the omnipresent narrator’s snuff film. Outrage about the game’s content as well as its extremely realistic images surrounded its release. In July 2004, a boy was killed in Britain by another boy who was said to be obsessed by the game, prompting further outrage and controversy. The media effects debate was also stirred up again by this event. In Australia, the Office of Film and Literature banned the game from being sold in stores. New Zealand also banned the game – the first ever to be banned in the country (Smith, 2004).

The events also added more fire to the Australian censorship debate with the Victorian Government calling for the addition of a category to the classification system to allow the game to be sold in Australia, while other groups called for a total ban on the game and others like it. Organisations like the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia (IEAA) claimed that by banning such games, the right of adults to choose what material they want to consume was jeopardised (Smith, 2004). The Opposition Leader in the West Australian government branded the game as ‘excessively brutal and violent’ and said that it ‘rewards and praises the player for the more violent and the more brutal the killings and bashings are.’ (Mendez, 2004)

As with Mortal Kombat, Manhunt has prompted widespread debate and controversy over its content. The increased graphical capabilities of software technology in 2004 has meant the themes within the game are heightened through real-life graphics. This is very much like what happened with Mortal Kombat in 1992. Its graphics were extremely realistic for the time period. Overall these case studies show that the violence in videogames debate is a longstanding and enduring issue that has not changed dramatically in its few decades of existence.
From computer games: violence - case study- Mortal Kombat and Manhunt by KCB336 New Media Technologies students in the Creative Industries Faculty, QUT.

Keep in Mind

Challenges in changing the many views of teenagers and any other under age gamers are pretty low by chance. With that in mind the only thing left to do for the community other than penializing the gaming company itself is to take part in a hearing of teenager kids and their parents to discuss what actually makes these supposedly violent type of video games to be as influential as the critics/politics say they are. In doing so these politicians may realize what exactly goes on in the heads' of teens and their addiction to play high in age rated video games.

Game Violence: Aggressive or Non-aggressive?

Does game violence make teens aggressive?

Researchers say parents should look closely at findings of new study

In a recent research study, adolescents played two different types of video games for 30 minutes. Teens that played the violent game (right) showed increased activity in the amygdala, which is involved in emotional arousal.

RSNA By Kristin Kalning Games editor MSNBC updated 11:58 a.m. ET Dec. 8, 2006 Kristin Kalning Games editor Can video games make kids more violent? A new study employing state-of-the-art brain-scanning technology says that the answer may be yes. Researchers at the Indiana University School of Medicine say that brain scans of kids who played a violent video game showed an increase in emotional arousal – and a corresponding decrease of activity in brain areas involved in self-control, inhibition and attention. Does this mean that your teenager will feel an uncontrollable urge to go on a shooting rampage after playing “Call of Duty?” Vince Mathews, the principal investigator on the study, hesitates to make that leap. But he says he does think that the study should encourage parents to look more closely at the types of games their kids are playing. “Based on our results, I think parents should be aware of the relationship between violent video-game playing and brain function.” Mathews and his colleagues chose two action games to include in their research -- one violent the other not. The first game was the high-octane but non-violent racing game “Need for Speed: Underground.” The other was the ultra-violent first-person shooter “Medal of Honor: Frontline.” The team divided a group of 44 adolescents into two groups, and randomly assigned the kids to play one of the two games. Immediately after the play sessions, the children were given MRIs of their brains. The scans showed a negative effect on the brains of the teens who played “Medal of Honor” for 30 minutes. That same effect was not present in the kids who played “Need for Speed.” The only difference? Violent content. What’s not clear is whether the activity picked up by the MRIs indicates a lingering — or worse, permanent — effect on the kids’ brains. And it’s also not known what effect longer play times might have. The scope of this study was 30 minutes of play, and one brain scan per kid, although further research is in the works. OK. But what about violent TV shows? Or violent films? Has anyone ever done a brain scan of kids that have just watched a violent movie? Someone has. John P. Murray, a psychology professor at Kansas State University, conducted a very similar experiment, employing the same technology used in Mathews’ study. His findings are similar. Kids in his study experienced increased emotional arousal when watching short clips from the boxing movie “Rocky IV.” So, why is everyone picking on video games? Probably because there’s a much smaller body of research on video games. They just haven’t been around as long as TV and movies, so the potential effects on children are a bigger unknown. That’s a scary thing for a parent. Larry Ley, the director and coordinator of research for the Center for Successful Parenting, which funded Mathews’ study, says the purpose of the research was to help parents make informed decisions. “There’s enough data that clearly indicates that [game violence] is a problem,” he says. “And it’s not just a problem for kids with behavior disorders.” But not everyone is convinced that this latest research adds much to the debate – particularly the game development community. One such naysayer is Doug Lowenstein, president of the Entertainment Software Association. “We've seen other studies in this field that have made dramatic claims but turn out to be less persuasive when objectively analyzed.” The ESA has a whole section of its Web site dedicated to the topic of video game violence, which would suggest that they get asked about it — a lot. And they’ve got plenty of answers at the ready for the critics who want to lay school shootings or teen aggression at the feet of the game industry. Several studies cited by the ESA point to games’ potential benefits for developing decision-making skills or bettering reaction times. Ley, however, argues such studies aren’t credible because they were produced by “hired guns” funded by the multi-billion-dollar game industry. “We’re not trying to sell [parents] anything,” he says. “We don’t have a product. The video game industry does.” Increasingly parents are more accepting of video game violence, chalking it up to being a part of growing up. “I was dead-set against violent video games,” says Kelley Windfield, a Sammamish, Wa.-based mother of two. “But my husband told me I had to start loosening up.” Laura Best, a mother of three from Clovis, Calif., says she looks for age-appropriate games for her 14 year-old son, Kyle. And although he doesn’t play a lot of games, he does tend to gravitate towards shooters like “Medal of Honor.” But she isn’t concerned that Kyle will become aggressive as a result. “That’s like saying a soccer game or a football game will make a kid more aggressive,” she says. “It’s about self-control, and you’ve got to learn it.” Ley says he believes further research, for which the Center for Successful Parenting is trying to arrange, will prove a cause-and-effect relationship between game violence and off-screen aggression. But for now, he says, the study released last week gives his organization the ammunition it needs to prove that parents need to be more aware of how kids are using their free time. “Let’s quit using various Xboxes as babysitters instead of doing healthful activities,” says Ley, citing the growing epidemic of childhood obesity in the United States. And who, really, can argue with that? © 2007 MSNBC Interactive From the study of video game violence towards teens, "aggressive or non-aggressive?" by Kristin Kalning