Is Violence In Video Games a Problem?

Is Violence in Video Games a Problem?

Is violence in video games a problem? It’s a question that’s been at the heart of countless video game controversies ever since games have had the technology to properly depict it. Anytime there’s been a potential link between violent acts and violent video games, mainstream media and politicians have been quick to throw the blame toward the fastest growing industry; look no further then the Sandy Hook shooting being blamed on the killer’s obsession with violent games.  From 1992’s Mortal Combat, to boycotts of 2013’s GTA V for allegedly promoting violence toward women, controversies surrounding violence in the industry are nothing new.

More recently however, after the Florida shootings earlier in March President Trump was quick to pivot the discussion from gun control towards the possibility of restricting access to video games: “I’m hearing more and more people say the level of violence on video games is really shaping people’s thoughts…maybe they have to put a rating system for that.” Despite the fact the ESRB has been rating games in America for more than 20 years.

It’s not hard to see through Trump’s statements as nothing more then a distraction from the real problems of gun control laws, especially since there have been countless experiments disproving the theory that violent video games turn people violent, including a recent study in January by the University of York citing that violent games do not “prime” players to act aggressively.

So, is violence in video games a problem? The science says no. What about the art of video games though? The Last Of Us uses it to convey a message of hope and love, in a dead America surrounded by gore and anger it makes the central relationship of the game feel like the most important thing in the fucking world. Bioshock uses it to make a political statement, as does GTA V with its biting satire of the way the media views modern day America. There are several poignant depictions of violence in video games, but t’s still an underwhelming minority. For every game that puts violence to good use, there are 20 games that use violence just because it looks cool. And this is definitely undeniable. There’s a certain catharsis involved in seeing a robots head pop after you land a perfect headshot. Violence in most games have no weight, and it’s easy to see how people might think games desensitize people to violence when they’re used so flippantly, so often.  But as an community should we be so surprised or even insulted when the White House releases a 90 second supercut showing off how violent games can be. It certainly minimizes and disrespects the power that games can have, but rarely do. So many games include some form of violence just because they include combat as the primary source of interaction; games that aren’t necessarily about violence still feature it very prominently. Everything from Pokémon and Zelda to Ori and Persona are in no way about violence, but combat is still what you’ll be doing 70% of the time. It’s easy to feel bad for developers because there aren’t any easy fixes, combat in these games are fun, it’s the reason most of them sell, and most importantly there aren’t many alternatives.

Franchises like Animal Crossing thrive on their lack of combat; they’re all about the relaxation. And it’s obviously easy to not include any sort of violence into sports/racing/puzzle games, but it’s absolutely impossible to make a fighting game with no fighting, or a shooter with no shooting. Even other genres like platformers such as Mario or Sonic don’t particularly need any enemies, but the threat of them adds urgency; Mario would be half as fun if there weren’t an evil mushrooms to avoid or rockets to dodge. But it’s also increasingly difficult for big budget developers to experiment with their games: violence sells. With the fact that games are becoming more expensive to make, it’s almost impossible to not ship a £50/$60 game without violence. A recent example, Sea of Thieves is a AAA game that’s easy to imagine with no combat, in fact I’ve seen several opinions online saying the game would be better if it didn’t have any PvE combat, if it was just you and three friends exploring the seas without having to worry about any enemy players chasing after you. But how do you advertise that? How do you get a big audience to be excited about that? How do you make a profit on that? Game development is a major risk that many publishers and studios are understandably, unwilling to experiment with.

Ultimately, it’s hard to come to a definite conclusion and sit firmly on one side of the fence for a question like this. Depictions of violence in games can suck. Definitely. But it’s not necessary for every game that includes violence to explore it with nuance or add some kind of artistic message to the game, for the game to be a great game. Sometimes just being fun is enough. But progress is slow and we can’t be shocked every time Australia bans a game for their violence or a politician uses the industry as a scapegoat. That will continue to happen until playing games become as commonplace as watching films.