230 réponses à ce sujet

[Jock Cranley]

If you think mass shootings are some kind of common occurrence here then you gave been misled. The sensationalist media flocks to shooting scenes like buzzards to roadkill whenever one occurs, and they love to drum up ratings as high as they can by making an international spectacle out of it and selling you the idea that the United States is a nation full of gun-toting lunatics who fill schools with bulletholes every chance they get.

 

The truth is most people here don't own any firearms and most of the ones who do use them mainly for hunting or for sport, or keep them stored away for a rainy day. Don't buy into the hype that Americans are obsessed with guns or that shootouts are some kind of common occurrence here. It's bullshit.

 

 

If BBC said it, it must be true.

[TheBunz]

Nah, ignoring him results in more amusement.

Come on dermi. I haven't caught up with you. What's new?

And what's with all this heat on gun control? Have any of you even fired one before?

[Bod02]

If you think mass shootings are some kind of common occurrence here then you have been misled. The sensationalist media flocks to shooting scenes like buzzards to roadkill whenever one occurs, and they love to drum up ratings as high as they can by making an international spectacle out of it and selling you the idea that the United States is a nation full of gun-toting lunatics who fill schools with bulletholes every chance they get.

 

The truth is most people here don't own any firearms and most of the ones who do use them mainly for hunting or for sport, or keep them stored away for a rainy day. Don't buy into the hype that Americans are obsessed with guns or that shootouts are some kind of common occurrence here. It's bullshit.

I don't really see Americans that way, sorry if it seemed like it. I never referred to the US as a whole. I only meant the actual gun nuts that probably have the second amendment as their bed sheet cover.

 

I don't think you're a narcissist.

Me neither, but you fell into an obvious troll and it was kinda funny. (and i mean you've been kinda mean to him in the past)

[Bod02]

  wow you just keep coming in swinging and missing, it's a bit sad and funny at the same time. Never said it caused violence, in fact I actively would deny that it does altogether, so maybe you should start reading my responses before you keep making yourself look like an ass response after response? Up to you. I highly suspect I know much more on the issue then you do. 

 

Really all I've said so far is that he took bits of true information and warped it, which is a pretty broad statement without context, how you keep taking that and saying "you said X" from that is beyond me, perhaps reading comprehension was not your strong point in school?

 

Just so we're clear, it raises aggression, aggression does not = violence, nor does it indicate that the person will necessarily be violent which is why I keep going out of my way to point out the issue in what he said.

 

*will patiently await your next response where you continue to make up things I said so you can keep arguing*

 

I never denied that. If one were to say that video games can increase aggressive behavior then they have a point. If one says that they CAUSE the behavior then they're a moron. 

 

I will say that if a young enough person is playing a violent video game they may see the protagonist as a "model" and as such mimic their behavior. Social learning theory says that we can learn how to do certain tasks by observing others. These others are defined as "models", as the learner would be modeling the behavior. The model can also reinforce (increase the likelihood of repeating the behavior) the learned behavior or punish (decrease) the learned behavior.

 

It is because of this that you can watch children reenact certain scenes from movies/favorite cartoons/television shows, and that has also been shown with research. I am unaware of any large scale experiments that directly tie video games to this, but I don't see it as being improbable. 

 

If anything, it's supposed to be guarded against with the whole video game rating system, but the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of it falls on the consumer not the game maker. Making people understand that issue  is where the problem lies.

 

 

 

Correction, the term is narcissist. Narcissistic is the term used to describe the behavior.

 

On that note, I have many unfortunate qualities, but being a narcissist is not one of them.

In addition to everything you two said, the desensitisation to violence is also an undeniably obvious effect. But yea whether all or any of that causes actual violence I have no idea.

[Dermain]

I don't really see Americans that way, sorry if it seemed like it. I never referred to the US as a whole. I only meant the actual gun nuts that probably have the second amendment as their bed sheet cover.

 

Me neither, but you fell into an obvious troll and it was kinda funny. (and i mean you've been kinda mean to him in the past)

 

You say that as if it wasn't my intention.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

 

Consider the Gorilla as a publisher/developer.

[Fast Jimmy]

Consider the Gorilla as a publisher/developer.

You can't tell me who to consider a gorilla!

[Seraphim24]

I think gamers could also be angry because people keep seeing things in games that aren't there/are really dumb accusations about really harmless stuff.

 

Yeah the politicization thing seems like one of the biggest actually... it's like.. uh.. you know these are all just things we did for fun. I can't remember people caring about half the stuff that goes on in gaming X number of years ago. If you don't like it, don't play it. I don't know where all these people who somehow don't like these things but keep playing and complaining about it came from, it can definitely be annoying.

 

Pikmin though... that's pretty incredible.

[Fawx9]

It may also be due to the fact that the crazies are winning in the censorship war: http://www.target.co...-Release-v2.pdf

 

Jack was stopped, but there's a new group trying to pull the same stuff and this time the press is allowing them to do it.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Its a rough time to be a gamer with awareness of the social politics in the gaming world. Oh well, at least there's other games to help relieve all this stress and not hurt anybody irl.

[Isichar]

Its a rough time to be a gamer with awareness of the social politics in the gaming world. Oh well, at least there's other games to help relieve all this stress and not hurt anybody irl.

I want to play Pokemon, but isn't that really just supporting animal slavery and cruelty by capturing them and forcing them to fight each other? And how can you say it doesn't hurt anyone when it breeds entire generations of people that think this sort of thing is OK? I disgust myself.

[Cainhurst Crow]

I want to play Pokemon, but isn't that really just supporting animal slavery and cruelty by capturing them and forcing them to fight each other? And how can you say it doesn't hurt anyone when it breeds entire generations of people that think this sort of thing is OK? I disgust myself.

 

Stop talking and train that Fennekin. Redeem yourself for the glory of Delphox Sempai.

[Isichar]

Stop talking and train that Fennekin.

The funny part being that's exactly who I chose too

[SmilesJA]

It may also be due to the fact that the crazies are winning in the censorship war: http://www.target.co...-Release-v2.pdf

 

Jack was stopped, but there's a new group trying to pull the same stuff and this time the press is allowing them to do it.

 

I wonder if these same people saw the torture of Mr. K?  It's sad that something like that is ignored and the murder of a single prositute is emphasized as violence against women.

[Straw Nihilist]

I hope I'm not too late but this was too fun to pass up. 

Just so we're clear, it raises aggression, aggression does not = violence, nor does it indicate that the person will necessarily be violent which is why I keep going out of my way to point out the issue in what he said.

 

Oh I am so glad you said that. So glad. Are familiar with psychology, Isichar? Nevermind actually, I'm just going to go ahead and bring it up. Right it'd be very unprofessional of me as an internet ranter to lecture you without giving evidence. Why? Because well, with evidence you'll know that I'm telling you this not because I'm shoving my opinion down your throat but because you are simply wrong and, being the altruist that I am, want to wipe that filthy ignorance clean from that addled mind of yours. So my evidence for this evening will be some experiments. You know... because science is credible and ****. So without further ado, in the study conducted by Ferguson et al. ( 10.1177/0093854807311719)(this is a doi, just in case you think I'm making up this scientific evidence. Nay, that seems to be your thing and I'd hate to cramp your style)  on the link between video game violence and the link between it and aggression, they found that in both cases, there was no evidence to support the hypothesis, proposed by yourself, that exposure to violent video games would spur violent outbursts of aggression. This was a pretty recent study and I'm choosing this one in particular because it's broad approach in terms of grouping which I'll get to in a second. 

 

In the study participants were divided into three groups: the first group was assigned to play a non-violent video game, and the second violent ones. Interestingly however, those in the third group were given a choice between the non-violent and the violent group. Like with the first two groups, this group showed no notable increase or decrease in the basic levels of aggression. This is interesting because one would assume most if not all of those that chose the violent video game would have been people that are familiar with such games. The fact that those participants weren’t shown to be aggressive shows that not only does violent video games not have an effect on short term aggression levels, but long term also. That means that even if a casual relationship would exist, as suggested by the expert in the field known as you, the effects may well be so minimal that those engaging in aggressive video games routinely would be long since desensitised to their aggression inducing effects those aforementioned effects would have a chance to manifest themselves inside the subjects. 

 

 

But is such a claim plausible? Dare I be so bold as to suggest your remarks are incorrect? Can one become desensitised to the aggression begetting effects of an object or media? In Berkowitz and Lepage’s (10.1037/h0025008 Oh look, another doi. I'm so thoughtful) experiment on the link between guns and aggressive behaviour, it was shown that participants were more likely to administer electric shocks to other participants, which was the act used to record aggression levels in this experiment. However, a notable finding in this experiment was that the so called “weapons effect” had less of an effect on those acquainted with the stimuli. In other words, the more exposure one had to guns, the less aggressive they became at the sight of said stimulus. Henceforth it seems highly probable that, like with the video games, the more familiar one is with them, the more desensitised they to the aggression they invoke. That is to say if aggression is even invoked, which it isn't. This is just a safety. You know... just in case. 

 

But what of all the motherfuckers that say there is a link, what of their experiments? Glad you asked Jimmy, I'm calling you Jimmy now, it just sort of happened so bare with me. As aggression is drawn from a myriad of stimuli in everyday life, it is quite possible that aggression that was recorded in studies in favour of this violence and aggression link (Let's say...Anderson & Dill's one for example, that's a nice one I just had a flick through there. Unfortunately that one doesn't have a doi so here's the full APA reference courtesy of moi, your pal billy: Anderson, C. & Dill, K. (2000). Video Games and Aggressive Thoughts, Feelings, and Behavior in the Laboratory and in Life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 772-790 ) may well stem from the most common igniter of aggression in the lives of teenagers, whom hold the age demographic for video game players: problems in the household. This confound variable is addressed in the second study conducted by the main man himself Ferguson (Same doi as his first) in which it was found that once exposure to family violence was controlled, there was no change in aggression levels between those playing violent and non-violent video games. That Jimmy, is what we call a confounding variable. So in addition to learning that there is no link you also learned that, so yeah, you're welcome Paul(Again, just go with it). 

 

Do I need a conclusion? I can provide if you want. You know, because I'm just such a stellar guy and all. 

[Isichar]

\facepalm so hard

"there was no evidence to support the hypothesis, proposed by yourself, that exposure to violent video games would spur violent outbursts of aggression."

Right there. If you can't see the issue then you are entirely all too.. Special (let's go with that) for me to spend time explaining it.


Edit: Ah what the hell. When someone says they are directly opposed to the notion of videogames causing violence and you make a comment like that as a response, I have to laugh. You're either trolling, or by far one of the most special users to grace these forums.

[Straw Nihilist]

\facepalm so hard

"there was no evidence to support the hypothesis, proposed by yourself, that exposure to violent video games would spur violent outbursts of aggression."

Right there. If you can't see the issue then you are entirely all too.. Special (let's go with that) for me to spend time explaining it.

I was being hyperbolic of your point there because you strike me as an extreme guy bro. Aggression precedes aggressive actions. Simple causation. Although you may also call it satire, which I afforded myself seeing as how I already dropped what you were saying faster than the bass.

 

Edit to accommodate your edit: for one to claim that there is no link between video games and violence one must also accept the fact there is no correlation between aggression and playing video games, for, and I'm pretty sure I said this already, aggression precedes violence, as aggression, by its very nature is violent. 

 

Man, if I knew you were going to topple your own argument you could have let me know ahead and saved me time, bro. 

[Isichar]

/double facepalm

So basically "you said games don't cause violence, so I took that as you saying games cause violence"

BRILLIANT! Truly your logic is on a whole different level then mine. An ignoramus like myself could never hope to match your level.

It's really quite simple. You don't understand the difference between aggression and violence.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

If you don't like it, don't play it.

 

[Seraphim24]

I want to play Pokemon, but isn't that really just supporting animal slavery and cruelty by capturing them and forcing them to fight each other? And how can you say it doesn't hurt anyone when it breeds entire generations of people that think this sort of thing is OK? I disgust myself.

 

I can't think of anything more horrible than Pikachu.

 

 

This demonic furball is a threat to world peace!

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

 

I hope I'm not too late but this was too fun to pass up. 

 

Oh I am so glad you said that. So glad. Are familiar with psychology, Isichar? Nevermind actually, I'm just going to go ahead and bring it up. Right it'd be very unprofessional of me as an internet ranter to lecture you without giving evidence. Why? Because well, with evidence you'll know that I'm telling you this not because I'm shoving my opinion down your throat but because you are simply wrong and, being the altruist that I am, want to wipe that filthy ignorance clean from that addled mind of yours. So my evidence for this evening will be some experiments. You know... because science is credible and ****. So without further ado, in the study conducted by Ferguson et al. ( 10.1177/0093854807311719)(this is a doi, just in case you think I'm making up this scientific evidence. Nay, that seems to be your thing and I'd hate to cramp your style)  on the link between video game violence and the link between it and aggression, they found that in both cases, there was no evidence to support the hypothesis, proposed by yourself, that exposure to violent video games would spur violent outbursts of aggression. This was a pretty recent study and I'm choosing this one in particular because it's broad approach in terms of grouping which I'll get to in a second. 

 

In the study participants were divided into three groups: the first group was assigned to play a non-violent video game, and the second violent ones. Interestingly however, those in the third group were given a choice between the non-violent and the violent group. Like with the first two groups, this group showed no notable increase or decrease in the basic levels of aggression. This is interesting because one would assume most if not all of those that chose the violent video game would have been people that are familiar with such games. The fact that those participants weren’t shown to be aggressive shows that not only does violent video games not have an effect on short term aggression levels, but long term also. That means that even if a casual relationship would exist, as suggested by the expert in the field known as you, the effects may well be so minimal that those engaging in aggressive video games routinely would be long since desensitised to their aggression inducing effects those aforementioned effects would have a chance to manifest themselves inside the subjects. 

 

 

But is such a claim plausible? Dare I be so bold as to suggest your remarks are incorrect? Can one become desensitised to the aggression begetting effects of an object or media? In Berkowitz and Lepage’s (10.1037/h0025008 Oh look, another doi. I'm so thoughtful) experiment on the link between guns and aggressive behaviour, it was shown that participants were more likely to administer electric shocks to other participants, which was the act used to record aggression levels in this experiment. However, a notable finding in this experiment was that the so called “weapons effect” had less of an effect on those acquainted with the stimuli. In other words, the more exposure one had to guns, the less aggressive they became at the sight of said stimulus. Henceforth it seems highly probable that, like with the video games, the more familiar one is with them, the more desensitised they to the aggression they invoke. That is to say if aggression is even invoked, which it isn't. This is just a safety. You know... just in case. 

 

But what of all the motherfuckers that say there is a link, what of their experiments? Glad you asked Jimmy, I'm calling you Jimmy now, it just sort of happened so bare with me. As aggression is drawn from a myriad of stimuli in everyday life, it is quite possible that aggression that was recorded in studies in favour of this violence and aggression link (Let's say...Anderson & Dill's one for example, that's a nice one I just had a flick through there. Unfortunately that one doesn't have a doi so here's the full APA reference courtesy of moi, your pal billy: Anderson, C. & Dill, K. (2000). Video Games and Aggressive Thoughts, Feelings, and Behavior in the Laboratory and in Life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 772-790 ) may well stem from the most common igniter of aggression in the lives of teenagers, whom hold the age demographic for video game players: problems in the household. This confound variable is addressed in the second study conducted by the main man himself Ferguson (Same doi as his first) in which it was found that once exposure to family violence was controlled, there was no change in aggression levels between those playing violent and non-violent video games. That Jimmy, is what we call a confounding variable. So in addition to learning that there is no link you also learned that, so yeah, you're welcome Paul(Again, just go with it). 

 

Do I need a conclusion? I can provide if you want. You know, because I'm just such a stellar guy and all. 

 

 

This is literally the only post in this thread that I've read since the last time I, myself, posted in here.

 

 

It was worth it. 

 

(Unt nao I veel skoolk avay to zee quieter corners of zee intranetz unts ageen.)