Violence in video games: where to draw the line?

[JChapel]

To give you all a little background, I’m 21 years old, and up until around 2 years ago, after a major bout of depression and several life-changing events, I wasn’t taking my faith very seriously. This has all changed dramatically following those events, and I’ve since been examining how I’ve been living my life, and have worked quite hard to bring myself into parity with the church.

Now, to the topic. Video games have always been one of my favorite pastimes. I chalk it up to them being a nice way to “get away” from things after a stressful day. Anyway, when I look back at lot of the video games I’ve played over these fast few years, I’ve noticed how many contain quite a bit of violence, some almost shockingly so, although I didn’t see it, or it didn’t phase me at the time.

I’m just wondering where we as Catholics should draw the line of violence in video games. Should we avoid video games with violence altogether? Is violence permissible against fictional monsters? Is violence permissible, but only in cases where we aren’t the aggressor? Are we required to follow the just war theory in video games? Does the realism of the graphics in the game factor into this?

Sorry if I’m over-analyzing this. I’m just trying to figure out what’s ok for me to keep / keep playing and what I’ll need to throw out.

 

[AB_Juney]

If you do a search for “video games”, you will find many discussions on this topic from the past, which might help

 

[WoundedIcon]

The rule of thumb I follow is “If it’s morally licit in real life, then don’t worry about it.” So war games, rpgs, cartoony stuff, killing monsters, and so on. I wouldn’t join the Dark Brotherhood on The Elder Scrolls or anything like that, or play GTA. I also avoid gory stuff, and if it’s something like the game Civilization then I build an army for defensive purposes. I don’t try to be imperialistic or hack the various Barbarian tribes that you discover from time to time into pieces for fun. Basically competition and heroism, not villainy and slaughter.

 

[Baelor]

If it leads you to sin, avoid it. If not, then it is not sinful, but perhaps more or less edifying depending on your personality and where you are in life. That is, follow your conscience and avoid near occasions of sin.

 

[Geist]

Video games are works of fiction devoid of impact in reality.

I’ve played vioelnt video games since a child, and have harmed 0 people in the real world.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Video games are works of fiction devoid of impact in reality.

I’ve played vioelnt video games since a child, and have harmed 0 people in the real world.

Bullwinkle the Moose once said “I like violence, ’ cuz they’re purple and they smell nice!”

 

[lerapt78]

Video games are works of fiction devoid of impact in reality.

I’ve played vioelnt video games since a child, and have harmed 0 people in the real world.

With respect Geist, your last statement is often echoed by people who refuse to condemn the flaunting of poor behavior. I apologize if I’m projecting too much into your post, but I think it’s too dangerous a comment to go unaddressed. We hear that same line repeated in many ways: “I’ve always watched pornography, and I still respect women” (in defense of immoral media), “I grew up with a single parent, and I turned out okay” (so as not to disapprove of having children out of wedlock), “I smoked pot as a teenager, and I’m still a produtive member of society” (in defense of drug usage), etc, etc. We’ve unfortunately seen many ways though in which casual dismissal of concerns have negatively impacted our current society.

While your situation is accurately reflective of those of the many other children who were also exposed to violent images and likewise grew up to be non-violent adults, I don’t think it’s overreaching to be concerned about the level and amount of violence children are exposed to today. There’s no denial that more and more violence is being committed today by children (including adolescents), and although I personally wouldn’t pin it down entirely to video games, there’s no doubt in my mind that they do play a role via desensitation.

I agree with you when you note that there are certain instances which cannot be reconciled with reality, and therefore do not pose a threat. Such an instance would be battling monsters, for example. However, we’ve seen that video games have not only become increasingly more violent in general, but that the *types *of violence depicted *have *imitated reality to a larger degree. When the hero of the video game is shooting up an alien spacecraft with a laser, he has no way of relating that to his personal life, and no opportunity to actually act upon that simulation in the real world. When the video game “hero” can be seen using a gun, or hitting a woman however, it’s not so far a stretch to think that real-world depictions of these occurrences might shock him a bit less. I think that’s one of the big problems in our society today - horrible acts don’t shock us quite as much as they used to.

As to when and how far to draw the line. . . I don’t have a definitive answer to this, and would enjoy seeing others’ opinions. I acknowledge that a certain level of violence will always be attractive to boys (and men), and I certainly don’t advocate limiting their entertainment to tea parties , but I think we should be able to make a distinction between the justifiable violence that enhances masculine development and the exploitative kind that serves no purpose other than to feed dark or senseless urges.

 

[melekali]

Have you ever looked for video games that incorporate other things than violence into them? Sports, mysteries, puzzles (think Myst) and the like.

 

[CyberAngel]

just stop playing violent games

 

[PyroDrew]

While your situation is accurately reflective of those of the many other children who were also exposed to violent images and likewise grew up to be non-violent adults, I don’t think it’s overreaching to be concerned about the level and amount of violence children are exposed to today.

True. Likewise it would be overreaching to put a 21 year old adult on the same level as a 7 year old child regarding the level and amount of violence.

There’s no denial that more and more violence is being committed today by children (including adolescents), and although I personally wouldn’t pin it down entirely to video games, there’s no doubt in my mind that they do play a role via desensitation.

???
I’m not sure where you’re getting your facts. According to federal crime statistics, the rate of juvenile violent crime in the United States is at a 30-year low. Many other reputable sources state similar findings. With the rapid increase in millions of sales of violent games, first world countries should be seeing an epidemic of violence, but instead violence has declined. What has increased among the young in the US… obesity. Violence isn’t the danger of video games, but too many video games can cause one to get badly out of shape and/or hinder their social skills (chatting with strangers online for hours every day about monsters/dolls isn’t the same as meeting/talking/dealing with real people).

When the video game “hero” can be seen using a gun, or hitting a woman however, it’s not so far a stretch to think that real-world depictions of these occurrences might shock him a bit less.

As opposed to when a “hero” that they admire in old movies use a gun? Hitting women in video games is bad, but the old James Bond movies with Bond hitting women is ok? Women hitting/killing men in movies and video games is ok, but not vice-versa? What about books with violence and the news?

I think that’s one of the big problems in our society today - horrible acts don’t shock us quite as much as they used to.

I would rather have a friend skip the “shock” phase (especially the potential stunned or fainting effects) if I was shot and bleeding. A cool level-headed person dialing 911 would be fine. Constantly repeating “my friend has been shot” to the 911 operator while (s)he’s in shock, not so much. If playing Call of Duty helped them overcome that “shock” factor wouldn’t that be a good thing?

As to when and how far to draw the line. . . I don’t have a definitive answer to this, and would enjoy seeing others’ opinions.

Games have ratings like movies. If a parent feels a PG movie is too adult for their kid then use the equivalent in the video games (T?). If a parent doesn’t limit tv/movie time for a child why would they do it for video games? IMO, the tv/movie is much worse since it’s far more real looking and the entire body can be idle for hours. That’s impossible for any video game.

I think we should be able to make a distinction between the justifiable violence that enhances masculine development and the exploitative kind that serves no purpose other than to feed dark or senseless urges.

One could counter that saying violent video games can help improve an individual’s hand-eye coordination, strategy, organization, monetary management, etc and in a group co-operation, communication, leadership, etc… all far more than any violent movie would do. And what would boys do instead… work out at the gym increasing their testosterone and thus potential aggression and watch DragonBallZ (violent cartoon)? Weekly practice/events of rugby, wrestling, martial arts against a real guy would never(?) feed dark urges of violence, but fighting on a video game would? Parents gather and cheer for their boys in violent sports and celebrate the victory. Later everyone watches StarWars again (with Luke getting his hand cut off) or Rocky movies (as guys beat the heck out of each other) or grandpa’s old John Wayne movies (bang! bang! bang!)… but a kid changing pixels on a screen of a 2-D fabricated person in a video game is somehow worse? No.

And what of all the actors who spend hours a day sometimes for months playing violent roles in tv/movies/theatre (old and new)? Should there be no Romeo&Juliet in highschool theatre/drama class? Acting/Roleplay is a skill and kids do it in video games all the time and before video games… ever hear of a very very old game called “Cowboys and Indians”? No parent needs to sweat if their kid wants to be Darth Vader for a costume party.

 

[lerapt78]

True. Likewise it would be overreaching to put a 21 year old adult on the same level as a 7 year old child regarding the level and amount of violence.

I’m not putting a 21-year-old at the same level as a 7-year-old, but my post dealt with generalities. I could get specific on the ages in another post, because yes I do realize that adults can be exposed to more mature material than can little children.

???
I’m not sure where you’re getting your facts. According to federal crime statistics, the rate of juvenile violent crime in the United States is at a 30-year low. Many other reputable sources state similar findings. With the rapid increase in millions of sales of violent games, first world countries should be seeing an epidemic of violence, but instead violence has declined. What has increased among the young in the US… obesity. Violence isn’t the danger of video games, but too many video games can cause one to get badly out of shape and/or hinder their social skills (chatting with strangers online for hours every day about monsters/dolls isn’t the same as meeting/talking/dealing with real people).

No doubt obesity is a problem. But this thread is focusing on violence.
My sources come from the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics:

Arrests for Violent Crimes from 1970-2003
In each age group (14 and under, 15-17, 18-20, 21-24) violent crime steadily increased from 1970 to 1986, then decreased through 2003. The total number in 1970 was 64,986/100,000 population. The final numbers at 2003 are greater than they were 40 years ago, despite a spike and lull from the mid-eighties through the mid-nineties. The number of offenders was calculated per 100,000 population for all years. The final number in 2003 is 92,535 per 100,000.

bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2028

The total in 2009 was 305,560. A quote from the source bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/aus8009.pdf:

Between 1980 and 2009, juvenile arrests made up an average of 14% of all aggravated assaults. This percentage ranged from 12% to 16% over the period (figure 15). . . . As a result, in 2009 the juvenile arrest rates for aggravated assault (up 6%) and the adult rate (up 10%) were both near but above their 1980 levels.

As opposed to when a “hero” that they admire in old movies use a gun?

Depends. What were the events surrounding his use of a gun? A cop shooting a bad guy to protect someone else in a movie is infinitely more admirable than someone going on a violent rampage in “Grand Theft Auto”, IMO.

Hitting women in video games is bad, but the old James Bond movies with Bond hitting women is ok? Women hitting/killing men in movies and video games is ok, but not vice-versa? What about books with violence and the news?

No, I never said a double-standard was OK, so I’m not sure why you made that assumption. And with regards to movies, I don’t think it’s a bad idea to set limits and I’ve posted on that subject before, so I won’t delve into that here.

I would rather have a friend skip the “shock” phase (especially the potential stunned or fainting effects) if I was shot and bleeding. A cool level-headed person dialing 911 would be fine. Constantly repeating “my friend has been shot” to the 911 operator while (s)he’s in shock, not so much. If playing Call of Duty helped them overcome that “shock” factor wouldn’t that be a good thing?

I would be glad if someone were cool-headed enough to aid me should I ever be shot too. But I still lament the fact that we are desensitized to a certain extent. I saw one of the “Caught on Camera” segments recently that airs on (I think) MSNBC. It showed a cell phone recording of a street party in Mardi Gras during which a young man punched a woman to the ground and another man kicked her when she was down. The most disturbing part of that footage however, was the the cell phone camera also caught three *other *men standing and watching, recording the event with their own cell phones. Who knows when someone finally came in to help? And yes, it disturbs me equally to see it happen to a man.

Games have ratings like movies. If a parent feels a PG movie is too adult for their kid then use the equivalent in the video games (T?). If a parent doesn’t limit tv/movie time for a child why would they do it for video games? IMO, the tv/movie is much worse since it’s far more real looking and the entire body can be idle for hours. That’s impossible for any video game.

I think the problem is that many parents are shirking their duties to monitor what their children are exposed to, though I tend to agree that movies are worse than video games. As I stated in my previous post, I don’t think the *root *of the problem rests with video games, but it’s still a concern to me.

One could counter that saying violent video games can help improve an individual’s hand-eye coordination, strategy, organization, monetary management, etc and in a group co-operation, communication, leadership, etc… all far more than any violent movie would do. And what would boys do instead… work out at the gym increasing their testosterone and thus potential aggression and watch DragonBallZ (violent cartoon)? Weekly practice/events of rugby, wrestling, martial arts against a real guy would never(?) feed dark urges of violence, but fighting on a video game would? Parents gather and cheer for their boys in violent sports and celebrate the victory. Later everyone watches StarWars again (with Luke getting his hand cut off) or Rocky movies (as guys beat the heck out of each other) or grandpa’s old John Wayne movies (bang! bang! bang!)… but a kid changing pixels on a screen of a 2-D fabricated person in a video game is somehow worse? No.

And what of all the actors who spend hours a day sometimes for months playing violent roles in tv/movies/theatre (old and new)? Should there be no Romeo&Juliet in highschool theatre/drama class? Acting/Roleplay is a skill and kids do it in video games all the time and before video games… ever hear of a very very old game called “Cowboys and Indians”? No parent needs to sweat if their kid wants to be Darth Vader for a costume party.

Did you miss the part where I stated that I don’t want boys playing “tea party”, and that I recognize certain forms of violence are perhaps crucial to male development? The last thing I want to do is turn men into women. . . but I also realize that a civilized society should not indulge in unnecessary depictions of savagery (hint: that’s what *makes *us civilized). I specified that it might be prudent to make a *distinction *between certain forms of violence - those that serve a purpose, and those that are simply exploitative. Boxing and martial arts serve a purpose, because one learns the art of self-defense, while maintaining discipline and good sportsmanship at the same time.

And actually, I think you have the gym/video game comparison backwards - a gym is where one can go to work **out **his aggression, whereas sitting down and playing a violent video game can get one all worked up with no readily available outlet for the testosterone pumping through his system. (Not to mention, going wild on a punching bag at the gym would help a lot more in the obesity problem you referred to than would sitting in front of a TV.)

 

[NickVA]

A distinction needs to be drawn as to the level of violence. There are varying degrees of violence in these games. I wouldn’t at all say that every game that has violence is bad, but clearly there are some games which should be avoided. Look at the ESRB rating system .

Violent video games rated T for “teen” are usually pretty mild, Games rated M for “mature” are much more violent with large amounts of blood and Gore. Games where you kill people can be considered more objectionable than games where monsters or animals are killed.
**
Desicions you make on individual games should evolve prudential judgment with the use of your conscience. **

I personally don’t belive all violent games are harmful, but many can be.

 

[LJN21]

With respect Geist, your last statement is often echoed by people who refuse to condemn the flaunting of poor behavior. I apologize if I’m projecting too much into your post, but I think it’s too dangerous a comment to go unaddressed. We hear that same line repeated in many ways: “I’ve always watched pornography, and I still respect women” (in defense of immoral media), “I grew up with a single parent, and I turned out okay” (so as not to disapprove of having children out of wedlock), “I smoked pot as a teenager, and I’m still a produtive member of society” (in defense of drug usage), etc, etc. We’ve unfortunately seen many ways though in which casual dismissal of concerns have negatively impacted our current society.

I’m sorry, you premise here is flawed. Just as mine would be if I argued to someone watching TV or reading a book was bad because some people view/read porn in that media. The morality in a video game, or TV show, or book is largely how the user reacts to the content.

To the OP. Do you think violence moves or books is wrong? Would you think twice about watching a movie about war or an action movie?

I think anything where you have violence in excess just to for its own sake is wrong (Kill Bill), but if its appropriate to the situation its not something for an adult to worry about.

Example. In Fallout 3 the default game reaction to a head shot is ludicrous. I’m sorry if you shoot someone in the head with a 9mm what happens in game is just not possible. However, with a simple .ini setting the game goes form probably over the top violence to something more appropriate.

 

[Seeker1961]

If it leads you to sin, avoid it. If not, then it is not sinful, but perhaps more or less edifying depending on your personality and where you are in life. That is, follow your conscience and avoid near occasions of sin.

This comment makes the most sense, really. We need to be responsible for our choices and take a long hard look at what our activities lead us to. If playing a violent game leaves you to angry thoughts or outbursts toward others, then maybe it’s not the best use of your time.

We all need to periodically evaluate what comes into our homes and the ways we choose to invest our free time.

I’ve found discussions with my Confessor have helped me immeasurably in situations like this.

 

[PyroDrew]

My sources come from the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics:
Arrests for Violent Crimes from 1970-2003
In each age group (14 and under, 15-17, 18-20, 21-24) violent crime steadily increased from 1970 to 1986, then decreased through 2003. The total number in 1970 was 64,986/100,000 population. The final numbers at 2003 are greater than they were 40 years ago, despite a spike and lull from the mid-eighties through the mid-nineties. The number of offenders was calculated per 100,000 population for all years. The final number in 2003 is 92,535 per 100,000.

Thanks for proving my point. Those stats further prove my point because the decrease from 1986 to 2003 is when violent video games were booming yet violence was dropping.

Depends. What were the events surrounding his use of a gun? A cop shooting a bad guy to protect someone else in a movie is infinitely more admirable than someone going on a violent rampage in “Grand Theft Auto”, IMO.

Is there anything admirable in “Grand Theft Auto”? Likewise, have you seen how much violence there is in Hamlet? There is nothing admirable about the evil Emperor from StarWars or a Bond Villain planning to kill millions. No one condemns the actor, just as no one would looked down on the kid playing the “robber” in “Cops and Robbers” decades ago. It’s just “make-believe”, story-telling and one’s imagination.

No, I never said a double-standard was OK, so I’m not sure why you made that assumption.

I didn’t make that assumption, which is obviously why I wrote that in the form of a question.

I would be glad if someone were cool-headed enough to aid me should I ever be shot too. But I still lament the fact that we are desensitized to a certain extent. I saw one of the “Caught on Camera” segments recently that airs on (I think) MSNBC. It showed a cell phone recording of a street party in Mardi Gras during which a young man punched a woman to the ground and another man kicked her when she was down. The most disturbing part of that footage however, was the the cell phone camera also caught three *other *men standing and watching, recording the event with their own cell phones. Who knows when someone finally came in to help? And yes, it disturbs me equally to see it happen to a man.

I don’t know the details of that situation, but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps those recording already called police, but feared for their own lives (what if the attackers had concealed knives, guns or other violent allies nearby?). “Tell mom I’m not coming home tonight as I’ve been stabbed with a knife and this guy has a gun at my head.” The recording could at least provide the police with what the attackers looked like (& license plates?) and providing solid evidence in court if they were captured. Furthermore, the reason you never saw those things in the “back in the day” was because not nearly everyone had a camera phone on them like today, much less the internet.

I think the problem is that many parents are shirking their duties

This we agree on. As a result, it’s so much easier for parents to blame teachers/schools, movies, video games, food industry, etc etc than to blame themselves.

Did you miss the part where I stated that I don’t want boys playing “tea party”, and that I recognize certain forms of violence are perhaps crucial to male development? The last thing I want to do is turn men into women. . .

I never said you wanted to turn men into women.

I also realize that a civilized society should not indulge in unnecessary depictions of savagery (hint: that’s what *makes *us civilized). I specified that it might be prudent to make a *distinction *between certain forms of violence - those that serve a purpose, and those that are simply exploitative. Boxing and martial arts serve a purpose, because one learns the art of self-defense, while maintaining discipline and good sportsmanship at the same time.

Discipline and good sportsmanship can be achieved in video games and in many cases it’s necessary to do well in that game.

And actually, I think you have the gym/video game comparison backwards - a gym is where one can go to work **out **his aggression, whereas sitting down and playing a violent video game can get one all worked up with no readily available outlet for the testosterone pumping through his system.

On the contrary, working out and lifting weights naturally increases the amount of testosterone in one’s body. Body builders and violence are not unusual bedfellows. Sitting in one place for hours will not be as potent. Further, in many sports there are “winners” and “losers” resulting in rivalries. However, many video games can be played solo and you are guaranteed to win and it’s just a matter of if you can pass your old top score.

(Not to mention, going wild on a punching bag at the gym would help a lot more in the obesity problem you referred to than would sitting in front of a TV.)

That’s true, but you’re the one who said we’re not talking about obesity. I brought up obesity because that is a bigger issue.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Have you ever looked for video games that incorporate other things than violence into them? Sports, mysteries, puzzles (think Myst) and the like.

Two of my favorite video games are “Solitaire” and “Logo Quiz”

 

[centurionguard]

Over seven years ago I used to be a heavy gamer. Shoot Em Up Violent games were never big on my lists. Sim Games like Flight Sim and Reality Adventure gaming.

After a while I realized and had to admit to myself if PC Gaming and Television itself was taking away time from my Family and most importantly my time and prayer life with God.

I think every Catholic who delves into these things has to humble take a hard look and humbly discern answers related to these types of leisure for themselves.

Its easy to deceive and rationalize oneself saying I’m not harming anyone involving myself in such pastimes. Depending how greatly one is devoutly involved it can be seen as false God unto itself, though I suspect many will find such a suggestion somewhat offensive.

One might ask themselves where do they prioritize Gaming and TV leisure in comparison to the time they give to God. That IMHO is where the real answer lies.