Jimquisition: Desensitized to Violence

[lead sharp]

I think the Escapist should be commended for allowing this, it's journalism. Well done Jim!

I remember the same impending feeling of reality when they showed a guy with a bomb vest go off on one of those cop shows (memory doesn't serve well after a 12 hour shift so forgive the lack of detail).

 

[Crazycat690]

I wasn't disturbed by the video of "real violence", and I've fired a gun and liked it, uh oh? UHm, well but seriously, there's a big difference between any movie or game violence and actual violence. I mean, I wasn't disturbed by the video, or any video where I assume real violence is going on (unless an animal is getting hurt) but if I'm even close to where a fight is about to happen I... Well shit, I wanna see it, guess I'm a bad example, still, lets put "functioning psychos" between the normal people and actual lunatics.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

i skipped to 1:49. point proven i guess. take the swearing out n get this video broadcast everywhere, it gets the message across about how the news media make violence worse, IMO

 

[braincore02]

That footage was pretty tame for "shocking" footage. I didn't even wince. I wonder if I have been desensitized, but if I have, I think it might be just real life that's desensitized me.

A while back I found some footage of terrorists beheading someone with a machete.

I clicked on it out of morbid curiosity.

Aside from not being able to finish watching, I felt emotionally disturbed for at least 2 weeks before I managed to start wiping the memories from my mind.

I doubt anyone would allow you to play that footage on the escapist, and I doubt Jim would even want to.

So yeah, I don't think violence in videogames are to blame.

People do some pretty messed up stuff to each other, and they always have.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Seeing that footage made me feel sick. More evidence for you Jim. Real violence is something only true psychopaths love. The gore and death of video games will never make me feel so ill at ease as that clip did.

 

[DRTJR]

It maybe because I had a compound fracture in my left arm at age 5 but that video didn't effect me at all.

 

[GestaltEsper]

Not gonna lie, I wasn't shocked or disturbed by the clip, but I was confused. All I could think was, "What drove this man to do this?" I mean, the guy gets on TV, pulls out a gun, and tells everyone to back off because it might hurt someone...only to proceed to kill himself. This man was rational enough to care for everyone else's safety, but threw away his own life so casually. It's like...what just happened? What did I see? You know?

 

[mateushac]

I think I'm a bit late to the party, but I hadn't thought I'd be 10% as disturbed as I actually was. Even though it's not exactly what I think about violent media, Jim's argument is pretty nice!

 

[jehk]

Nevermind. Found what I was looking for.

OT: I skipped the video was well. I saw is once back in the day and I don't need to see it again.

 

[triggrhappy94]

But what about the interactivity?
It's the one question/arguement I can't figure out.
There are plenty of violent movies and videogames, but what seperates them is that videogames are interactive.

Could that interactivity be the difference that causes violence?
(Or, how would you argue against that question?)

EDIT
I just want to say I skipped it too. I've seen a short clip of it before out of context (in "Bowling for Columbine") and I'm in no way squeemish. But after that clip started, I just couldn't watch it.

 

[Conn1496]

Pretty much hit the nail on the head there. I can't say I was disturbed by the video, but I'm definately not going to say I didn't get a little shock. It didn't make me feel sick, but the reality- the legitimateness of the death makes it certainly more harrowing. The truth is: If someone dies in a videogame, no matter how realistic it is, the person in the game was never truly alive. The fact that a real person died is what caused the shock. If anything, I'd be more disturbed by something like Saw, but the truth remains that it's fiction. No-one ever died in Saw, and no-one ever dies in Halo or Call of Duty. It's a simple set of pixels that dies, there's no relation to people.
There are a hell of a lot of factors in real violence that makes it truly different to video game violence, the main difference being the big kicker: Actual people die in real violence!
Until the media get this shit through their skulls, they ain't gonna be able to be a legitimate source for... well... anything.

...and people wonder why I hate media coverage and shit. Christ.

 

[Gamegodtre]

for the main point in this argument i believe it to be true that the violence in games does not make people desensitized, in honesty Hellsing has more graphic depictions of violence then any videogame and it does not desensitize people it just people repeating the same excuses from the past onto a new medium, before it was comics then it was metal music and then rap music etc....

as for me ive been desensitized to violence on the scale of that clip for a long time since i started studying history and have seen some of the most graphic pictures of death as you can imagine, just do some research on WW2 and yeah that is really disturbing

as for the content that is controversial for people the act of the suicide i find it to be a kin to seppuku given the actions that led up to it, the only difference is that he did not disembowel himself. i feel sad for the man with all that said

 

[TheEvilCheese]

I've seen a lot of gory things- studying forensic science would in theory desensitize me far more than any game. Yet the video still made me feel a little wrong inside- not massively disturbed, knowing it was coming, but it felt wrong somehow.

Thank God for Jim

(And far more seriously, thank you Escapist for letting him show it. Was the right decision)

 

[mateushac]

But what about the interactivity?
It's the one question/arguement I can't figure out.
There are plenty of violent movies and videogames, but what seperates them is that videogames are interactive.

Could that interactivity be the difference that causes violence?
(Or, how would you argue against that question?)

I'm sorry for not being able to come up with an essay on the subject, but I like contribute with a bit of my own experience and relationship with videogames.

Everytime someone comes up with an argument about a game's interactive aspect having an effect on people's behavior I can't help but feel a little off. People say that being able to unleash violence and murder of your own desire may make you more comfortable with performing violent acts in real life. I assume they say that because your avatar is somehow supposed to "be" you in the game's world. I just can't feel that, though; When I'm playing a game, I don't really feel like I'm doing everything that's going on screen, rather I just feel like I'm being told a story, a story in which I only get to chose what I want to be told. Maybe that's why I didn't feel really disturbed by Spec Ops: The Line (I really wish I did, though... I feel like my lack of shock over it detracted quite a bit from the game's value) or MW2's airport shooting section.

So, to sum it up, even though games are interactive and stuff, to me they just feel like a "choose your own adventure" type of movie.

Ps. I hope I could get my point across. I hate my inability of translating thoughts into text.

 

[Gamegodtre]

The last paragraph about games seems to be mostly assumptions. Personally I would never touch a gun.

There can't be a study that could really show that, due to ethics standards. For example, you know the Millgram experiment (people told to shock someone, actor pretends to die, etc)? That was incredibly unethical, and you couldn't get funding to do anything like that. You'd need to either kill someone, or imitate killing them, trained by videogames and with actual guns, which you cannot do. Period. Would never get past the ethics committee. Notice, all the evidence cited above comes in the wake of wars. So, like most of psychology, and a lot of science, you are left with assumption. I personally believe that videogames are less effective at training than military training, for a variety of reasons, mostly about real world experience, recoil, jams, etc., but, I see no reason not to believe that the same qualities that made the one so much more efficient wouldn't be present in the other, even if to a lesser degree.

Also, why would you never touch a gun?

so shooters are virtual training to shoot someone well call me pickled, i always thought running out into the open and not going for cover followed by looking around corners covering your blindspots before entering into a room was a really bad way of teaching someone to shot people who are armed and ready to kill you, but then again i just respawned and am ready to try again after all i just picked up my gun for the first time and if its a shotgun know how to properly hold it so the kick does not break my arm and or shoulder from playing COD also i now know i can in real life fire a gun to take someones life since ive done it so many times in a game, please give me a break.

as for your second question i dont touch guns because i dont need them

 

[Quellist]

Ive said it many times before but once again Jim hits the nail on the head

/hatoff to you

And for the record i looked away and covered my ears just before he shot himself. Also for the record for fun in Grand Theft Auto i used to grab a flame thrower and run into a crowd...