HeySeansOnline said:
The gun scenario is interesting, I would actually ponder both options, talking If I was In a weak position, but the second I have a chance I would try to diffuse the situation, If with violence then so be It. I would probably only consider violence however If lives other than mine were In direct danger. I guess I would be thinking, In gaming terms If you will, the enemy still poses a threat, I have to take him down. Which is suprisingly to me what I would probably be thinking, and would jump on any chance to neutralise him, I would never want to kill though, I don't think I could live with that burden.
No you wouldn't. Ponder it that is, you wouldn't ponder it, if you were shocked your instinctive behaviour would kick in and you'd do
something. Thing is that apparently that
something is alterable, someone who would have frozen up could be trained to replace that instinct with dropping the weapon or even shooting. If you'd played a lot of FPS games then you'd probably have shot the guy before you'd even known there was another option. Basically there were a few articles that said that kneejerk reaction was changeable by repeated training and association.
That's what I'm worried about, that if gaming really can change ingrained behaviour it really could make someone more prone to using a violent solution if one is applicable.
EDIT: There was an article on here on this theory actually! http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_153/4960-The-Anatomy-of-Violence