How and why are videogames such as Call of Duty becoming more violent? Is this a concern for the typical audience?
“It doesn't take the most powerful nations on Earth to create the next global conflict. Just the will of a single man.”
The video game industry has shown to be a powerful component of entertainment, generating billions of pounds worth of sales. Video games are considered to be “one of the leading forms of media consumption”[1]. However, many video games in this modern climate have shown to become increasingly violent which has raised concern within society. The significance of 18 rated games has been devalued there is a continuation present of underage gamers approaching this wrath compiled of aggressiveness in violent video games. Consequently, there are various institutional, as well as societal issues confronted by the manner in which the consumers are affected by violent video games.
This investigation will discuss how violence has become more explicit over the years. One of the prime factors that will be justified is how new & digital media has become a big part of this revolution.
There seems to be a general consumption or an up rise rather in first person shooters. And it seems to be primarily appealing to males. “Adolescents who were more hostile tended to consume more electronic media, played more violent video games, prefer more violent content, and have fewer parental limits on the content of their video games"[2]. Therefore gaming institutions such as Activision (developer of Call of Duty) have developed and induced their products in a way to appeal to primarily males as they biologically are more aggressive than females.
Realism has become a necessity in the modern prosperity of video games. One remarkable aspect of Call of Duty is its much updated graphics, which took off in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. The main anticipation for the release of the game was due to its revolutionised graphics which eagerly awaited the consumers. But the question is why it was such a success? The latest instalment of the Call of Duty series, Modern Warfare 3 “notched up $400m in sales within 24 hours of launching on 8 November.”[3] In conjunction with the sense of realism, dominant stereotypes are perpetuated in video games such as Call of Duty. Stereotypically, the American soldier is shown to be in simplest terms, a hero. However, foreign characters in particular the Afghanistan soldiers as well as Russian soldiers are portrayed as the villains, which is rather biased as it is a first person shooter and the consumer plays the role as the American soldier in his perspective, which goes with Infinity Ward’s values and ideologies.
Since 9/11, first person shooters have been favoured by the majority of people as it relates to real life situations. Realistic graphics and a first person perspective has given the consumer a sense of importance as it is a prevention of terrorism which most consumers fear of in real life. Nevertheless, despite the conflict and controversy this could cause, it is a perfect situation for video game institutions due to the face that video games are predominantly cogitated by real life events such as World War II. Tom Watson argued that the level was "no worse than [scenes] in many films and books" and criticising Vaz for "collaborating with the Daily Mail to create moral panic over the use of video games" [4], such tabloid newspapers such as Daily Mail have a particular ideology of creating a moral panic over absurd situations. This in this case, has developed controversy of violence in Call of Duty.
Now, notwithstanding the increase or exposure of violence in video games, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (released in 2009, 6th instalment) was the “first game in the franchise to have been classified as an 18 rated game by the BBFC” [5]. All previous Call of Duty titles have been rated 16. So what does this suggest about violence in video games such as Call of Duty? Is the violence becoming worse? It may well be so. One of the missions of the British board of Film Classification is to “protect the public, and especially children, from content which might raise harm risks” [6]. This desists extensively that video games are harmful to particularly children, which may be the reason why the age ratings were amended for the most recent Call of Duty titles.
“The '18' category was, however, deemed more appropriate for a particular mission in which the characteristics of the violence differ from the rest of the game. In this mission, the player has infiltrated the terrorist group and joins them as they execute an attack on innocent civilians at an airport.” According to the BBFC one of the main reasons Modern Warfare 2 was classified as an 18 rated game as a result of the infamous scene in the campaign where the gamer is put into the perspective of a Russian, walking along the airport platform and killing hundreds of innocent civilians. The BBFC also stated the violence in the majority of the game would have fallen within the allowance of the Guidelines at '15' which state that 'Violence may be strong but should not dwell on the infliction of pain or injury. The strongest gory images are unlikely to be acceptable.' [7]
"Kids not only watch realistic characters spurting blood and pulling heads, spinal cords and beating hearts out of bodies, but they are creating mayhem and are rewarded with extra points for doing so." [8] One of Call of Duty’s main rewarding strategies is kill streaks, or more recently point streaks. This gives the player the ability to either use very high operated gunships or simple radar privileges.
However, first person shooters, in particular Call of Duty have to some extent glamorized it’s in game content. Being able to customise the weapons, including the choice of colour for the gun has countered the desensitised perspective of violence. Moreover, despite the very fast paced ambience that Modern Warfare has implemented, the demoralised killings of one another has made Call of Duty somewhat unrealistic which to be fair is the main purpose of a video game. During development of pre-2000 video games such as Doom, the main aim was to give the gamer a very realistic gaming experience.
The level of violence, sexual references and drug references within violent video games results in a wider moral panic, as the media arguably injects ideologies into the audience which corrupt children and cause aggression. Consequently, parents gain an oppositional reading to violent video games, as it is a “huge concern to children”. This has made video games very controversial, primarily because parents are concerned of how violence in video games will affect their children, but also how video games follow dominant stereotypes.
Manhunt, a stealth game released in 2003, was very controversial. The game's graphic presentation of the executions is accentuated in a style reminiscent of a snuff film, and the game encourages players to execute enemies as brutally as possible. In 2007, former Rockstar employee Jeff Williams wrote on his blog that the game wasn't unanimously revered among the developers either, saying that the game "just made us all feel icky. It was all about the violence, and it was realistic violence. We all knew there was no way we could explain away that game. There was no way to rationalize it. We were crossing a line." People were very concerned at that point of how video games will develop in future, as this game was possibly the first game to depict such a realistic perspective of violence.
The game's dark and highly violent nature and technical aptitude were singled out by critics. Gamespot concluded that "Like it or not, the game pushes the envelope of video game violence and shows you countless scenes of wholly uncensored, heavily stylized carnage." Game Informer praised the game's audacity and competent technical capabilities, stating that "It’s a frightening premise that places gamers in a psychological impasse. The crimes that you commit are unspeakable, yet the gameplay that leads to these horrendous acts is so polished and fierce that it’s thrilling." IGN complimented the game's overall challenge, calling it a "solid, deep experience for seasoned gamers pining for some hardcore, challenging games." Therefore the regulation and control of violent video games is often demanded by politicians and parents of children who play violent video games, as they feel that the control of these games will result in less crime and deviance in society.
The media have shown to exaggerate and sensationalize news surrounding violent video games, in order to inject messages that video games will cause the audience to become violent. "Violent media, for instance, may increase aggression by teaching observers how to behave aggressively, by priming aggressive cognitions, by increasing arousal and by creating an aggressive affective state." It has been argued that violent video games are not a concern, primarily due to the fact that there is insufficient evidence to prove that. "It has been argued that the aggressive content in video games could allow players to release their stress and aggression in a non destructive way, and, in fact, would have the effect of relaxing them".
However, video games are also argued to be a concern, as technology is improving at a fast pace meaning that the realism of violence in video games will continue to be more explicit. We do know that playing violent video games show physiological effects that are different compared to playing less violent games or no games at all and that those effects may be even greater for children who already show aggressive tendencies".
Recent research has suggested that even some violent video games may actually have a prosocial effect in some contexts for example, team play.
It has been argued there is generally a lack of quality studies which can be relied upon and that the video game industry has become an easy target for the media to blame for many modern day problems. The most recent large scale meta-anlysis-- examining 130 studies with over 130,000 subjects worldwide-- concluded that exposure to violent video games causes both short term and long term aggression in players and decreases empathy and prosocial behavior. However, this meta-analysis was severely criticized in the same issue of the same journal for a number of methodological flaws, including failure to distinguish clinically valid from unstandardized aggression measures and for failing to solicit studies from researchers who have questioned whether causal links exist, thus biasing the sample of included studies
A study by Dr. Craig A. Anderson et al. compared the effects of violent video games to those of smoking on lung cancer. This view has been challenged, however. For instance, Ferguson (2010) has ruled out a relationship between video game violence and serious aggression, concluding "Taken together these meta-analyses range from those which argue against meaningful effects to those which find weak effects. Thus the debate on video game violence has been reduced to whether video game violence produces no effects…or almost no effects."
Other studies reach the conclusion that violence in video games is not causally linked with aggressive tendencies. This was the conclusion of a 1999 study by the U.S. government, prompting Surgeon General David Satcher to say, "We clearly associate media violence to aggressive behavior. But the impact was very small compared to other things. Some may not be happy with that, but that’s where the science is." A meta-analysis by psychologist Jonathan Freedman, who reviewed over 200 published studies and found that the "vast and overwhelming majority" did not find a causal link, also reached this conclusion. A US Secret Service study found that only 12% of those involved in school shootings were attracted to violent video games, while 24% read violent books and 27% were attracted to violent films. An Australian study found that only children already predisposed to violence were affected by violent games. A recent long-term outcome study of youth found no long-term relationship between playing violent video game and youth violence and bullying.
Word Count: 2072
Bibliography
Works Cited
Books:
Gunter, Barrie. The effects of video games on children: the myth unmasked. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998. Print.
Newman, James. Playing with videogames . New York: Routledge, 2008. Print.
Oppliger, Patrice A.. Wrestling and hypermasculinity . Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, 2004. Print.
Rosser, James. Playin' to win: a surgeon, scientist and parent examines the upside of video games. Garden City, NY: Morgan James Publishing, Llc, 2008. Print.
Signorielli, Nancy. "violence in the media." Violence in the media: a reference handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2005. 36, 37. Print.
Tapscott, Don. Grown up digital how the net generation is changing your world.. Concordville, Pa.: Soundview Executive Book Summaries ;, 2009. Print. Page 298
orderer, Peter, and Jennings Bryant. Playing video games: motives, responses, and consequences. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006. Print
Wesley, David, and Gloria Barczak. Innovation and Marketing in the Video Game Industry: Avoiding the Performance Trap.. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 2010. Print.
Websites:
Works Consulted
Books:
Grown up digital how the next generation is changing your world.. Tapscott, Don, pg 7 ( Lieberman 1993)
Innovation and Marketing in the Video Games Industry, Wesley, David, and Gloria Barczak Social and Economic Impact of video games, pg 10
Websites:
[1] Innovation and Marketing in the Video Games Industry, Wesley, David, and Gloria Barczak Social and Economic Impact of video games, pg 10
[3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/dec/12/modern-warfare-3-breaks-1bn-barrier - Modern Warfare 3 hits the $1bn mark in record time
[7] Ibid
[8] Grown up digital how the next generation is changing your world.. Tapscott, Don, pg 7 ( Lieberman 1993)
No comments:
Post a Comment