write three categories in which you feel the essay could be stronger
Jason Long
Professor Korman
English 102
May 18, 2017
Video games and video game consoles weren't always as they are today. Today games are more real than ever. From games like Grand Theft Auto that is grounded in reality and gives you the ability to be as crazy as you want in Los Angeles with no consequence to games like The Sims that a hyper realistic life simulators where you the player takes control of character and makes it live normal day to day life such as brushing your teeth and going to work. Games were not always like this of course. Enjoying the spoils of the humble and shaky beginnings of the first video and console is what we as consumers and players are doing now.
The first video game was created by a Physicist named William Higinbotham in October 1958. The game Higinbotham dreamed up only came to be because the lab where he worked would on occasion have visitors' day where thousands of people would come and take tours of the lab. As the head of the instrumentation division he was responsible for the creation of an exhibit that could show off what he and his companions were working on. Due to the current exhibits being bland and wanting to capture the visitors' attention Higinbotham created an interactive demonstration that would much more captivating. He was actually quoted as saying "it might liven up the place to have a game that people could play, and which would convey the message that our scientific endeavors have relevance for society."
Using a computer that displayed different shapes he was able to come up with an idea that would convey that message he hoping to get across. After a few rough sketches the prototype was created within two weeks. The game at the time was called "Tennis for Two" twist a knob to change the trajectory of the ball and press the button to fire it at your opponent. This game consisted of two lines and a ball, nothing more. Tennis for Two quickly began gaining popularity and in the 1970's the game was turned into a system. Though this game was originally called Tennis for Two, we all know it today as Pong.
From the invention of the first console which was the Magnavox Odyssey which gave life birth to 28 games throughout its lifetime and none were banned. In 1976, the first controversial game was developed. The objective of this game was fairly simple, using a car drive over as many monsters as possible within a given time limit. The reason the game was actually pulled from shelves was explained by historian Steve L. Kent "What got everyone upset about Death Race was that you heard this little 'ahhhk' when the person got hit, and a little gravestone came up." Did the realism, though very little cause any changes in the action of the players or was it an overreaction to something that is fantasy?
There were games that took it too far that deserved at the very least to be placed in an adult store or have an X rating. An example of that would be a little game by the name of Custer's Revenge. In the game player assumes the position of General Custer and runs from arrows that are being shot at him. Running from the arrows you a native American woman strapped to a pole, as the player gets in striking distance of the woman he begins to preform sexual acts with her for points. Custer's Revenge was understandably pulled from store shelves in 1983 and pretty much forgotten until today.
Did the banning of these games change the landscape of the gaming community? Removing these games from store shelves in the seventies and eighties during the infancy of gaming could have possibly ended it completely. In people's reckless pursuit to boycott and fight change did the help or hurt those playing? Through expansive research it is hard to find any information that suggests that there was increase in violence in any demographic because of a game.
There have been measures put in place in order to inform the public to what kind of game they would be purchasing. In 1994, the IDSA or the Interactive Digital Software Association founded a rating board to help categorize and rate all games. The responsibility of the rating board was to remove as much controversy from game releases as possible. A reviewer would be selected to look over a game and decide what category it would fall under. The options are as followed, EC(Early Childhood), E(For Everyone), E10+(Everyone 10+), T(Teen),M(Mature) and AO(Adults Only). Thanks to this system every game that was released now had a rating and no one could claim they had no idea what they were purchasing. The board responsible for this would later be known as the Entertainment Software Rating Board or ESRB.
The methods of the ESRB have been called into question on many separate occasions. The main complaint is that they are not as effective as they claim to be. You would think that a game must be played before it can be given a proper rating but that is not the case when it comes to the ESRB. The trailer of the game is watched or the synopsis of the game read and then a rating is slapped on the box. Watching a trailer and playing a game is completely different, how could the board member get proper context by simply glancing over each game? The process for rating games is also a trade secret. Who will rate the game is always left anonymous and the methods for which the game is rated and kept secret. Not being able to check the background of the person who rate games can cause a myriad of problems, the biggest being bias opinion if that person does not like a particular genre of doesn't like games at all. Finally, the descriptions that are written about each product is usually taken out of context, by not giving a complete description and taking a lot of the things in game out of context, the ESRB are giving games a more extreme than they should have which turns some interested parties away.
Is it violent video games or a combination of issues that could make a boy, a teenage boy act violently from prolonged exposure. Using mass shooters as an example, some did admit they had a long-standing relationship with violent video games. What is being left out is the gender and the age of the people who carry out these crimes fit a target demographic of people who suffer from a mental illness. The evidence that suggest that most spree shooters also ignores the millions upon millions of people who play violent video games and have not killed. The main thing that is being left out of a majority of studies is the "in addition to" argument. In addition to violent video games some people are becoming more violent from video games.
What are the other factors that are being left out that could cause a boy to reenact what he sees in a game that is violent? Puberty is one of the more emotionally confusing points in life, not only are physical changes happening but also mental and hormonal take place which alter who you are and how you feel. The player could have mental illness that was inherited from a family member. If there is a mental illness is the player taking medication and does the medication have side effects? If there is abuse in the home whether the player is being abused or witnessing the abuse could be a major key with behavioral issues in school. Almost all kids that witness or experience abuse in the home take it out on other children in school. Isolation is said to be the main cause of violent outbursts. Does the player have a friend or relative to talk to, do they have somewhere they feel like they belong? With so many factors it is impossible to say only violent video games would be the single reason for a violent outburst or a major change in behavior.
Who are the people that are claiming that video games make players violent to begin with? Conservatives are the group that tend to raise the argument more than anyone else. Even president Trump has made ridiculous claims "Video game violence & glorification must be stopped-it's creating monsters!" Believe it or not even the NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre believes that video games are the cause for gun violence "There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat, and Splatterhouse." Simply stating the name of the games without having played any of them is quite unfair. It leads the reader if thinking clearly believe that there is some kind of hidden agenda.
Jason Long
Professor Korman
English 102
May 18, 2017
Violent Video Games and the Lack of Real Life Violence
Video games and video game consoles weren't always as they are today. Today games are more real than ever. From games like Grand Theft Auto that is grounded in reality and gives you the ability to be as crazy as you want in Los Angeles with no consequence to games like The Sims that a hyper realistic life simulators where you the player takes control of character and makes it live normal day to day life such as brushing your teeth and going to work. Games were not always like this of course. Enjoying the spoils of the humble and shaky beginnings of the first video and console is what we as consumers and players are doing now.
The first video game was created by a Physicist named William Higinbotham in October 1958. The game Higinbotham dreamed up only came to be because the lab where he worked would on occasion have visitors' day where thousands of people would come and take tours of the lab. As the head of the instrumentation division he was responsible for the creation of an exhibit that could show off what he and his companions were working on. Due to the current exhibits being bland and wanting to capture the visitors' attention Higinbotham created an interactive demonstration that would much more captivating. He was actually quoted as saying "it might liven up the place to have a game that people could play, and which would convey the message that our scientific endeavors have relevance for society."
Using a computer that displayed different shapes he was able to come up with an idea that would convey that message he hoping to get across. After a few rough sketches the prototype was created within two weeks. The game at the time was called "Tennis for Two" twist a knob to change the trajectory of the ball and press the button to fire it at your opponent. This game consisted of two lines and a ball, nothing more. Tennis for Two quickly began gaining popularity and in the 1970's the game was turned into a system. Though this game was originally called Tennis for Two, we all know it today as Pong.
From the invention of the first console which was the Magnavox Odyssey which gave life birth to 28 games throughout its lifetime and none were banned. In 1976, the first controversial game was developed. The objective of this game was fairly simple, using a car drive over as many monsters as possible within a given time limit. The reason the game was actually pulled from shelves was explained by historian Steve L. Kent "What got everyone upset about Death Race was that you heard this little 'ahhhk' when the person got hit, and a little gravestone came up." Did the realism, though very little cause any changes in the action of the players or was it an overreaction to something that is fantasy?
There were games that took it too far that deserved at the very least to be placed in an adult store or have an X rating. An example of that would be a little game by the name of Custer's Revenge. In the game player assumes the position of General Custer and runs from arrows that are being shot at him. Running from the arrows you a native American woman strapped to a pole, as the player gets in striking distance of the woman he begins to preform sexual acts with her for points. Custer's Revenge was understandably pulled from store shelves in 1983 and pretty much forgotten until today.
Did the banning of these games change the landscape of the gaming community? Removing these games from store shelves in the seventies and eighties during the infancy of gaming could have possibly ended it completely. In people's reckless pursuit to boycott and fight change did the help or hurt those playing? Through expansive research it is hard to find any information that suggests that there was increase in violence in any demographic because of a game.
There have been measures put in place in order to inform the public to what kind of game they would be purchasing. In 1994, the IDSA or the Interactive Digital Software Association founded a rating board to help categorize and rate all games. The responsibility of the rating board was to remove as much controversy from game releases as possible. A reviewer would be selected to look over a game and decide what category it would fall under. The options are as followed, EC(Early Childhood), E(For Everyone), E10+(Everyone 10+), T(Teen),M(Mature) and AO(Adults Only). Thanks to this system every game that was released now had a rating and no one could claim they had no idea what they were purchasing. The board responsible for this would later be known as the Entertainment Software Rating Board or ESRB.
The methods of the ESRB have been called into question on many separate occasions. The main complaint is that they are not as effective as they claim to be. You would think that a game must be played before it can be given a proper rating but that is not the case when it comes to the ESRB. The trailer of the game is watched or the synopsis of the game read and then a rating is slapped on the box. Watching a trailer and playing a game is completely different, how could the board member get proper context by simply glancing over each game? The process for rating games is also a trade secret. Who will rate the game is always left anonymous and the methods for which the game is rated and kept secret. Not being able to check the background of the person who rate games can cause a myriad of problems, the biggest being bias opinion if that person does not like a particular genre of doesn't like games at all. Finally, the descriptions that are written about each product is usually taken out of context, by not giving a complete description and taking a lot of the things in game out of context, the ESRB are giving games a more extreme than they should have which turns some interested parties away.
Is it violent video games or a combination of issues that could make a boy, a teenage boy act violently from prolonged exposure. Using mass shooters as an example, some did admit they had a long-standing relationship with violent video games. What is being left out is the gender and the age of the people who carry out these crimes fit a target demographic of people who suffer from a mental illness. The evidence that suggest that most spree shooters also ignores the millions upon millions of people who play violent video games and have not killed. The main thing that is being left out of a majority of studies is the "in addition to" argument. In addition to violent video games some people are becoming more violent from video games.
What are the other factors that are being left out that could cause a boy to reenact what he sees in a game that is violent? Puberty is one of the more emotionally confusing points in life, not only are physical changes happening but also mental and hormonal take place which alter who you are and how you feel. The player could have mental illness that was inherited from a family member. If there is a mental illness is the player taking medication and does the medication have side effects? If there is abuse in the home whether the player is being abused or witnessing the abuse could be a major key with behavioral issues in school. Almost all kids that witness or experience abuse in the home take it out on other children in school. Isolation is said to be the main cause of violent outbursts. Does the player have a friend or relative to talk to, do they have somewhere they feel like they belong? With so many factors it is impossible to say only violent video games would be the single reason for a violent outburst or a major change in behavior.
Who are the people that are claiming that video games make players violent to begin with? Conservatives are the group that tend to raise the argument more than anyone else. Even president Trump has made ridiculous claims "Video game violence & glorification must be stopped-it's creating monsters!" Believe it or not even the NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre believes that video games are the cause for gun violence "There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat, and Splatterhouse." Simply stating the name of the games without having played any of them is quite unfair. It leads the reader if thinking clearly believe that there is some kind of hidden agenda.