Germany considers banning violent video games

So I was listening to the news on the radio this morning and it looks like there is a movement afoot to ban violent video games as a result of yesterday's hostage situation. This has long been an issue in the US, epitomized by the Columbine shootings several years ago. I'm surprised that Germany, of all places, is starting to experience similar things. So the question is, will banning violent video games solve the issue? Having owned a Nintendo when I was a wee lass, I'd say I'm no more prone to violence than the next person. Then again, I was playing Super Mario Brothers, not Grand Theft Auto. My personal opinion is that children should go outside and play, not sit in front of the boob tube or play video games all day, but I'm old fashioned that way. But would that solve the problem?

I think this image of kids stuck in front of consoles all day ripping people to shreds is a fallacy...sure it may be true in a VERY small amount of cases, but then those cases are probably using it as some kind of escapism from the real source of their discontent. Most kids i know play a bit, but when they are told to stop or "come eat" or whatever, they do ( just like watching tv when i was a kid...) and they play outside just as much as i did. The violence in video games is no more influencing than what you see on the news, around you in the street etc. in my opinion...

At the end of the day, if the kids are taught proper values and are shown love and respect and all that jazz, then they know what is wrong and what is not...

In Germany, a "censored" version of Grand Theft Auto was released. The censorship covered 2 things only
1 - the animation for "headshot" deaths was removed. Headshots still of course worked, but you did not get spurts of blood pumping from the corpses neck
2 - dead bodies could not be kicked. Killing is OK, but don't rub it in by kicking the corpse.

Very strange censorship. Point 2 actually made the game easier, because you could only target "live" people, which was pretty useful when you are fighting a gang - in the UK version it was easy to accidentally target dead bodies, which could loose you a few seconds in which time you might get "a cap bust in yo' ass"

They did not censor any of the in game cutscenes though, and the language is pretty colourful in GTA San Andreas.

I dunno, violent games resulting in actual violence? Bit far fetched if you ask me. Pop culture, rappers, bling bling ganstas - these things tend to promote violence, and games based on that sort of thing are gonna be targets, but what if your "violent" games are running about with a lightsaber chopping up stormtroopers, or controlling a massive Mechwarrior robot thing? Can that translate to kids getting hold of a gun and shooting somebody? Seems pretty doubtful really.
Has Microsoft's flight simulator led to a massive increase in people wanting to be pilots? No, not really. Does playing some massive multiplayer shooty thing make people want to shave their heads and join the Army? Again, no not really. Does some kid who likes to listen to Fiddy, wears a hoody, and dreams of being a gansta go out and buy GTA san Andreas. Yep, maybe.
Chicken and the egg.

I see the video games as an extension of the “bang-bang; you're dead� games we used to play as kids. I remember watching Spaced with Simon Pegg a couple of years ago. Remember when they do imaginary shoot-outs? Christ, that brought back memories, we used to do the same thing as lads. Didn't do us any harm.

I think the whole issue is misleading. In my personal experience, violent games do not lead to violent behaviour. We have 1 son and 1 daughter. The son has an Xbox, plays some games like Star Wars Battlefront but also car racing games and is pretty passive. Our daughter loves her Barbies and Polly Pockets... but is substantially more violent than he is.

I grew up before video games and was fed a diet of WW2 actions films, 'Battle' comics and played endlessly with toy soldiers. I didn't bash anyones face in with the butt of my rifle... Yet... But don't push me...

I think that there is a difference between passively watching a violent film and actively taking part in a violent computer game.

I think people who have a relatively weak pschye could be susceptible to these games. You only have to see those people who believe that soap operas are real (remembers people petitioning for Deidre to be released from prison in Coronation Street) :} Not sure if banning them is the solution as banning anything just drives it underground... People would just download illegal copies or import them, and copy them to friends...

Only real solution would be to ban development of the games in the first place...

I'm not a friend of video games containing violence with explicit graphic imagery with blood squirting and such, for kids/adults regardless. Most people will be OK, but some will play nothing else and pick up on the violence, if that's what they're putting into their brain all day. I say ban them.

I agree... If a child played these violent games only from time-to-time, it probably wouldn't be much of a problem - but many of these kids sit day in day out playing these games - that has got to have *some* effect, especially with those with a weak psyche...

Sure, ban violent video games and nasty nasty action men and toy guns and pea shooters and god knows what else. Make everybody feel beter about it and secure in the knowledge that yet again the powers that be have taken the responsibility out of your own hands and all is well with the world. Codswallop.

Parents, teachers and pupils need to reminded of exactly how resposible they are for their children, their students and each other.

I'm as much a gun nut as anybody, played Quake (showing my age) for hours at a time and enjoyed it and and spent my childhood almost exclusively playing war games and I still respect society. Respect.

Although if that fool in the office across the courtyard moves in to range he's getting a early Christmas present.

I have an almost constant urge to go outside and gun down the bloody Germans. However, I do not, and am thankful that I can instead blow the buggers up on PS2.

I concur. My best friend has a son my son's age and the boys are friends as well and attended the same class. Last year her son brought a video game over to our house along with his playstation (as I refuse to purchase one for my son). He had received the game from his grandfather who lives in the Ukrain. Apparently the grandfather did not understand what he was buying.

I asked first that the boys show me the game so they did and they also showed how the level of violence could be turned up on the game to sickening levels. Then when I balked and said that they could't play it, I sat them down to explain why and my friends son admitted to me that on the game you can enter some kind of code words (similar to "cheats") that allow you to do even more. The player could rape female characters of the video game and then kill them afterwards. Fortunately he had not shown this to my son yet.

I immediately told my friend who seemed shocked (of course) but not near as outraged at I thought she should be. Not wanting to push something that should be her decision I just backed off but I did make it clear that when my son was over I did not want them playing video games and that he was not to bring them to my place.

The apathy was hard to understand..

It is a parents responsibility to pay attention to the games our children play.

I grew up watching John Wayne killing Red Indians on a regular basis on tv. I've never had the urge to kill any Native Americans, normal Americans however...

While TV is 'only' passive information I don't think this makes it any better for vulnerable minds. There are other child development factors that can stem from passive recieving of such a jumble of useless & useful information (not to mention TV advertising) and access to a TV is harder to control. On the other hand interracting with a video game can be an excellent educational tool.

I agree that children should not be exposed to violent video games, but I think the culture of banning is scarier than the fact that unsuitable games are out there. We need a shift in perception and should treat adult-themed games as we do R18 movies, magazines and books. Games have been an adult media as well as a toy for a while now but a generation of parents are somewhat ignorant to this.

Parents should take an interest in knowing the content of popular games and have easy access to this information, and sellers/renters of games should strictly comply with the same regulations they do for selling pornographic or violent movies.

Granted games can be trickier than TV shows as it is harder for a parent to know the whole contents, but banning games or game development in general is just a knee jerk reaction that is not going to fix anything.

Grand Theft Auto is referred to a couple of times in this thread. I think it also might be the one Saint Daniel is referring to (which means there is no rape scenario, but the character can appear to get in a car and have sex with a prostitute).
This game is R18.
The question is not whether this kind of game should be banned, but how did the children come to possess it? If you found your children had been watching pornography you would track down who supplied this to them and which parents were meant to be minding the children while they were watching it.

This is the problem, the perception that games are only for children, not the fact there are adult themed games available.

Absolutely. I don't know very many kids who are independently wealthy enough to buy games systems and games themselves. Some adult is not doing their job.

I also think kids get too much "privacy" these days. I would not personally buy a TV, computer, or games system for my child to keep in her room to use by herself with the door closed. I'm sure it would be a great way to keep your teenager contained and not irritating you every second, but I suspect this is how parents
get to the point of "having no idea" what their child is doing.

Problem is, there will always be people with weak personalities who will be more easily influenced by what we may consider (rightly or wrongly) undesirable elements.

- The bloodiest wars in human history have been fought before video games were invented.
- The level of prostitution in major cities (eg London) was significantly higher in Victorian times than today.
- The single biggest 'evil' influence that corrupted the minds of a large number of people to do barbaric things was not a video game... it was an Austrian.
- There are (probably) no video games whatsoever in Rwanda or Darfur, yet mass extermination occurs there.

Random violence is a part of our make-up. Banning video games isn't going to make 1 iota of difference to this.

Each year, thousands of people in the US are murdered - the cause not being related to video games. Each year 100s of thousands are killed in car accidents..many. many more than through video-game influence... should we ban cars?

What I don't understand is, why people tend to generalize and/or simplify everything?
I think violence be it in any media form is just that - violence in a media form.
It on its own, is not causing anything.
There are many factors and parameters that play in this.
To say that the games/movies are responsible for kids/teenagers being violent, or that a some shootings or what have you, can be blamed on the fact that who ever was doind it was also playing/watching violent games/movies is basically escaping the truth.
Games will not make non violent people to violent.
And violent people don't need violent games/movies to do acts of violence.
Usually its the other way around - violent people find violent games/movies attractive because they get a chance to get in touch with their rage , which usually originates from bad dynamics with their parents (and I am talking here in a bit deeper sense than just not getting along with them), instead of letting this anger out on their peers or worse.
So playing violent games can also serve as vent.
Again, this is not a magic formula, its not always true, but it is ALSO true.
I play (still today but not as much as I'd like to) games, mostly ego shooters, and I like it more, the more realistic it is.
(As a programmer I also can appreciate the it as a software, but that's another story)
It didn't made me any more violent then I was before.

After all, before the age of movies and PC games, man kind was not violent, there where no horrific deeds, etc.
Its like making prostitution illegal.
It doesn't make people not consume sex.

Games, movies and any other media, is only a reflection of society, its not creating it.

People tend to make loose connections between things and draw wrong conclusions which doesn't help to solve the problem.
There are very few categorical conclusions one can make about this subject.
That said, I don't mean to say there are no limits.
A game where one can rape and murder people is ofcourse not something a non adult should play, and even I could not enjoy such a game.
But that is true for hard core sex movies as well.
And people should be more occupied with WHY a certain individual is so obsessed with violence, and not just deprive him from access to it.

So yes, there should be an age restriction on games that are violent, just as there is on movies.

But to give it any causal significance, is just taking the easy, and wrong way of dealing with the real problems concerned with violence.

I think this is GTA, but there is no rape going on(That would be too much even for the most hardened of gamers). Plus the benefit of killing them afterwards meant you got your money back.

I heard that games about WWII cannot be made in Germany, there was a game banned where you could actually play as the Germans and try and win WWII. I often wonder why is there loads of games on the market where you can kill Germans, Japanese, Koreans, Russians etc... Though where are the games where you can kill Americans? Not that I want to...honest!

Has there actually been a link to a game to this recent incident?

There was a notorious case in the UK where a 14yr old was killed in a vicious premeditated way just so he could be robbed by an older boy (18yr old). There was a Tabloid cry about the game "Manhunt", in the end it turned out the game was actually owned by the victim not the murderer.

Banning something that may influence someone who is mentally disturbed is probably a lost cause. Some people claim that the word "SEX" is spelt out in the salt of a brand of cheese cracker, others that god told them to do it and some that they obeyed secret messages hidden in record that can be heard when its played backwards.

I don't know about being made in Germany, but you can play and buy such games here, such as DOD for example or wolfenstein.
And battlefield aofcourse.

@Exile

No, I don't think there has been a link established. In fact, the fault appears to lie somewhere else... see also, this thread.


And the evil internet seems to have played a large role... BAN THE INTERNET!

@Exile


Have you listened to Celine Dion's "My Heart Will go On"? If you play it backwards, you can clearly hear her saying 'Drown you f***er, drown you f***er' in the last verse.

The point is that the children did not participate in the WWII, prostitution..etc...They just read about it or saw a movie that is a documentary.
Video games make you participate.
Evil in the world will go on. Video games just add to it. Why let it? If it is possible to do something about it, do it. Or, shall we just dismantle all the prisons...?

me thinks.

Why do people constantly make the false assumption computer games are played mostly by children, average age of players is around 33yrs.

No problem with protecting children from violent material but adults should not be treated like children.

Yes, for adults ( >18 ) I have no issue. They should be responsible themselves.
ban it for kids.

me thinks.

That'll be along with the KFC, McD, Cola, etc that are also killing our kids?

And I guess you never heard of the Hitlerjugend? Or teenage prostitutes (even these days in India, Thailand ,etc...)?

It's a kneejerk and populist reaction from simple minds. Me thinks.

If you think there is really no problem relating to images in video games ( and TV, and movies..etc ) for kids, why don"t you show your kids ( <5 years) and see how they sleep at night? Young minds absorb everything.

In this respect I think it is harmful.

And because there were child prostitutes somewhere, sometime, will you make your child go through it then???

me thinks.

Playing Celine Dion forwards is bad enough.

I completely agree with Cinzia in regards to kids today having too much privacy. Parents are also raising their children with a sense of entitlement. So many kids my son's age believe they are entitled to a handy, to internet access, to a playstation or to a TV in their bedroom. It is not easy to consistantly deny my son a playstation over the past 4 years but if there is one thing that I am proud of as a parent, especially a single parent, it is that I have stuck to my guns.

Moderation (as in moderating the content we allow our children to view) and consistancy are two of the keys to successfully raising children in today's society. However, this takes time and energy and believe me, when they get to be about 11 years old kids have already learned how to be consistant themselves, consistant at wearing on and nagging their parents that is.

As far as violence is concerned, I believe TheLSB is spot on. However, has it not been proven that viewing violent images, year after year in movies or TV desensitizes people? Surely feeding our mind with such imagery cannot be healthy, right?

Years ago I read a statistic that the average 10 year old has viewed well over 1000 "murders" acted out on television. With modern cinematography the violence looks more and more real. I believe that our subconscious has to process these images and does not always recognize or differentiate between what what is real and what is fake. This should be a concern for everyone, not just to people with children. Eldon Taylor conducted research that tested the brain and body’s reaction to violent imagery and found that while people thought they were not affected by it, their body was signaling otherwise.

What a bunch of idiots, they're considering banning a video game. But not smoking...

Why not make a law that you HAVE TO go to church?!?

From Valdemar W. Setzer

Even assuming that the population remained stable and kids didn't move away as they grew up, this does not prove a causal link. As there is no control and too many other factors could be responsible, especially over a 15 year time span.

The violent imagery religious children are subjected to over their life time is more worrying and should be studied far more closely than video game/tv violence.
Kids who play games or watch TV know it is make believe (and if there parents tell them otherwise than they shouldn't have care of children.)

Religious children are taught all these violent, hellish and bloody scenes are in fact reality.

More energy should go into researching and stopping this irresponsible child manipulation than worrying about games which at least are marketed as exactly that.

It's ironic that those who fear movie/game violence the most are generally those that fill their childrens lives with the historically violent imagery of the religious kind.

I think kids just have too much free time on their hands. Not that I'm a fan of sports 5 days a week or anything, but teenagers (my generation included) just have too much time to sit around and romanticize about death and morbid stuff, while not having a developed enough intellect to appreciate what suicide or death actually does to the people around them.

Violent images themselves are not new though. Art has always been evolving to an expression of fantasies and realities (beautiful/peaceful as well as tragic and violent), the difference is the technology and presentation. I think more than ever we can now differentiate between what is reality and what is fantasy thanks to information sharing.

Whether parents help or hinder this process (by not understanding the technology) is another thing.

Really, does anyone believe that banning a game, A GAME!!!, is going to stop or reduce violence in society?!? I mentioned to a friend yesterday that " I bet they'll blame video games", but I hopefully thought that people had grown up or maybe even learned something from previous instances, i.e. the Columbine Murders.

For Christs sake! This is like calling Rock and Roll the Devils' music!

Hey why don't we just start hunting those damn witches, and burn a couple, that'll cure societies ills.

Here is exclusive footage of the new German Movement To Ban Video Games And Witches

Well, I don't think it has been proven, no.
There have been many studies, with various outcomes.
Some show its healthy, in the sense it allows the player to channel its bottled up anger out, in a non harming way.
Some show it can bring up bottled up anger beyond the PC game in to real life - which ofcourse is not healthy (at least to the people around).
My point was, that the variable here are not the games, or movies, but the person playing and his/hers mental condition.
Yes there is no doubt that there should be moderation for kids, but from here to ban publication of games or other media is just nonsense in my opinion.

I'd even dare to say, that if parents and teachers and other educational figures would pay more attention to KIDS that are being very occupied with violence (in any form) more then usual (instead of being occupied with the FACT that they are playing a violent game), and intervene in form of consultancy and treatment, many such violent outbursts could be prevented, for the sake of everyone involved.
And you can only do that by allowing violent (to a degree!) content to be accessible for kids.
Normal people will be interested in violence only to a degree, and will loose interest quite quickly.
Those who don't loose interest, are the ones that need draw attention.

In simple words - the problem is not the content of media, but the mental state of individuals.
You can't make sick person better by denying him/her access to a trigger of his problems.
Some other trigger will always come along.

A violent media content is never a reason, marly a trigger.

I am all for protecting children, but a blanket ban on violent games simply won't change matters. humans are violent creatures. Unfortunately that is the case. Humans have been violent creatures for a lot longer than computers have been around. Rugby is pretty violent, but is an accepted form of exercise. Boxing is legal, as is wrestling. Both of which have led to deaths in the ring, and who knows what else in car parks and schools after matches.

Computer games are marketed at different audiences. I for example play Counter Strike online. This is very popular all over the world. Including Germany. However it also has an age restriction on it, ranging from 16-18 (i think) depending where you are. Children should not be playing it. But large numbers do. Who bought it for them. Parents. I'm not blaming violence on parents. It isn't that simple, but children should not be getting these games, they are age restricted, just like movies are.

Violence is a fact of life. It's part of life, as this is a violent world, there are a lot of meat eaters in it. To pretend that it actually isn't violent doesn't help. Children should not be exposed to as much of it as possible until they are at a stage where they can deal with it, and certainly shouldn't be left unsupervised.

Google is good for finding out information. A quick google of GTA for example will give you a very good idea about it's content in a matter of seconds.

Time to buy myself a new black t-shirt...

Haha, that's funny. I may have to get one of those.

But under 18s are ALREADY legally barred from such stuff innit.
I can't see a blanket burn functioning or stopping such attacks like the other day.
I see the tabloid press are all for it though.

Reminds me of the story about how any German based websites that carried any X rated content were being obliged to personally have proved that anyone on their site was over 18. Result: No website with X rated content is based in Germany any more.

Also somewhat bizarre in a country that obliges its young men to learn how to shoot people with real guns that they won't be allowed to pretend to do it on a computer screen.

But that's OK because it's government-supervised violence.

What about Schützenvereine? They practice with real guns there... Ban 'em too?

Edit: Bit off topic.

I second that. IMHO, the government just wants to keep the monopoly on violence/war/bloodshed/torture/arms dealing and therefore wants to ban violent video games. They don't want Joe Public to join in on the fun. Geeky guys who smell funny and play computer games the whole day aren't the ones you should worry about. Every day you can read in the papers about fathers killing their children, men killing their wives, ex-boyfriends killing their ex-girlfriends and stalking them, mothers killing their babies, soldiers torturing and killing for fun or out of boredom, politicians sending so-called terrorists away to be tortured and killed in countries where torture has not been forbidden and this is what children see every day, read every day, hear every day. Reality is far worse. When our parents were kids they couldn't surf the internet, couldn't read about the atrocities being commited in obscure and far off countries all over the world which nobody has ever heared of, weren't exposed to war being portrayed as a media spectacle on CNN (have your beer and chips while watching the GI's storm Baghdad). Some kids can handle our modern society, others can't. The realities they have to face are a lot worse than the violence they are exposed to in games.

There has never been a single study which showed any causative link between violent video games and real-life violence, and anyone who believes it should read this essay.

woof.

When I was a kid, I would play violent computer games when I was pissed off with something. After killing a lot of faceless people in games such as Commando, or Rambo, I'd feel a lot better afterwards.

OK - granted, it wasn't as graphic as now and sometimes the characters were hard to distingish from each other, but I don't think it's turned me into a menace in society and it actually helped get rid of aggression at the time.

Ditto, and this is the finding of most legitimate studies. The games act as a proxy, allowing people to do something they can't or wouldn't do in real life, from driving on racetracks to going on killing sprees.

woof.

I guess this is hard for people like me who don't (or rarely)experience violent thoughts to understand needing a proxy. However, I can accept, without judgement, when someone says that it is a release for them.
But BD, don't you think there must be better ways of channeling negative energy than using video games that only reinforce violent imagery?

What I am thinking is this; if people would find other ways of channeling that energy or dispelling it or, shall I go so far as saying that people could actually find more constructive ways of dealing with anxiety or problems so that they not only eliminate the need for such proxies, but also drastically reduce the initial negative response that they have in the first place.

For adults, things like NLP and cognitive behavioural therapy come to mind.
For children, nothing beats good, attentive parenting and schools that monitor and discourage bullying and mobbing.

edit: I should add that I do not agree with banning anything, neither books nor video games..my point is not about removing video games or violence from the media, it is more about personal responsibility. When it comes to emotional health, we are (should be) our own advocates.

edit 2: I also think that we should mention that statistically there are more men playing violent video games than women. Perhaps, the male sex has been molded by evolution and social conditioning and social necessity throughout time to fight for survival and dominance. In today's world it is not acceptable to pick up a stone and bash your challenger's head in but the instinct seems to have survived even though it has outlived it's purpose. Today we are expected to find diplomatic solutions. Is diplomacy and change in what is socially acceptable behaviour moving too fast for male evolutionary instincts?

I would sooner have alcohol banned than video games. Sorry Hazza.

Fight Club