Response: Video game violence

Just thought I'd throw in a quick response to some of the posts such as The Blame Game, Hannah's post and Adri's response relating to violence in video games, and how they might motivate people to commit violence in the real world. Over the weekend I've been considering the notion of freewill or in a way, agency in the gaming world and I think this might have interesting implications for how we view violence in gaming.

I'll take GTA as an example, since it's the most often cited game which is meant to turn teenage boys into murders. It is very possible to play the game and never kill any prostitutes or steal your money back. All the actions performed by the character are at the instruction of the player, in essence he is their avatar in the virtual world of Vice City (or other locales). You could very well play the game without committing any crimes in the game. You would however not be able to 'finish' the game in the conventional sense.

So I question whether all 'violent' video games are actually inherently violent in the sense that they require the player to commit violent acts or reflect only the desire of the player to use the avatar in the game to complete the tasks required to reaffirm its identity. That is, there is an expectation that Max Payne will get revenge in the game of the same name, not making it happen in the game would be like refusing to read a book because you know from the blurb that the beloved protagonist is really Jack the Ripper. I wont go as far to deny that video games may lead to a normalization of violence, and as such they should be restricted to adults who hopefully have the cognitive ability to keep gaming as fantasy.