In light of California’s recently proposed video game law (that prohibits the sale of violent video games to minors), 11 other states have also come forward with arguments favoring the proposed law. Here’s a look at the law, the states favoring it, and whether or not there is some merit to their arguments. Thanks to our friends from the travel insurance blog.
Click image for larger version
Source: Travel Insurance Blog
EMBED THE IMAGE ABOVE ON YOUR SITE
Around the web:
‘Black Ops 2′ Doesn’t Need New Engine, Says Treyarch 
MW2 Map Terminal Shows Up In ‘Modern Warfare 3′ Patch Files 
‘Halo 4′ Box Art Revealed 
Sony Shares Plummet To 32-Year Low 
Loading ...
I think most hardcore gamer kids will get the games regardless through friends and parents so I wonder much time and money is being spent in this regulation.
Propaganda like this frustrates me. I think parents are informed enough at this point to understand what video games are and are not capable of.
People who play videogames spend 30% less time reading? Wow really? Another form of entertainment comes into the world and the universe doesn’t increase our 24 day? Shoot I guess I should just pick one piece of entertainment and stick with it.
That data they are using here though is misleading. As always the media screws with scientific research. There is evidence showing that playing violent videogames makes you permanently more hostile. Nor do we know if violent people to begin with are simply attracted to violent games.
Sorry, but if you are going to propose legislation for games you are going to have to do it with films, music etc. And in doing you are going to have the same issues that other countries have with vague wording like “a reasonable person would find the violent content appealing to those with morbid interests”. Sorry, but ratings and opinions on content is subjective and should remain that way.
Even though the second paragraph hardly makes any sense, I do get the point and I agree. Both of the the other points are exellent and should be made known to all the people who are bashing video games simply because they don’t like to play them. Another reason these words should be spread is because, in the words of Ken Levine, “grow a pair, video game industry and fans”. (paraphrased)
Laws like this in California will affect gamers everywhere. With such a large market share controlled by California, many companies will try to reduce the violence in their games to keep them open to the under 18 audience.
I think stuff like this is ridiculous. Violence is not the only thing that has come with the advancement of video games. There are many, many games out there that are either mature or intellectually stimulating that have very little violence. Not to mention, you probably have as much exposure to violence and “atrocious content” by watching the national news. Plenty of kids, adolescents and adults, myself included, have played graphic, immersive and violent games, and are no more inclined to violent acts than other people. Video games are not the only environmental stimulus to cause someone to harm people.
Also, as far as the argument that “large amounts of video game play is likely to hurt their school performance”, I played video games for at least 20 hours a week from 1st grade on, through high school, college, undergraduate and graduate school, and I was at the top of my class at every level of academia. My friends who I played games with were right there with me. We all now are very successful, in our fields, ranging from engineering to doctors and dentists. Video games were a great way to decompress from the stresses of school and the real atrocities in society. By regulating them you are not only taking more civil and creative liberties from the people, you are taking away a very important pastime from today’s younger generation. I for one, will buy any game my or any children want, regardless of its content, and regardless of any stupid law that big government tries to pass.
I Agree,I play video games all the time and I’m in the top of my classes!And no matter what happens, every kid;teen;and adult in the nation will still get there gorey;violent;bloody M-rated games!This law will stop only the minors who’s family thinks that because of this,ALL video games are consentrated evil that is killing there kid’s soul, wich is complite BS
Where does their data actually come from? I for one am someone who as enjoyed violent games such as Mortal Kombat since a young age and I am probably the least violent and least impulsive of my friends, I also play the most games
Well, I’m glad this infographic has come to put the old “Video Game Violence” old topic to rest. I thought there was a debate on the how video games affect people, but it looks like the crack psychology team comprised of ING, Online Education, USA Today, and travelinsurance.org already have this covered! Phew, now I can finally stop thinking!
Bottom line – Most parents are ignorant about gaming, and the content within games. They need guidance. As a parent I limit what my son can and cannot play and I shake my head at parents who buy their 10-year old GTA IV, COD or God of War. There are thousands of good video games that are not insanely violent and a game being insanely violent does not make it good.
Agreed, almost every parent is very ignorant about the content in their games. And a voilent game is not necessarily good. But some of them are. Heavy Rain is a very violent game, and yet it tells a better mystery story than any book or movie I have ever read or seen. It’s the same with Metal Gear Solid, God of War, and Mass Effect.
Quite a few questionable claims there. From what I’ve read, there are no conclusive studies linking the playing of video games with violent behavior. And how did they come up with 800 hours of violent footage? Definitely not from single game, I think 20-40 hours of game play is typical. So they add up a bunch of games? How many? And how many does an average player play? It’s a meaningless number put up to raise an alarm.
So I find this infographic interesting, indeed. Whilst there may be some true fact included, it feels more along the lines of propoganda. The problem lies within the parents. If you’re kid comes up to you saying “Modern Warfare 2 looks awesome! Will you buy it for me?” and you look at the M rating, you should immediately say “No.” But many ignorant parents purchase these games anyway. If it has an “M” rating, it’s FOR A REASON. But no. Dumb parents purchase these games for their children, and instead of stepping up and simply saying “No,” to their kids, they blame it on the industry instead, telling them “they’re the ones that need to change. It’s THEIR fault, obviously.” As soon as this blame-game gets rolling, where will it stop? Suddenly states won’t allow R-movies, or books that may be “too morally suggestive.” Why shouldn’t developers be allowed to make games for mature-audiences? They do in every OTHER form of entertainment.
Lastly, “800 hours is the amount of footage violent video games may contain.” What in God’s name were they smoking when they made up that hideously false fact? I mean, 800 hours? Jesus Christ! Most campaigns in games these days last hardly 7 hours, with the longer ones (ex: “Dragon Age,” “Final Fantasy,” “WoW,” etc.) lasting anywhere from 30-50 hours, and most of that is purely gameplay.
And please, for the love of Christ, name ONE game in which “the most atrocious content is reserved for the highest levels and can only be accessed by advanced players after hours of progressive mastery.” I mean, seriously. Like, c’mon.
I’m 13, and I love video games. But during the school year I don’t play at all. Never. I understand education is much more important than video games. I always put school and work before anything.
Okay there are 2 kids. One played mortal kombat when he was in 5th grade. Had grew up with all kind of video games violent and not. Another didn’t play any video games and the only one he had in his house was Clue the board game for the PC.
Both kids eventually grew up to be a senior in college. One however would not graduate because one would be convinced of second degree murder of their mother. Which one was it sir? According to your damned chart it was me… the one who had played the violent games. But no, it was my old high school friend who hadn’t touched a single one. A 4.0 student in his own right. Beat the tar out of his mother with a clock before stabbing her to death. It came pretty much out of nowhere.
So to me this chart is dishonest in the least and libel and slanderous at worse. Kids were killing people before games came out. The 2nd worst shooting in American History occurred in the 1960s. The worst school massacre of in America all time was in th 1920s, call the Bath School Disaster.
Guess they should have laid off the violent video games huh?
By “Your” I mean Travel Insurance.org of course…
And now that I think about it I have to laugh… of course TRAVEL insurance is against video games… cause video games are direct competition with the travel industry. Them darn kids won’t want to go out and see the world if they stay home to play.
If this were relevant data it would come from a reputable source, with many references to studies to back it up. Saying Video Games can be blamed for people not reading so much is ridiculous, as many video games require you to understand and read signs, maps, and follow basic instructions normally written. An example, would be that just before reading this article I was playing Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth, which has no voice acting whatsoever (aside from a few sayings) but rather opts to allow the player to read the story to find the contradictions between testimony and evidence, but even heavy FPS games require some understanding of basic reading writing skills.
49% of the 70 top selling games contain “serious violence” , but if you were to look at films, I’m willing to bet the amount of films with “serious violence” would be quite high as well, possibly surpassing Video Games (although I have no evidence on this claim). Also, if you were to look into their claims of the 2 to 3 hours causing Physiological arousal and raising adrenaline levels, you’d find no real evidence to this or the statement that adolescents who play games tend to be more hostile. I read a study, that showed aggression levels do rise during game play (the game in question being Metal Gear Solid on PS1), which makes sense as games become more and more realistic, the sense of immersion in the world grows, however no data has shown up with regards to the lasting effects after the game is turned off.
I’ve never played a game with 800 hours of violent footage or anywhere close to that, if it were 80 hours, I’d be more inclined to see it as a fairer estimate, but 800 hours is just ridiculous.
In the many studies I’ve read on Video Games, one thing has really stood out, and that is the connection between Video Games’ effects on the minds of minors and TV’s effects on the minds of minors, in that most studies find that they have very similar effects.
But to the main point, this law should not be necessary. Kids will always find a way to get what the law, their parents, or anyone else says they can’t have. Video games mimic real life, life is violent, and video games show that…just as movies have and continue to do. With better graphics and faster processing comes a greater sense of realism, which is just that, realism.
I’ve played violent video games since I was 5 and let me say from first hand experience, no law will stop the kids from doing what they want to do, only the parents have the power to do this…but I guess most parents would rather have the government and media take care of their kids.
That information is poorly presented. “30% less time reading” is meaningless unless you give the comparison – less time than who? Kids who don’t game? Kids from 20 years ago? What? Without these comparison, the number is meaningless. “800 hours amount of violent footage games may contain” – the longest single game I know of is the Baldur’s Gate series, which tops out at about 300 hours. Most games have between 7 and 30 hours of gameplay. Exactly which games are providing 800 hours of violent footage?
“2 to 3 hours [of gaming] produces extended physiological arrousal” – how does that compare to watching a violent movie or violent sports? The last point, “Adolescents and children who expose themselves of violent games are more hostile” – that is completely unfounded. The best that science has been able to show is a correlation. It certainly isn’t enough to base a rights-restrictive law on.
This says that the violent game blossomed in 1990. What it doesn’t say about all this horrible youth violence is that violent crimes by youthful offenders has decreased each and every year since 1993. If games were causing more violence, there would pretty much have to be more violence. There is not. In point of fact, there is less. Something is wrong with their conclusion.
Of course, you should also note that this compilation of ‘scientific’ and psychological evidence to restrict American rights was provided by an insurance company. Not by a scientific organization, a psychological study, or a focused study, but by and insurance company.
I agree that such legislation may not directly take a huge amounts of titles out of the hands of younger players. I am thankful that it does highlight the fact that there are way too many violent titles out there. Any laws against such too much of the same old rubbish is most welcome. Could game developers not come up with something more original and creative than shooting and blowing things up all the time? It seems the few alternatives to violent genres are the racing genres and children’s games – come on, bring out something totally new where you don’t have to hurt, punch, kill, shoot or destroy something. I live in SA which is a very aggressive and violent society – why must you simulate such ugliness in a video game?? Could not our minds be stimulated in a different way? I also often struggle to find decent titles for my boys. When they play more violent titles (like shooting robots or something) they really tend to rough each other up a lot more. And what about girls. Most of them don’t like the violent genres. Wouldn’t more females start gaming if there were more excellent non-violent games (and non-racing games – although I do enjoy them myself) out there? It would be great if I could play a decent video game with my wife other than only Singstar – which I enjoy but, golly, is there nothing better out there (game wise of course)??
Try LittleBigPlanet, or Mirror’s Edge. Ever heard of Mario? How about Spore? Or the many, many sports games out there. Next time you want to play something new and different try actually researching games and finding out which ones are considered good but aren’t violent. There are plenty of them out there. Don’t just assume racing is your only escape from violence.
raceing games suck so does all no violent games i playde fifa it sucked sports games suck but i love call of duty modern warfair
Let the children play