What is considered accepted in-game violence/offence?

[Globusdiablo]

Disclaimer: This subject could be conceived as provocative by some. Please refrain from knee jerking.

I actually don't know why I haven't asked myself this question before now, but this question was put to me yesterday:

Most will agree that violence is the driving motivation in most video games. Be it suggestive or explicit. We have all manour of crime in todays games:

• Murder, Mass Murder, Genocide
• Assault, Battery
• Theft, Burglary, Armed Robbery
• Prostitution, Sexual Assault, Trafficking, Slavery
• Drugs

This applies across ethnic groups, minorities, civilians, specific genders, you name it. Pretty much any law I can think of is broken in most modern video games in one way or another. All crimes that would receive pretty serious penalties in real life. Some even long prison sentences, and some even the death sentence.

So why is this allowed?

The most common reply is: It's a game. It's not real life. It's pretend. None of us would do any of these things in real life. Chill...

And then someone asked me yesterday; Why is pedophelia not a subject in video games? A crime that receives quite mild penalties in real life compared to some of the others I've mentioned above.

After an initial knee jerk reaction, I was actually a bit confused. Trying hard to come up with a reasonable response, I answered that any given content is subject to the cultural and sociological stigma of any given time.

And for whatever reason, most crimes are considered all right in video games, but pedophelia is not. But boundaries shift, and video games have indeed become more and more explicit and controversial over the years. Even pedophelia may be considered legitimate content in video games ten or twenty years from now. I don't know.

But this whole question has left me feeling uneasy. So I bring this question here, where I have met clearer minds than my own.

 

[EUS]

Initial response from me would be because it's not entertaining in the least. I'm not even curious in the least bit on how it would be implemented into a game.
I play games to be entertained, not be subject to PTSD.
If it ever becomes entertainment, that would my cue to turn off the computer.

 

[Globusdiablo]

Initial response from me would be because it's not entertaining in the least. I'm not even curious in the least bit on how it would be implemented into a game.
I play games to be entertained, not be subject to PTSD.
If it ever becomes entertainment, that would my cue to turn off the computer.

Thanks for replying.

But by that logic you're saying that you find:

• Murder, Mass Murder, Genocide
• Assault, Battery
• Theft, Burglary, Armed Robbery
• Prostitution, Sexual Assault, Trafficking
• Drugs

as gameplay mechanics entertaining, right?

Why are some crimes all right to "play", and others not?

 

[EUS]

Thanks for replying.

But by that logic you're saying that you find:

• Murder, Mass Murder, Genocide - when playing CIV, and dropping a nuke, yes (looking at you Ghandi!)
• Assault, Battery - when playing skyrim, and defending against thugs, yes
• Theft, Burglary, Armed Robbery - again skyrim, yes
• Prostitution, Sexual Assault, Trafficking - I guess slave trading in ED, yes, the others i haven't played a game with those in it.
• Drugs - who doesn't like making cr off onionhead?

as gameplay mechanics entertaining, right?

Why are some crimes all right to "play", and others not?

Context. I suppose your examples rely on games like the GTA series. I don't play it, it doesn't interest me because of those components that become in your face type of things, but in context with the games I mentioned above, it becomes a different thing.

 

[MottiKhan]

The short answer is I don't know.

A bit longer one is that it might have to do with pedophilia being rooted in mental illness and not something that's relate-able to the average gamer. I don't know of any game mechanics based on bipolar disorder or depression either.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Just play one of these hentai pedo upskirt japanese games and you got it covered.

Different cultures produce different games. Some come with a preemptive censor by the designer - some don't. Some find mass murder distasteful, some don't mind. But they all mind marketability, so if they risk landing on the index they might not go for that topic. Though you get all kinds o crap nowadays on Steam.

 

[Globusdiablo]

Context. I suppose your examples rely on games like the GTA series. I don't play it, it doesn't interest me because of those components that become in your face type of things, but in context with the games I mentioned above, it becomes a different thing.

Context indeed. All right. So it's safe to assume that you're a very liberal person. You wouldn't have issues if a "top tier" style pedophelia game was released, you just wouldn't play it yourself?

Could you see a significant backlash from the public in general if such a title was released?

 

[Winterwalker]

Why are some crimes all right to "play", and others not?

Isn't it like dreaming? They say that when you dream a nightmare, especially common when you're young, it's a lesson in self preservation; What would you do if you were being chased down the street by a giant marshmallow? Apparently the brain, in giving you these scenarios, prepares you in case you get chased down the street by other things.

In a game; How do you catch a thief? What should you do to protect yourself from one? What better way to understand the psychology of the thief by actually being one, in a safe space? The Mirror Dimension?

Spoiler

[video=youtube;mO37JEW9GMM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mO37JEW9GMM[/video]

 

[Vasea Azure]

Lots of games from Asia implies underage sex imo, as said above just looks at those "anime story games", I bet much more drastic ones are available in Asia.
As far as depression/bipolar/suicide topics - I know few indie horror games based on those, some of the covers those topics pretty well.

 

[Shadowdancer]

And then someone asked me today; Why is pedophelia not a subject in video games?

Have you looked at the deluge of "visual novels" that were on Steam even before they came out with their latest "controversial" move?

(edit) OK, been mentioned in better terms by Navigare above…

 

[Globusdiablo]

...In a game; How do you catch a thief?..

But games in general aren't about; How to catch a thief. They're about; How to be the best thief possible...

 

[Globusdiablo]

Have you looked at the deluge of "visual novels" that were on Steam even before they came out with their latest "controversial" move?

(edit) OK, been mentioned in better terms by Navigare above…

Cheers.

No I haven't. Honestly I've never seen video/game/book content of a pedophile nature. I know it exists though.

But I suppose the gist of my initial question is; why are all these horrendous crimes considered legitimate gameplay mechanics, but pedophelia is not. Is it merely a question of cultural and socialogical context? (based on the answers above, I suppose it is)

 

[Winterwalker]

But games in general aren't about; How to catch a thief. They're about; How to be the best thief possible...

True but this is only one example. It's also going to be much easier to defend yourself against a rubbish thief than against a master cat burglar. So if you play the role, might as well try to be a good one, and really understand what it takes?

 

[EUS]

Context indeed. All right. So it's safe to assume that you're a very liberal person. You wouldn't have issues if a "top tier" style pedophelia game was released, you just wouldn't play it yourself?

Could you see a significant backlash from the public in general if such a title was released?

More anarchist_live_and_let_live/mind_my_own_business than liberal, but IMO, a top tier game couldn't exist without a large consumer base, which would mean it would be "acceptable" to the majority of the society where said game is released, in which case I would probably ignore the game, and be more detached from the society that would back this kind of stuff.

If the above is true, there would be backlash, but it would be less significant, likely limited to the groups we have today that attempt to censor the media we already have.

 

[Globusdiablo]

True but this is only one example. It's also going to be much easier to defend yourself against a rubbish thief than against a master cat burglar. So if you play the role, might as well try to be a good one, and really understand what it takes?

And this translates to "be the best pedophile you can be"?

I don't know. I'm not sure I have the stomach for this conversation...

 

[MottiKhan]

And this translates to "be the best pedophile you can be"?

I don't know. I'm not sure I have the stomach for this conversation...

That's a reasonable response. To the majority of us, a child's innocence is precious and breaking that would be utterly repulsive. It's against our very nature.

But we could see ourselves stealing or killing in certain circumstances, even if we don't want to admit it. Who hasn't secretly wished harm on an enemy?

 

[cpbtrading]

I think if a dev was to put pedophilia in a game, they would have to do it on the old BBC... :O

 

[MTBFritz]

Thanks for replying.

But by that logic you're saying that you find:

• Murder, Mass Murder, Genocide
• Assault, Battery
• Theft, Burglary, Armed Robbery
• Prostitution, Sexual Assault, Trafficking
• Drugs

as gameplay mechanics entertaining, right?

Why are some crimes all right to "play", and others not?

That statement gave me pause but I came up with an answer that lets me continue my existence

Its a question that everybody answers in private and probably doesnt share with the rest of the world. The "am i a good person?" question is well known and depending on your findings you ll have no problem to share. Questions like "do I like to inflict pain?" or "do I thrive on others misery?" are existential questions that even the person asking might not like the answer to so many dont ask in the first place to avoid casting a look into the mirror and not liking what they see. I had my fair shares or anger and violence in life and all these events forced me to evaluate my nature because lying to yourself results in misery. Now no doubt that there are people on this planet who will answer these ugly questions with "yes" if they are brutally honest with themselves. There are pathological murderers who accepted what they are because they were unable or unwilling to change themselves and they cope with "trying not to get caught" but continue what they do. This is an extreme example of course. To lesser degrees you might come to the conclusion that you have "issues" or a temper that will affect other people around you to a degree that it breaks laws. Domestic violence, mistreatment of minors, handling difference in opinions by law of strength etc. If you are prone to violent outbursts realizing your nature and accepting it is actually a good thing but it doesnt mean that your outbursts are "okay" or you can continue to exercise them whenever you feel the need. You still have to navigate through a social maze of laws, rules and taboos which all change depending on the country or even community. Its all very confusing and sometimes funny.

If I know I m prone to violent outbursts I probably will try to avoid situations that trigger them if I have any sense of responsibility towards others. AD&Ds morality system comes to mind. Only when you shift to the darker spectrum of morals will you find people who realize they like violence and still freely apply them on others aka showing a complete disregard for other persons values or safety.

People are diverse. There really is no "norm" apart from the most superficial ones. Once you go into psychology is all becomes a mess and many of these people cannot be blamed for their preferences because some characteristics are so deeply ingrained that "changing" is not an option.

For me it was a combination of factors. Age is one. There is truth in "hotheaded youth" and I experienced this first-handed. I value my own freedom and happiness very much. When I got into a serious relationship I was suddenly faced with encounters and situations which would see my own ideas and convictions stand at odds with others. How do you resolve this? Violence, ignorance or compromise are the 3 immediate solutions that come to mind. 2 out of these 3 usually dont see long-term relations so if you value a relationship you will probably learn to compromise.

Once you start that and understand the fundamentals its easier to apply said technique on all kinds of situations in your life.

Problem[u/]
"I d really like to kill somebody but its against the law and even if I defend myself I probably get punished"

Solutions/compromise
"I can join the army and apply for hot zones"
"I can simply ignore laws and continue to live out my psychy"
"I can vent my urges in a digital fantasy playing games"

Now these solutions have all vastly different consequences but also hold various degrees of risk. in one instance you might actually be called "hero" and be distinguished for your urges but at the same time you risk your own life in the process. Another makes you a fugitive living in constant fear of discovery or a fugitive who is forced to deny your own persona. The one which is the least risky opens you up to ridicule but truth be told.....games today are much more accepted then 20 years ago and we still have pockets of people thinking of gamers as "nerds" or "losers".

Now this might seem like a confirmation that whoever is playing "killing games" is actually a "killer in the waiting" and I really believe that there are individuals out there who think just like this but applying this logical leap to everybody is like various past government attempts to measure intelligence based on race or head size. Its laughable, its rudímentary and outright wrong scientifically.

So when you ask me that question (Do you like violence) the initial answer that springs to mind when I admit that Like to play shooter games (Yes) isnt something that I d like myself for. I despise real life violence. i dont want people to apply violence on me nor do I want to be violent on others. Yet I like to play games that have violent mechanics. This is such a core opposite that it makes you think.

The difference is that I dont play games that promote violence but rather offer the option as kind of problem solving. Or violence is part of a persona which I control so its like "watching a movie with me at the wheel" aka roleplaying. I dont play various shooter games in order to kill pseudo human beings. I play shooters to overcome opposition or to get that next level or to aquire item x or to just compete against others like in a sport. Its all about the motivation to play said game and I can honestly say that my motivation is not to kill other human beings or just be violent for the sake of violence. But answers may vary with different people.

Fact tho is that most games offer violent mechanics in a disguised manner or offering you a choice. You are hardly tasked to "hack these limbs from the prisoner" and the games that do this stuff leave a sour taste in my mouth. When you are tasked to "kill 25 orcs" in World of Warcraft you could argue that its genocide or simply living out a killing spree. But orcs are not real. They dont exist in real life and the "violence" is reduced to an animated fall-over and a poofing sprite. it doesnt show me intestines dropping out or gushes of blood, curling screams or pleads for sparing. Instead pixel orcs come at you and they will kill you if you dont kill them first.

What about Doom and its success then you might ask? And the answer is social tolerance and human nature. When Doom initially came out it was heavily censored and even prohibited by law. And its human nature to be interested in things that are forbidden at first. Dark curiosity you might call it. Tell your kid that it can eat whatever it wants but not these 3 things and watch it trying to pick exactly one of these 3. Our kids fascination with drugs, alcohol and sex isnt only based on the testosterone levels in them but also due to the fact that they are legally forbidden to consume or practice these things. I might talk about kids as if they are a different species but I d like to mention that I was a kid once. It was a different world back then but nobody can accuse me of "never been a kid". of course todays kids wont see it that way and wont understand until they grow up.

And when 20 years ago a drunken minor or a 16 year old having sex would result in major newspaper lines and the parents being "bad at their job" today (depending on the severity of course....) most people will say "kids are being kids right?" The tolerance for these things just ups over time. and naked skin in advertisements 50 years ago compared to today? You can answer that yourself Of course there were these occurences 50 years ago as well but punishment or social stigma was far more severe acting as a deterrent. Penalties today are rather mild compared to earlier generations so the frequency of these incidents rises accordingly. Nobody bats an eyelid anymore when another 16 year old has sex. But things change the younger you go.

The world changes and IMO society degenerates compared to past standards. But I have this judgement and more importingly am capable of differenciating between "good and wrong" because I experienced both. Playing computer games was a privilege I had to earn. Parental rules and social tolerances were far more stern then they are today. Todays generation is growing up in an environment where all the things that were frowned upon in my childhood are ever-present and okay. And it shapes your perception of these things as well meaning if you grow up in an environment that promotes these qualities you are prone to breaking laws in accordance with your perception not understanding what the problem is because you are following your own perceived "norm".

In my early online moments "banter" was an integral part of communicating with others. You met people and you dropped the occasional insult or laughed about others. We all knew the rules and if I decided to dish out I had to accept that I receive some heat as well. All part of the game. fast forward a few years and you have an influx of youngsters who enter an environment where they are confronted with the results (insults) without knowing the motivation (fun, banter). Nobody educated them prior to dropping into this playing field and as the internet grants anonymity people dont know they are addressing a kid. Suddenly these kids are confronted with hostility they dont understand and lash out in a natural reflex. Its not really a decision between "flight or fight" because there is no immediate threat...only the computer screen and the safety of your own home. So its fight only for these kids its "serious" and if not controlled accordingly (parents...I mean you because internet controls are for the lulz) this misunderstanding will only grow and become more intense.

Ever wondered why internet communities are so toxic nowadays? I have thought a lot about it because I have lived in a time where todays behavior would ve left a shocking silence.

Its not a one-way street you know. The threat is real but so is terrorism and murder. Doesnt mean you have to accept it. But fighting against the tide is taking effort and is work. but I see no reason why parents today couldnt bring up their kids like my parents did with me back 40 years ago. the playing field has changed. I dont mean for parents to raise their kids mormon-style but if certain things are naturally ingrained in todays society like sex, nudity, violence and all kinds of other things it means that the children today have to be educated accordingly in order to be able to cope with the sensory assault. Computers and internet access is hardly monitored as far as I know. While many internet platforms offer parental controls most parents I know dont know about them or bother with them in the first place. Then you have control mechanics which can be easily overcome with a little determination. And due to the last generations stigma (and I mean the 1970 generation by this) with all kinds computer many adults today are illiterate in these things and handle internet and computers like the television. Its ignorance of potential dangers.


Lost track a little I think


Differentiation is the key word for this topic. Fighting and killing enemy soldiers in computer games or performing genocide is "entertaining" because I know its not real. And the last event in World of Warcraft where a world tree was burned down and genocide actually was called for is an example for Blizzard misinterpreting todays "norm". Its wrong to assume that somebody who plays violent games simply is a violent person but that might change if we stay on the current course. Social degeneration is very real and while the internet has helped to overcome racial borders it also makes you a target if you are connected and dont have the knowledge to protect yourself. Regardless if its your possessions or your sanity. Schools these days should teach "internet etiquette" and some do as far as I know but it really should be a must-have course or part of the education. Sexual education still is a major issue in many parts of the world when providing it at young age would prevent so many "issues" later in life.

Which brings us to social taboos.

Big topic because this one has an active opponent in the form of companies. And because we are living in a free-market economy these companies are free to act as they want as long as they follow and abide laws. A company producing and selling sex-toys will naturally try to erode your sense of shame to promote higher profit. Companies producing "unhealthy stuff" will try to promote a cool image or present their products as "everybody does it" in order to convince you to buy them. Actual values are neglected or are hidden under big flashy logos or distracting images making the search for quality an actual investigation. Lingo has evolved and manages to transport negative things in a positive light and of course the constant bombardment of sensory input leads to an increased conscious tolerance while maintaining a subconscious vulnerability to impulses. Its actually a multi-billion dollar business and as money is the driving force in todays world morals largely degenerate to allow for greater profits.

This is a light and shadow world that exists at the same time in the same place. Even 2 decades ago Sex and nudity was frowned upon in the USA. It was a social taboo that gave the americans their international reputation of being prude. And it was so extreme because at the same time the USA was the number one producer in the world for pr0n. I m not sure what kind of coping mechanism gets to work here. "oh but its not ME doing it so I m not part of it" or "this is horrible but when I do it its different" either way its the passivity which allows it in the first place.

The problem is that this world is not strictly separated. What happens at the highest tier spills over into everything affecting everything else.

We do have companies producing warfare tools be it bombs or tanks or airplanes or rifles and ammunition. All of these companies have one priority. They need wars in order to sell their stock and same as in food satisfying demand is not the problem. Making people buy YOUR product is. So you offer more for less leading to diminished quality or childrens labor in order to cut production cost. Its unethical, its morally wrong but money is this worlds god and money says "we do what we have to do".

Now heres the shocker. If demand is saturated you simply CREATE more demand in order to maintain or increase your profit. In terms of food there is a thing called "sugar addiction" which will give you pause at how todays food companies operate in order to keep their margins up. But this company ethos can be applied to everything else. Armament companies will promote violence in different ways. Either lobby for lax laws regarding possession of guns or they will trigger wars in order to increase demand. Meddling in international affairs is prohibited but laws usually are only effective if you enforce them. The solution is to not get caught or operate in legal grey zones in order to accomplish your task because the first truth is that companies dont care for laws. Most of these things cannot be proven or linked to any actual company but saying "its not true as long as I dont prove it".....cmon.....

So lets assume that there are companies out there who actively work at weakening your resolve to current social taboos in order to sell you more of their product. The difference is that they are spending billions of dollars in order to achieve this often hiring the best people in their fields to turn your own biology or chemistry against yourself and all you have is......your free will. Only most of the time you are not even aware that you are under attack. Just like the frog and the boiling water.

Its really an arms race in a legal landscape. Rules and laws are created and applied in order to "protect" governmental and private interests and then you have counterplayers trying to achieve advantages in this playing field by exploiting grey areas or using legal situations which are not exactly defined. Laws and rules get "adjusted" to cover these loopholes and the whole game starts again. The population in the meantime is standing on the sidelines living under the effects but having next to no short-term option to change the climate. So every time one loophole gets exploited its the population that suffers until it gets closed.


So your whole topic can be answered with "no, people playing killing games are not killers by default" but regarding all which I wrote its possible that we will get there eventually. If violent games are not played for venting but translate into "the norm" because "killing games are fun" then real life reactions to all kind of stimuli can become more extreme in turn. And frankly, thats exactly what we can see already. but that doesnt mean that I personally want killing games to be gone for good. I still enjoy them and can separate a video game from real life. The challenge is to co-exist with todays conditions and even tho humanity is prone to the "stomp rather then co-exist" reaction I dont really see the people accusing killing games as the root of the evil as the "stompers" in this scenario to be honest

 

[Roybe]

It really comes down to what the society the game releases into has taboos over.

In the US...there is no real taboo, anymore, against direct violence.

Sex is still a heavily taboo subject in the US...and when you mix power AND sex (as in or pedophilia or child molestation)....people refuse to talk about the issue, at all.

And you are making a bit of a mistake about the response of violence in video games..it used to be taboo...look at the first release of Postal...and GTA...and the responses from people at the time...IT was a problem...the whole 'violence in games begets violence in real life' thread of logic, sprung from these games and the public's concern over their inclusion of these activities in them.

<shrug> When a game comes along that breaks the taboo of the sexual abuse of others, it will in all likelihood, be a raison d'tre for a character quest line dealing with revenge, where death, torture, and humiliation would be heaped upon the antagonist.

 

[Kaocraft]

@OP: The difference is that in most countries child pornography already is a crime in and of itself. So a videogame (or any media) directly depicting paedophilia would most likely be illegal.