Violent Video Games?

Video games have been around for decades and include a plethora of game types and platforms. However, they have come under the scanner for potentially creating violent responses in children and teenagers. But how many have actually considered the base of this argument? How much of it is actually true?

Almost all video games are a competition or are based on meeting a time crunch. They are about which player can score more points than the other or who can finish the game in the least amount of time. That is how their creators intended them to be. They were made to enhance the players skills and improve upon other abilities simultaneously. Video games push players to use their mental and physical capabilities to beat the machine, or each other, in a battle of time and skill management. In all classic video games, the game challenges the player's timing, reflex, tact and strategy - and builds their ability to perform under pressure; usually a time crunch or deadline of some sort.

In player vs. player games, the outcome of the game is decided by who responds sooner and acts in the most appropriate way to attack, defend or counter-attack as to gain an advantage. Some players adopt a tactical and calculated approach, while many other find a moves that the easiest to perform and begin a continuous barrage of attack which undoubtedly always leads to their downfall.

Strategy games were created with the aim to invoke a player's planning and evasive tendencies. They sharpen your mind and reduce decision making time while improving reaction time.

The point argued is that such games are violent. They aren't! Children don't play video games from the day they are born. They learn, they see, they listen and absorb what they can from around them. This is what makes up the world surrounding their existence. When the child grows enough to handle a game controller; they act upon what they've absorbed and their inner self is presented on screen in plain sight. Parents should let the child choose what sort of games he or she wants to play. They need to pay attention or even partake in the game with their child or children. This will let them gauge what the child is focused on. Do they pick competitive racing or fighting games? Or do they choose a strategy game which involves team work and dependence on the performance of others in times of need. If so, are they focused on the goal at hand or on destroying everything in sight?

Here, it is the parents who are responsible and need to  realize their child's or children's thought patterns and counter actions thereof. Failure to note the difference is what qualifies as ignorance in upbringing. It's the little things that make a big difference later on.

A game is played how the player chooses to play it. An angry child will prefer a game with guns so he or she can shoot at everything to glory deriving pleasure from dissipating their anger among virtual beings. Games like Contra or Quake are mission oriented. They provide you an arsenal to attack and defend yourself but the game is ultimately based on accomplishing a goal - complete the level as soon as you can with minimum fuss. Here, the player can choose to evade game opponents and stealthily complete levels taking down enemies only when they stand in their way. The game can be played several different ways. The player decides how they want to go about it. It's more than a game; it's a gauge of discipline and choice.

Not to stereotype any players or games, but some games actually let you gauge what sort of person the player is. Arkanoid, Tetris and even Pinball tend to be played by those looking to exceed their own limitations -  those who push themselves to be better than they used to be. Similarly, Super Mario Brothers or games of such genre show a curiosity, a perseverance within the player to reach their goal, their prize. Some may even consider people to be addicts. However, there's a fine line between being committed to oneself to see a goal through within a reasonable amount of time and being addicted.

Then there are the games created later by those you could safely say are in need of a psychological consult or even mental help. "Shoot as many as you can" or "shoot as much as you can" are simply not rules. They seem easy enough at first but then you realize that they are mindless violence oriented games with a single track to follow. What's more; they don't last because of that aspect. They don't bring anything else to the table or offer anything else to benefit the player. They certainly don't engage players beyond a single parameter. This is the major difference between those sort of games and games like Call Of Duty or Commandos. These are hot sellers because they actively involve the player and strengthen several skill sets which are basically required to survive. They inculcate responsibility, strategy, planning, tact, team work and sacrifice. They require quick thinking and decision making and utilize considerable reserves of the players memory. They engage the mind and body of the player in ways that few other games can.

Thus, it's wrong to blame video games for the violent tendencies of children. Video games are merely an outlet which lets you see what a child would do given the power and abilities that video games offer in a virtual world. Of course, this does not translate literally to their actions in the real world but there are some who cannot process the difference. There are some who will have certain feelings triggered by events in the real world which cause them to react upon the real world as they would in the game.

As for violent video games; they don't exist! The ones that are simply focus on a singular path of violence never make it to the mainstream. There is always a choice and there are those who choose.