h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Squiggles...

A specially designed simulator used by the military is not a computer game any more than a blank-firing firearm (such as used on exercises) is comparible to a plastic toy that makes electronic 'ack ack ack' noises when you pull the trigger.

The reason why the 'theory' is unpopular is that it simply isn't true; there have been NO links proven between commercially available computer games and violent behaviour. You might as well say that loud music makes people more suggestible because it's occasionally used by the military during 'interrogations'.

I also blame video games for all them short mustachioed folks eating mushrooms and jumping into pipes.

It doesn't necessarily support your theory, does it? There are various other issues with bullseye targets vs VR human ones:

- They don't move like humans.

- Soldiers need to be trained to aim for the centre of mass. Bullseye targets are not surrounded my a mass.

It is true that soldiers *do* have to be taught somewhat to treat a human as a target. Soldiers not shooting to kill is a Known Issue (it was estimated that only one in ten GIs in Vietnam who fired a shot actually hit Charlie). However, as someone who personally knows quite a lot about VR training systems (long story) I have not yet heard of their being used by the military for desensitisation.

One thing to think about is that in modern, assymetric warfare, combatants are mixed in with civilian populations. Rules of engagement try to limit civilian casualties - not always successfully. Civilians are represented in VR trainers for this very reason. If desensitisation were the intention, you would think that some alarm bells would ring.

Nice theory. It has everything going for it apart from evidence.

@toybox

Anybody ever play Zelda?

Whenever she finishes a challenge she has to get
on her horse and ride to the next encounter.

For what seems like an eternity all we can see is the
rear end of the horse undulating up and down to the
artificial and mechanical sound of hoofbeats. Little
Zelda is bouncing around on top of these huge, and let's
face it, rude haunches that are so 'in-yer-face'.

At least with wind up toys, even battery bunny drummers,
they will wind down eventually. The rear end of Zelda's
horse will ride on forever to the manic unvarying rhythm
of computer synthesized horseshoes on firm clay.

Cloppity-clop-clop, cloppity-clop-clop.
No wonder some people want to kill.


~jwf~

>>Anybody ever play Zelda?<<

Clearly not you as...

>>Whenever she finishes a challenge she has to get on her horse and ride to the next encounter.<<

... Zelda isn't a playable character in the Zelda series. The protagonist is called Link. There's also only one/two games (I've never played Majora's Mask so don't know if Epona is in it) in the entire series where horse-riding is a major dynamic.

Please stop embarrassing yourself by spouting such ill-informed claptrap

>> there have been NO links proven <<

Again with the proof and evidence thingies.
Sheesh.
You and ED need to listen to your hearts and guts
a bit more instead of somebody else's statistical
analyses. Reason is such a johnny-cum-lately in the
whole schema of Life, the Uni et al. It is probably
just a passing phase.

Meanwhile, stare at Zelda's horse for a while.
Clippity-clop, clippity-clop.
Are you feeling the rage yet?

~jwf~

PS: Yes toybox! Nice one.

"Anybody ever play Zelda?"

You haven't apparently.

But why actually make the effort to properly defend your 'theory' (with, y'know, like, evidence and whatever) when you can just post some entirely different nonsense? Really Squiggles, your theories are about as flimsy as a Tory MP's promises.

>> Please stop embarrassing yourself by spouting such ill-informed claptrap <<

Yes dear.


~jwf~

"You and ED need to listen to your hearts and guts a bit more"

My heart and gut tells me that there is no causal link between computer games and violent behaviour. Reason simply back that up. I saw the claims that there was a link before I saw any claims that there wasn't, and my immediate instictual reaction was that only a credulous ninny would genuinely think that computer games cause violent behaviour.

I love how terrified of facts and stats you are, Squiggles... it's almost cute.

Consider for a moment, Squiggles, that what your heart tells you might me...how can I put this gently?... wrong?

'It stands to reason, I reckon' is not normally counted as sound intellectual argument.

Although having watched my kids play the Zelda games I do sympathise. Surely *that* cant't be the much-vaunted storytelling element? Granted my opinions are somewhat jaundiced because my son went through a phase of downloading multiple versions of the theme music.

>>Meanwhile, stare at Zelda's horse for a while. Clippity-clop, clippity-clop. Are you feeling the rage yet?<<

Dunno about Zelda because you almost never see her on a horse, but when Link is on his horse (I've just been reminded she appears in 3 games - Twilight Princess being the third) there's usually some lovely, relaxing music playing. The music from the Zelda series is widely-recognised as some of the best the genre has to offer and adds to the whole experience.

Again, you don't know what you're talking about: you're trying to slander one of the biggest entertainment mediums by simply making crap up.

Serious proposition, Squiggles:

You only have until tomorrow to listen to the radio programme I mentioned that argued for games as an art form:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01c7xfd

OK - so I remain a sceptic myself...but why not give it a listen and comment on whether there's anything in there that you didn't expect?

Oooh, I love Zelda! I played Link's Awakening on my old black and white gameboy, I *almost* reached the end. And I bought my N64 almost entirely for The Ocarina of Time. And I got the Twilight Princess about a year ago but unfortunately I have no TV to play it on at the moment.

Riding in Zelda is not boring. It's simply nice. And then the trading games planting the seeds and searching for the fairy caves and the hidden heart parts...

As an honorary moron I would like to present the follow exhibit m'lord

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1967794/Video-games-cause-violence-most-children-admit-to-Ofcom.html
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-11-03/health/healthmag.violent.video.kids_1_violent-video-video-games-game-genres?_s=PM:HEALTH

There is a lot of money in the video games business m'lord and I feel it in my waters that they will poo-poo any suggestion that it is a cause of violence.

And yet they've let a couple of stories slip through. On some quite prominent sources, too.

But we should keep our critical faculties intact when looking at such stories.

The Telegraph one merely says that lots of children play games. Sometimes they don't heed the notional age certification for their sale. It does not put forward - let alone demonstrate - a link between this and behaviour.

The CNN link suggests a correlation between violent games and aggressive behaviour *for those children who play a lot of games*. It does not show causation. An alternative hypothesis might be that poorly socialised children might a) get into fights at school and b) send a lot of time on their own playing games. I am not saying this is true. There are many, many other explanations. We should not settle on the explanation that suits our prejudice. That's bad science.

Incidentally, former gaming journalist Charlie Brooker maintains that Grand Theft Auto (Cert 18) has a strong moral message. You have behavioural options. You can ride around San Andreas, keeping to all the speed limits and stopping at all the reds and you'll be fine. But the minute yo shoot a hooker in the head, all hell will descend upon you and you'll probably lose. As Omar, my favourite character in 'The Wire' says, 'It's all in the game.'

Incidentally...the type or military simulator SoRB played with...

Wellll...yes, there's been quite a bit of investment in them. But they're boys toys. Military trainers have been pulling their hair out because there's no evidence whatsoever that they deliver the knowledge, skills and attitudes that are needed. But they impress the kind of people who are impressed by that kind of thing.

Not just that, but the Telegraph's headline is deliberately misleading (Headline: Kids Tell Us Games Make Them Violent!!! Article: some kids say that they believe there is a causal link between video games and violence), and the CNN article is a short term study on a comparitively small amount of kids who, as Ed has pointed out play rather a lot of games.

If a long-term, wide-ranging study (i.e. several age groups from pre-adolescent to early middle age) of a truly significant number of subjects (at least 1,500 in every group) shows that there is a definite link then I'll put my hands up and say I was wrong. Until then, my heart and gut say no, not least because me and pretty much everyone I know who plays violent games finds them relaxing and a good stress-reliever rather than filling us with violent thoughts.

Yes, on the flip side, playing "violent" video games can act to purge the aggression out of the system - whilst converting the person into an obese or anorexic finger pushing sleepy head.

I read somewhere that chicken farming can turn one into Heinrich Himmler.