FPS's are hardly teaching kids how to shoot a gun

[Lou]

I love it how some critics argue that first person shooters are traning kids to become murderers. I don't see how being good at using your thumb and your pinky to move a mouse, and your index finger to press a button can be translated into being a good marksman in real life. It appears to me that the set of skills required to fire a gun, with accuracy, are quite different than those required to be good at shooting digital enemies on a video game. You have to stand still, aim the gun at your target, and pull the trigger. That is hardly the same as playing a video game.

How are FPS's training kids to become murderers? Are they desensitizing them towards human life (even if the enemy is a robot, an alien, a zombie, or a demon)? Is that what they are doing?

 

[Naudian]

They probably just mean training mentally, not physically. As in, desensitizing them to violence, gore etc.

Which is still BS.
A normal kid will not go kill people simply because he is desensitized to violence, he/she can still tell right from wrong.
A ****ed-up-in-the-head kid on the other hand...

 

[jerkasaur]

hey, how about the hl2.net members making an army? we could envade anywhere we want sice we're all soldiers now...

 

[MilkMan12]

I am in no way siding with those attention whore critics who use video games as a scapegoat for problems they probably subconciously contribute to. But video games did teach how to kind of use a gun...for example: Rainbow Six and basically every other semi-realistic shooter shows slamming the mag in and pulling the slide then releasing. Some games even taught me that you only do that when there isnt a bullet in the chambre. Then others taught me where the safety is and stuff. And one day when I had a chance to hold a pistol, I pretty much knew how it worked right off the bat and I was right. Now could I fire it properly and hit a target...probably not for the first time. But games kinda did teach me that I will admit it.

However when it came to the shotgun which is much more complicated I had no ****ing clue lol.

 

[The Mullinator]

I have recently taken up archery as a hobby. No I am not using guns but the same relationship can be made.

Real archery is totally different from what you see in games and especially movies. The method of drawing the arrow, of releasing, of aiming, of holding the bow, is not something that you could possibly learn from video games. All video games did for me was introduce the idea of archery and get me interested. I suspect it is the same situation with guns, they get people interested but they certainly won't teach you much on how to actually use them.

Just incase anyone is wondering, it was not Legolas that got me interested in archery. It was Link from the Zelda games as well as studies of the British longbow and the Mongolian horse archers.

 

[jerkasaur]

you do know that they used HL1 for training british soldiers don't you?

 

[CyberPitz]

I can just imagine it...seeing a video of Iraq soldiers running, then leaping into the air, and laying down flat in air, then landing, then getting up and repeating over and over and over..

Trained on BF2 eh?

 

[Sulkdodds]

I am in no way siding with those attention whore critics who use video games as a scapegoat for problems they probably subconciously contribute to. But video games did teach how to kind of use a gun...for example: Rainbow Six and basically every other semi-realistic shooter shows slamming the mag in and pulling the slide then releasing. Some games even taught me that you only do that when there isnt a bullet in the chambre. Then others taught me where the safety is and stuff. And one day when I had a chance to hold a pistol, I pretty much knew how it worked right off the bat and I was right. Now could I fire it properly and hit a target...probably not for the first time. But games kinda did teach me that I will admit it.

This is true. Flashpoint also showed me how to use the sights on an M16 correctly. D:

The thing is, it's actually not true to say that videogames don't affect people because everything affects people. Moreover, a medium where the player is an active participant in the proceedings is obviously going to have some kind of effect - but I'm not talking about turning people into murderers (the very concept of that is ridiculous).

We can't keep on claiming that computer games have the capacity to shock, to amaze, to sadden, to inspire great emotion. We've all got personal stories from Flashpoint, from Morrowind, from Deus Ex - we all share the experiences and the feelings they gave us in Half-Life, CoD, Baldur's Gate or whatever. These experiences are all the more powerful because they're happening to us - but if a game can affect us emotionally in a good way then there must be associated dangers. Which is why we've got to be very careful because kids who don't ****ing grow up properly are going to be even more vulnerable to videogames than to any other cultural bric-a-brac.

Of course, problems stem from parenting and culture rather than games themselves. But yeah, we do need to be careful.

 

[Ren.182]

This is true. Flashpoint also showed me how to use the sights on an M16 correctly. D:

Same here.
Like it's been said, I guess it desensitiezes us. I'm not effected by the sight of gore as much as I used to be.

 

[Steven]

Heh imagine FPS players in the army, jumping around loseing there aim. They'd have to lern to be still.

I do belive there saying it trains them mentally. Which would apply to ten year olds playing Half-Life. There too young and stupid to play a shooting game. I think everyone would agree with me here but some moron will say "No a ten year old playing Half-Life is fine." because it offends him/her as a gamer.

 

[Jintor]

Uh... I don't think it desensatizes us. I still throw up after seeing flesh wounds, so...

*real flesh wounds, not digital ones

 

[el Chi]

They probably just mean training mentally, not physically. As in, desensitizing them to violence, gore etc.

Which is still BS.

I can see where they're coming from - the more you see blood and gore, the less shocking it becomes, but whether that genuinely translates to games, I'm not so sure. Even so, game gore and the reality of the frail human body are two completely different things.
As for violence? I'd argue that there is little to no way that killing someone in a game could feel like killing a real person. It's possible it could desensitize people already on the edge, but that's like saying cars should be banned because some people are reckless drivers.

There was an article about game violence in a recent edition of PCGamer that argued (amongst other things) that, in some ways, gore in violent games is good as it shows that there are consequences to violent actions. If dead enemies just fell over, then it might seem like there was a lot less to it.
In Tom & Jerry, they beat the living shit out of each other solidly for ten minutes, then shrug it off and repeat for the next episode. What does that tell children about the results of violent actions?
By all rights, the two burglars from Home Alone should've been dead about 24 times over. Obviously, it's a kids' film so they're not gonna have that fella getting his head stoved in by an iron, or that other dude bleeding to death after being hit in the crotch with a staple gun.
But even though it's all for laughs, does that send out a bad message about the ramifications of violent acts?

Personally, I don't think it does, really,unless the child's pretty stupid. We all have a concept of pain, and that others feel pain, thus we are aware of at least a degree of the results of violence.

But then I love games and I love Home Alone, so perhaps I'm biased. Or maybe I'm just not an alarmist, scape-goating pillock.

 

[Max_Payne]

a game does not **** up a persons mind, that person has got to be already ****ed up to go out and shoot someone.

Mikey:|

 

[CptStern]

hey lou ...you're not from germany are you? just curious

 

[Some_God]

Another case where they blame a third party(games) instead of blaming the perpetrator. The third party didn't commit any crimes, but guess who did... :|

 

[Neutrino]

I think it could possibly be argued that practice with an FPS can indeed improve your performance with a real gun, with respect to general hand-eye coordination. Granted, it's not the same motions, but I would think most "point and shoot" activities use the same part of the brain to one extent or another. So although an FPS may not give one the muscle memory necessary to shoot a gun accurately, it may in fact improve one's ability to mentally connect a target and a sight in the field of view, possibly leading to faster reflexes and increased aiming control. Though that is of course just conjecture.

 

[Lou]

I think it could possibly be argued that practice with an FPS can indeed improve your performance with a real gun, with respect to general hand-eye coordination. Granted, it's not the same motions, but I would think most "point and shoot" activities use the same part of the brain to one extent or another. So although an FPS may not give one the muscle memory necessary to shoot a gun accurately, it may in fact improve one's ability to mentally connect a target and a sight in the field of view, possibly leading to faster reflexes and increased aiming control. Though that is of course just conjecture.

Actually, I think you are right. I used to suck at pool and then I played this game called "Virtual Pool" for a couple of weeks and the next time I went to play pool with my friends I beat them all. Go figure.

 

[Jintor]

Answer = simple. Ban guns.

 

[XANA]

Answer = simple. Ban guns.

WHAT!?!?! what the hell do you mean "Ban guns. "? unless you were being sarcastic of course. if that's the case, i apologize. but really, i dont see how an FPS can teach kids how to use an actual firearm. mostly, FPSs have the weapon model at the lower right-hand corner and a targeting reticle. do you expect to hit a target with your weapon like that? i dont think so. also, games don't accurately portray the recoil of many firearms. it usually depends on whomevers using the thing. just think of it like this: its the difference between a beginner, and a fully trained ranger using a weapon. god, i feel like such a nerd right now... but i cant figure out why...:|

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

I don't think FPSs are desensitizing me in particular. Scary shit on teh internetz does that.
As for shooting a gun, I've never done that. NES light gun and Area 51 are the closets I've came to shooting at something.
My aim is badass when the enemy is like 2 feet away.

Real life, I don't think I've learned anything in the way of killing. Not even from Street Fighter.

 

[Zeus]

hmm lets see...shooting a gun in an fps and in the real world are about 5000% different. In the game you don't feel any recoil, dont have to worry about jamming (except in americas army), you dont get a reticle to aim with, ect. how about instead of wanting to ban video games for violent gun crimes you just ban the guns to begin with..

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

I say we ban people that try to relate the two and let people have their games and guns.
People have been killing people long before guns were invented.

Guns used in homicides are also traceable and great forensic evidence.

Banning guns will only make half of he US outlaws.

 

[MiccyNarc]

I play lots of violent games but was still nauseated, repulsed, etc when a cow whithered (basically her uterus fell out) where I work. And later when the farmer had to stab her neck with a needle to giver her nutrients, I flinched every time he had to stab it trying to the artery.

 

[Jintor]

WHAT!?!?! what the hell do you mean "Ban guns. "? unless you were being sarcastic of course. if that's the case, i apologize. but really, i dont see how an FPS can teach kids how to use an actual firearm. mostly, FPSs have the weapon model at the lower right-hand corner and a targeting reticle. do you expect to hit a target with your weapon like that? i dont think so. also, games don't accurately portray the recoil of many firearms. it usually depends on whomevers using the thing. just think of it like this: its the difference between a beginner, and a fully trained ranger using a weapon. god, i feel like such a nerd right now... but i cant figure out why...:|

I was more on the point that the easier that it is to obtain firearms, the easier it is to use them, the easier it is to go on killing rampages. Although I suppose banning guns at this point would have no real effect.

 

[Raziaar]

I have been playing evil, murderous games for most of my life. I still cringe and get physically sick if I see something real that is violently happening. Not to mention even doing something like that. I could never.

 

[Spoonoop]

I always think of it this way, would you rather have people blowing up pixelated buildings or real ones? There is no problem with playing video games, though, I do believe younger players can be influenced, this is where the parents should come in.

 

[xcellerate]

i slaughtered my entire family with a crowbar because my mom said i should go upstairs to watch tv, because she wanted use to couch. I put them in my basement for a few weeks, and when the neighbors came over trying to find out what the smell was, i killed them too and put them in the basement then moved into their house.

 

[Sulkdodds]

"Whoops!"

 

[Jintor]

Seriously though, if you're stupid enough to be affected by a videogame you're probably also likely to be affected by them voices in your head.

And by 'affected' I mean go on a murdereous killing rampage or things of that ilk.

 

[Fliko]

They probably just mean training mentally, not physically. As in, desensitizing them to violence, gore etc.

That just means if we get into something violent, we have a better chance to get out and perhaps get everyone else to get out.

 

[jerkasaur]

i didn't get a word from that...