Is it true that video games cause violent behavior?

The short answer is "maybe". Just like how the majority of people can enjoy a beer or some wine without becoming alcoholics, the majority of people can play video games without becoming violent. But there are going to be exceptions, and there are ways that the entertainment we consume can negatively affect us. This is true of any form of entertainment, though there is a prevailing belief that video games are more likely to be harmful.

This is probably one of the longest pages I've ever written, so I've tried to divide it into various sections to make it easier to digest. Hopefully this page can shed some light on the issue, though I doubt it will be enough to truly answer the question.

Before continuing on, I think it's important to understand why people play violent video games. After all, millions of people play them, so there must something that makes them attractive, and the idea that it's the violence is rather disturbing.

Speaking for myself, the most important aspect of any game is that it's fun to play. If I'm not enjoying a game, I probably won't continue playing it after I've finished reviewing it - in fact, there have been a few cases where I've actually abandoned a review in progress because playing the game wasn't worth it. By the same token, if I really enjoyed a game, I'll probably play it several times over, even after I've written about it. But here's the thing: how graphic a game is doesn't really factor into whether I think it's fun to play or not. It's all about the gameplay - I'm not impressed by blood and gore, and if there's a way to disable it, I usually will. I don't think it adds anything to the experience, so why keep it around?

I can only guess why other people choose to play very violent games. I've noticed that a lot of people only buy games that they know something about; in other words, they tend to stick with games they've heard other people talk about or games from a series they've played before. This results in the more well-known games getting most of the gaming community's attention, while many other games fly under the radar.

But there's also a catch to this. More than a few of the biggest names in gaming got there by being controversial. There's no such thing as bad press, so the more people rallied around protecting children from these controversial games, the more well-known the games became, and now that a lot of people have heard about them, the more likely it is that they'll buy the game, and the cycle simply continues.

This is one reason why it's a good idea to stray from the beaten path occasionally. For every well known violent game out there, there's at least a dozen non-violent games that are just as much fun. If you're interested, I have a little list that can help with this problem.

There is also another, much more serious, reason why some people are interested in playing violent games: violent people like violent entertainment. I'm not going to beat around the bush here. Evil people do exist, and they tend to gravitate towards things that reflect the evil in their hearts. This includes all forms of media: movies, TV shows, comics, and even video games.

But it's important to remember that these people didn't become evil because of what they watched or played: they simply used this material to feed an existing evil desire.

"Desensitization" is a ten-dollar word for becoming disinterested in something you see on a regular basis, and it's often heard during discussions about how entertainment affects people. Despite how pretentious it can sound to use big words like that, this really is something we should be concerned about.

Video games, like any other form of media, have the ability to desensitize us to various things. This becomes a problem when we start casually allowing things we shouldn't. For example, if you hang around people who swear constantly, you may stop noticing when people use foul language, or perhaps you'll even start using it casually yourself.

Since video games can depict some extremely unsettling things, people worry that players might become desensitized to violent behavior, and in turn, will be more willing to chose violent solutions to their everyday problems. I can see the logic here, but I don't agree with it.

In my experience, someone's current situation plays a big role in what they see as appropriate behavior. The choices we make in games make sense within the framework of the game we're playing, but may not make sense in reality or even other games.

One example that readily comes to mind is how we approach public restrooms. Game developers never include rooms or environments unless there's a reason for the player to visit them, so players will typically visit every bathroom (regardless of their character's gender) to see what's in there. Often, there are small caches of supplies or interesting easter eggs in video game bathrooms, so it's always worth taking a look.

However, when it comes to visiting public lavatories in real life, a lot of people are very hesitant to even open the door, let alone visit both gender's facilities.

Also, it's important to remember that the majority of video games don't provide a way for the player to choose a non-violent resolution to their conflicts. Since this option isn't available, players won't bother trying to find one. On the other hand, we have countless alternatives in real life, and most of us are only willing to use violence as a last resort.

Ultimately, no matter how terrible things can get on screen, I just don't believe that people would react to a real life situation the way we'd react to the same situation in a game.

Games are supposed to be fun. That's literally their entire purpose. But, many video games can infuriate the people playing them, and this may lead to the player acting out in various ways. Young children are especially vulnerable to things like this, as they are still learning how to handle their emotions constructively.

So what can cause these outbursts?

There are several possibilities, but the root of the problem is that video games follow their rules extremely rigidly. There's no negotiating when you lose, nor is there a way to call a time out when something goes wrong.

But this isn't just a case of learning to lose gracefully - video games aren't perfect, and there's always a chance that something in the game will handicap the player unfairly. Poor controls can make things more difficult than they should be, unclear directions can waste your time, and badly designed mechanics can drive players nuts.

Probably the most irritating thing a player can encounter is lag; there's very little a player can do to fix lag issues, and when you take into account how many games require fast reflexes, it just gets worse. As a non-gaming example, if you've ever needed to print something in a hurry, you can probably understand how enraging this sort of thing can be.

Sadly, players may end up venting their frustration on someone else. If someone is struggling with a video game and they are interrupted, they may yell at or otherwise lash out at the person who bothered them. Unfortunately, it's not always clear when someone is having trouble with a game, and this can an outburst appear to come from nowhere.

So what do you think? Does stressing someone out count as turning them violent?

I'll leave that judgement call for you to make.

Before moving on, I'd like to point out that problems like these are usually linked to a specific game or games, and if parents notice a recurring problem with their child's behavior, then I think they are justified in revoking access to that particular game. Maybe the player could try it again later when they've grown more mature, or perhaps it's best to disallow the game entirely.

Children learn by imitation. It's something we've all done, as it's a normal part of growing up. By experimenting with different roles, children develop healthy imaginations, learn to understand the world around them, and mature into well-rounded individuals. Throughout history, children have imagined themselves being ninjas, cowboys, robots, pirates, or just about anything else that captured their attention.

Since this is so commonplace, it's not a big stretch for someone to worry about who children chose to imitate. This is why there are many different "watchdog" groups out there who monitor different types of entertainment and warn parents when something is amiss. Many groups even impose strict rules about what children's entertainment can show, and if you're paying close enough attention, you might be able to spot some of these restrictions.

Parents need to ensure that their children have entertainment that is appropriate for their age. Children who consume inappropriate entertainment may choose to imitate the inappropriate behaviors they've seen on screen, and that's where they get into trouble. Choosing age-appropriate movies and TV shows is easy enough, but for some reason, there's a blind spot when it comes to video games.

Many parents provide their young children with very inappropriate video games and then react with utter shock and horror when their children draw graphic images, talk about killing people, or include violent or sexual material when playing with other children. Some people will use this as proof that video games are evil or have some unusually powerful corruptive influence, but this isn't being honest about the situation. It doesn't really matter that it was a video game; when children indulge in inappropriate entertainment - be it a TV show, movie, song, or a video game - they will usually display inappropriate behavior afterwards.

So how can parents, who usually aren't gamers themselves, be sure that the games they provide for their children are appropriate? I've seen people ask for a content rating system to be created for video games, and it's a reasonable thing to ask for - I mean, movies and TV shows are given ratings, and you'll find similar warning labels on inappropriate music. So why don't video games come with content warnings too?

Well, the thing is, they already do. In fact, official rating boards have existed since the 1990s. While it's not legally required for a video game to be rated, it's a smart business practice and nearly every famous game out there has been given a rating. Importantly, the infamously violent games that talk shows and watchdog groups keep using as examples have always proudly displayed their "18+ Only" warnings.

The problem is that people don't know these ratings exist, and this needs to change.

If you're just now hearing about this rating system, I'd suggest taking a moment to learn about it via this nifty little page, where I go into some detail about the system used in the United States.

Despite how much we stress the importance of sharing, children (especially siblings) can be fiercely protective of their stuff, and children are far more stubborn about sharing their video games than say, an action figure or stuffed animal.

There's actually a really simple explanation for this, but it might not be obvious to someone who doesn't play video games themselves.

While co-op and multiplayer games are becoming more common than they used to be, video games aren't usually designed to be shared. Your typical game can only be played by one person at a time, and most games aren't able to track the progress of more than one player. If a second person joins in, it'll have to be by taking turns (which siblings absolutely hate) or it might come at the expense of the first player's progress.

Additionally, most multiplayer PC games expect each player to have their own computer and copy of the game. That's not exactly feasible for most families, so in many cases, these multiplayer features are actually pretty useless.

To be frank, if you really need to have your children share video games, PC gaming isn't going to work out well. Instead, you're probably better off purchasing the latest Nintendo console (currently the Switch) and picking up games featuring Mario and his friends. Now, I don't review console games unless they've been ported to the PC, but I do know that Nintendo has worked very hard to corner the family entertainment market. Since so many of their best known games are explicitly designed to be played by multiple people at the same time and are also known for being family friendly, I'm comfortable suggesting their products.

One of the difficulties of discussing how video games affect people is that many parents will attribute their children's misbehavior to whatever video game they happened to be playing at the time of the offense. If we're being honest, then we'd have to acknowledge that children are experts at getting themselves into trouble; they don't need video games to help them.

Kids get into things they shouldn't, teenagers rebel, and siblings constantly seek reasons to fight. This is how children behave, and it's been this way ever since Cain and Abel. Video games might be involved in a situation, but we should make sure that they really are the root of the issue before assigning blame.

For example, throughout the ages, children have "forgotten" to do their homework. Homework is rarely enjoyable and often thoroughly boring, so parents have always had to put in some effort to keep their children from getting distracted. Despite this being a problem in just about every household, people started treating it differently when children began playing video games instead of getting their homework done. From the perspective of these parents, a toy or comic book might be a "distraction", but video games are an "addiction" or "obsession". Are they really so different?

A similar issue can occur when children are asked to do a quick chore when they're busy playing a video game. It's not always possible to leave a game without being penalized for it, so the player might need a moment to reach a place where they can put the game down. This might not sound like a problem, but some parents turn it into one by getting angry when their children take what they feel is too long to put down their games. When this happens enough, it will eventually turn into a fight, and that will be taken as more "evidence" of video games corrupting children.

Mind you, I'm referring to situations where parents don't give their kids time to respond to the request. If an hour goes by and the chore is still undone, there's a problem. It should be possible to find a place where you can either pause or save in about five minutes.

Yet another common complaint from parents involves playing video games at inappropriate times, like when it's time for dinner. This can be related to the above issue with leaving games, but it's much more likely that the player had misjudged how much time they had. Children aren't always that great at understanding how much time something will take, and sometimes start an activity without realizing that they don't have time for it. If you've read my page entitled Simple Rules to Keep Games Fun, you'll notice that one of these rules is about ensuring you have time to play before you begin, and it's for exactly this reason. This problem isn't generally a problem with video games as much as it's just a common mistake. The video game specific part comes in when the player doesn't want to stop playing - and this time, it's their fault.

As a side note, I've set aside a little section of my game reviews to give people a rough idea of how long they need for a reasonable session of each game. On average, it seems like most games need about fifteen minutes, though there are some exceptions.

Now, there are plenty of reasons for someone to own guns, and I'm strongly in favor of the Four Rules and proper trigger discipline. I'm also educated enough on the subject to know that painting a gun black and adding some accessories doesn't magically change the gun itself, and that the "bad guns" that people want banned are already illegal. In short, I'm generally reasonable about gun ownership and try to keep educated about the subject.

But I'm also going to tell you that giving children unrestricted access to guns, even their own, is a terrible risk.

You might be wondering why I'm talking about gun safety in the middle of an article about video games, but unfortunately, it's because we need to acknowledge that having guns is a serious risk. Children sometimes decide to play with real firearms, and there's never been a shortage of things that make guns look cool and exciting. When you combine easy access to real guns with a child's playful innocence, bad things happen. It doesn't matter if it's a movie, a TV show, a novel, or even a video game; anything that makes guns "cool" can encourage a disaster.

In order to be sure I had my ducks in a row while writing this article, I spent a lot of time researching real life cases where a child committed murder and their entertainment was blamed for it. This was easily the most upsetting and depressing information I've ever waded my way through, and while it ultimately didn't show much of a correlation between the child's entertainment and their actions, I did come across two noteworthy cases where a child played a video game and then killed someone using a firearm.

In the first case, two kids competed for a high score in a game they both liked, and the loser responded by shooting his playmate using his hunting rifle. In the second, a boy had been left unattended while playing a video game. After he was done, he somehow found a handgun that his babysitter had brought with her, and began playing with it. Both incidents ended in fatalities, and in both cases, people rushed to blame the video games for corrupting the children. But is that really a reasonable conclusion?

Seriously folks. Store your weapons properly. Children are not mature enough to handle them responsibly, especially when they're angry.

It only takes one bullet to ruin a family forever. Don't let it come from your gun.

School shootings were not a thing when I was growing up. We didn't need to worry about someone sneaking weapons into class, nor did we have active shooter drills. This has changed drastically in the last twenty years, and unsurprisingly, people want to understand where things went wrong.

When a school shooting happens, people immediately want to know what made the shooter different than the rest of us. Often, they'll have played violent video games, and this makes people wonder if there's a connection between their games and their actions. After all, our entertainment can influence us to some degree, so maybe the games gave someone some bad ideas.

But, when you stop and look things over, it doesn't seem like the games people played had much to do with the shootings themselves. In fact, if you really take a good look at what's being reported, you'll probably find that something strange is going on.

According to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, there have been over 1,600 school shootings in the United States since the 1970s. That's a lot of violence, but wait a moment. Does that figure sound right to you?

It doesn't to me, and it's not surprising. When most of us think of "school shootings", we think of horrible events like the Columbine Highschool Massacre, the Virginia Tech shooting, or Sandy Hook. In other words, we picture the exceptional and horrific times teens went on a killing spree, massacring their teachers and classmates. But that's not what these 1,600 incidents are recording. According to their website, the only criteria for listing something as a "school shooting" was that a gun was fired somewhere near a school. This grossly inflates the numbers, and makes things look much worse than they really are.

Breaking it down, most of those shootings occurred when somebody escalated an argument or fight to the point were somebody drew a weapon. Several were just dumb accidents, like the time a safety instructor's gun accidentally discharged during a demonstration. A fair amount of these incidents even occurred on days when the school was closed or at night, but they were still reported as if they were another Columbine.

That's the problem with statistics; it's really easy to use them in a misleading and deceitful manner.

But, now that we know how the ~1,600 figure was calculated, we can use it in a legitimate way. Instead of using the loaded term "school shooting" to describe what this tally represents, we can call it what it is: the number of gun-related incidents that occurred near a school. Since people blame the school shootings on violent video games, let's compare the playerbases of some violent games with this 1,600 figure.

Let's start with Grand Theft Auto V. The GTA series is famous for encouraging the player to lead a life of violent crime: you steal cars, commit murder, solicit prostitutes, perform "hits" for other criminals, and the list goes on. Grand Theft Auto V is a recent game in the series, and it's pretty popular: over 140,000,000 copies have been sold.

But, even if every single one of those 1,600 gun-related incidents were caused by someone who played GTA V at some point, that would mean that only 0.01% of the player base went on to become violent. That's one person per 87,500 players. Everyone else who played GTA V just continued on like normal.

How about Mortal Kombat? This is one of the games that was involved in the big video game moral panic from the 1990s, and it's still one of the most recognizable violent games out there. The most recent release, Mortal Kombat 11, is even banned in many countries due to its extremely violent content. As of October 2020, Mortal Kombat 11 has sold over 8,000,000 units. Thus, if every one of those 1,600 incidents were caused by people who played Mortal Kombat 11, then barely even 0.02% of the player base became murderers.

This trend continues regardless of the game you pick. No matter what violent game you choose, the statistics just don't support the claim that playing violent games makes people turn into school shooters. There are simply too many people playing these violent games to support that conclusion. Something else is behind the rising number of gun related incidents in our schools today.

But, while I did read up on the subject to create this article, I don't feel comfortable guessing what that something else might be. Every incident is unique, and every shooter has their own reasons for choosing to do what they did. Ultimately, I'm only talking about this subject to highlight just how poor of an argument it really is. Real life simply isn't that black and white.

No.

Any entertainment that we consume has the potential to affect us in a negative way, and it's important to understand that. For example, as I mentioned above, games that feature a lot of swearing may encourage players to swear more often. Another example would be that games with sexual content can cause an otherwise chaste player to think about immoral things.

When it comes down to it, St. Paul had good reason for writing Philippians 4:8, and we need to heed his warning.

Now, this page only talks about the potential for video games to inspire violence, as this is a very contested issue that needed to be singled out and discussed on its own. However, this is not the only way that games can cause trouble. You can find more ways to avoid problems with games on the page entitled Simple Rules to Keep Games Fun, or you could continue on to the page about video game addiction, which is a newer problem that's doing some real damage.