Games such as Halo, Call of Duty, Minecraft, and even Super Mario Brothers all involve the harming and even killing of online people or even gaming mobs. Though much of this involves killing to achieve something in the game, I do not believe that in any way it promotes the killing of animals or people in rea llife.
Video games in modern society are getting more and more violent as days pass. The audience of these games are also getting younger as these games are released. I am fine with violent video games, just not the sale of violent video games to minors. I believe with stricter enforcement of the ESRB, young children would be less exposed to the violent nature of most video games. The level of violence has to be a factor as well cartoon violence in games like Super Mario or Sonic the Hedgehog are not as bad as it could be; games like Mario or Sonic can be compared to TV cartoons like the Looney Tunes or Tom and Jerry which are filled with cartoon violence.
Though they are becoming more violent, it does not necessarily mean it will cause psychological issues. Back when games started, pinball machines was declared to be made the devil. You ABSOLUTELY just agreed with me, leaving that you are in favor of the exposure of video games. the point that I am making is that even with kids that are exposed with such video games, it will not brain wash them into crimes. The idea of "games are bad" came from those who do not understand how gaming works. Though there is violence in games, it does not promote killing but rather problem solving and consequential decision making. It is how the consumer of these products use it, meaning they aren't going to necessarily grow up to be criminals.
Although video games be helpful, but that doesn't mean they have to be violent. One could get the same amount of "psychological stimulation" with nonviolent video games. Video Games like "Flappy Bird" can improve timing, 2048 can improve the ability to see patterns and help one's math skills, and games like Minecraft improve creativity. There are no psychological benefits from Call of Duty, Battlefield, or Grand Theft Auto. Granted they are entertaining but they offer no benefit besides entertainment. Also not all people are mentally mature to handle violence that video games have. There is a reason why ESRB put an age limit on all video games.
Some people may not find violent video games to be appealing, and it may not benefit the human mind, but it does not leave harm towards others if they keep in mind that it is a video game. The point of video games is to provide entertainment, yes, but in games such as Call of Duty can help with teamwork, and strategy. Games back in the day were used for lessons and to teach, and I agree much of it is still that. But now video games have become a way to socialize. The idea of online has helped other people cooperate with those who are not in their comfort zone, improve their lives socially because of this common interests of video games.
Although a video game is just video game, it is the content that leaves an imprint on the mind. At a young age kids' minds are like sponges they soak up everything and anything. As a personal example I have ADHD and so playing a violent video game or an involved game my mind does not bounce back quick as a normal mind. My mom is always concerned that I get too much into the game I disregard everything around me. When my parents call me they have to say my name like five times, and I get aggressive. I mean I realized that I was acting not like me. However people with far more severe mental illnesses or a severe case of ADHD that person would take even longer to bounce back.
you had shown that the problem with video games is the CONSUMER itself. Games can leave an imprint and can be "soaked up" if a child takes a game as literally as the real world. Not everyone has ADHD and become aggressive, therefore each person reacts differently to violent video games. video games are used as a medical tool for people with illnesses to cope with that they have. They are circulating around hospitals and around children's hospitals to teach and to help them desensitize their thoughts of their illness. Games alone do not cause harm to others, it how the consumer applies what they see and what they think they learned from video games that can be potentially harmful.
There are other games that can help desensitize illnesses like Tetris or critical thinking video game like you used have as kids, remember those computer games that had math and required thinking and teamwork to accomplish a task. There is a reason why video game stores do not display A rated games because those games are way over the top. Imagine Grand Theft Auto but you can see everything... everything. Violent video games should be have at least stricter rules for selling to certain demographics. E games should be sold to everyone, Teen games should be sold to kids ages ten and up then, Mature games should be sold to 17+ people. It is the lack of restraint from the companies and retail because all they want is money.
I'm not referring to stricter use, I am an advocate for it. They already have such strict rules such as you cannot buy mature video games unless you have a parent with you or you show an ID. when it comes to children asking their parents for such harsh video games, THATS NOT THE GAMES FAULT. It's the parents who are buying these violent video games for their children and if they do not feel comfortable having their children seeing or playing that, then don't buy it. AGAIN, it is how the consumer takes the game whether its in a literal or figurative sense. Violent video games are not exposed on tv where children have easy access to, so unless they own it, that is when they would be at any risk. I do not see a lack of restraint.