Push button, make toast. Push button, kill man. Part 2.

Games are exciting, invigorating and fun. Many Games can also become mundane to those who play a great deal of them. In part 1 i talked about the difference between game-mechanics and actual actions and the misinterpretation this brings on. In this section I'm going to tackle one of the biggest criticisms leveled at games. Desensitization.

The word is banded about a huge amount in many forms of media. The idea is psychology is that exposure to viewed violence makes the viewer more comfortable with violence making violent acts seem less extreme to the viewer. Now i could debate the idea of catharsis, that is a violent games providing a safe violent release, but I'm not psychologist. I am however a videogames enthusiast and i can talk from my own extensive experience. What seems scary to many watching footage of games is that what they see as disturbing we see as entertainment. To the uninitiated outside observer barbarism is not only routine but desirable but the reality is that the player related VERY differently to playing a game than actually performing an action. It's hard to explain to those who don't really game but the experience is different to what non-players assume.

Now I'm not saying that videogames don't have an affect, games that deliberately set out to offend  should be weeded out, in a clever way, some games will be 'offensive' to some people simply because they are misinterpreted. There is also the issue of exposure to children, when experiments were done on the effects of watching violence children's developing minds were especially susceptible. Games have a ratings system for a reason and young children should be protected from ultra-violent content no matter what media. Lets just say be smart people. If everyone calms the fuck down and is sensible everything will be all fine and dandy. I don't want this to turn into a deconstruction of the critics of the industry (that will come at another point) but many who make claims about the dangers of vidoegames don't even bother to go as far as watching footage, most of out critics rely on third-hand reports or simply dismiss the industry off-hand

But this is a little off track. "Videogame violence" is a phrase that has come to mean sanitised or almost cartoony violence.  This is how even the OTT violence that seen in games like "Deadspace 2" is experienced by the player, there is a detachment from the violence that means at many levels it doesn't feel like violence. As an industry gaming does not set out to train people to be violent. You could argue that games should be MORE graphic, showing the consequences of violence and making the payer more connected to the actions he performs is a vital part of enhancing the emotional impact games can have and immersing us in their world. Shooting people in the face should not feel as comfortable as it does and much of the limiting side of the coin, I'm talking about your mum again, i feel is stunting many gamers relationship with their actions, most notably firearms.

But we will have to wait for part three to expand on this and some of it's more interesting implications in the areas of player relationships and moral choice.