"We found that most boys 12- to 14-years-old are playing mature-rated video games, so this idea that M-rated games cause shootings or major violence just doesn’t hold water."

Lets edit that a bit, shall we?

"We found that most boys 12- to 14-years old are playing mature-rated video games because their parents are buying it for them, so this idea that M-rated games cause shootings or major violence just doesn't hold water."

There you go. Now thats a good statement.

Kid is bored.

Scenario 1:
Kid plays video game to assuage his boredom. Kid becomes awesome at and becomes a pro "cyberathlete", makes bank, gets the house, the car, the girl, and retires happy.

Scenario 2:
Kid gets self into trouble to assuage his boredom. Kid falls in with the wrong crowd, becomes a meth addict, gets arrested for dealing, and ultimately gets "shanked" in prison, broke, single, and in meth withdrawal.

Games FTW!

take that, jack thompson..... lol


point set and match :)

I wonder in these aggression studies if they also add non-violent games to the mix to test as well. I don't feel more aggressive at all when I play Half-Life 2. But when I play Trauma Center for the Wii (in which you are doing the very opposite of harming people, I feel quite aggressive. But thats because the game is freaking HARD.

I love this woman.

Jack Thompson's nonsensical responce in 3, 2, 1

@ JC, I think the point is that this study shows a wider audience than us that videogames, even or perhaps especially violent ones, are a healthy part of adolescent life. NOTHING is healthy when done all day every day; even activities generally agreed to be healthy such as sports or reading must be moderated; and we've been saying all along that it is the role of parents to see that children get a variety of passtimes and none inappropriate for the individual child. There was never a chance of people misconstruing such a study as saying that all kids should play violent or mature-rated games. What we see in this is a reality check, a revelation that there is nothing innately harmful in violent games such that they need to be legally restricted from all minors. We WANT parents to step up and decide whether their child should play this game or that; we don't want out-of-touch politicians shoving their moral or political views on such games down the throats of an entire nation. This study and others like it can only bring good results, because they inform parents that there's nothing inherently bad about letting kids play video games in general or violent/mature ones in specific. This gives those trying to legislate video game violence no leg to stand upon. Whether parents choose to take an active role in moderating and understanding, even helping to select, their children's videogames and gameplay is nothing that can be siolved by any study, however, and there will always be parents who do a good job encouraging their kids to try a multitude of activities, parents who use media to babysit, and parents who give their kids whatever they ask for, amongst many types. This study won't change that, for better or worse, but maybe more like it can up the call for parents to do their jobs effectively and lower the rush to scapegoat video games in kids' problems.

Hmm, does this mean we are right again? WHat does this make now?

My estimates make this about 500-1* for us.
*There is an error of 1 point, see if you can find it.

This is certainly some reassuring news and I'm glad that there are studies out there being conducted by rational people rather than those with a knee jerk reaction and only a hearsay knowledge of gaming. It's a shame though that we might not hear this on the mainstream media, but we should definitely voice our opinion on this issue to help soldify that games do not create heathens, delinquents, terrorists, murderers, thieves or any other social misfit.

To add to the getting the rage out with games, it would work quite well though not so much if it was with an already infuriating game.

Serrenity:
I find issue with that survey. The study says kids read an avg. of 8 minutes a day. How do you read for only 8 minutes? That average means nothing to me. I can't read for any less than an hour if I read at all. maybe it's just me.

Of course games causing violent crimes is nonsense, games help rid those emotions.

Games help me relieve stress, but if I'm really pissed of about something, none of my hobbies(Games, programming, shooting, reading, ect ect) do me a bit of good. My hobbies are relaxing but most of them require a focus I can't bring up when I'm really pissed of about something. I have to calm down and stop being angry before I can do anything to relieve stress.

At that point all I can really do is go and wear myself out running or going to the gym. Thankfully I almost never get that angry.

That's a great way of putting it. Video games are a perfect social activity. A good friend of mine and i became good friends from playing San Andreas a lot.

@Terrible Tom
Here Here my good man.

better to vent the anger out playing a game (doesn't even have to be violent, although the violent ones vent faster) rather than at a school with a gun...

While still a little narrow in scope, the researcher still points out that everyone is an individual and everyone reacts differently to various situations.

People need to realize that aggression isn't caused by what someone is exposed to. Aggression is the result of a complex mixture of emotions, personality, and life experiences that comes up when an individual is exposed to anything.

While it's true that the ability to interact (in a sport, a debate, a video game, etc) may increase anger, frustration, competitivness, and other emotions in a negative way for some individuals, it is also true that being able to interact may actually decrease some of those feelings (ie "blowing off steam") for other individuals. The same is true of non-interactive situations (reading a book, watching a movie/TV, being in an audience of a sport event or a heated debate, etc) as the lack of ability to interact may increase or decrease emotions.

And while studies may claim "Oh look, an increase in aggression!", they lack pointing out that the aggression may be all those other emotions, the ability or lack thereof to interact, and other factors.

This study simply shows that there are individuals who can receive a benefit from such interactivity. But it also admits that not everyone can. And that alone is good research. While it still doesn't represent the full spectrum of what individuals are exposed to, it still shows people that not everything and not everyone is "bad".

Nightwng2000
NW2K software

I agree with this statement because thats how it works for me. But I've never done any research on it. All I know is when I'm pissed and want to crack someone's skull Ill pop in God of War, GTA, Socom, Fight Night or something else violent to blow off some steam. Not to mention I'll enjoy a nice cold brew while I'm doing so.

I love this woman! Thank you, finally someone gets it and is actually willing to go against the grain and tell the rest of the people the truth. I mean usually when we hear something even remotely like this there is still some biting criticism about video games being too violent or some and damaging children despite not turning them into killers. But this finally just gets rid of all of the BS and tells the truth.

I'm not sure I believe that the violence in games serves as a genuine outlet for anger. A video game in general may be an outlet, but the violence itself has never influenced how I felt during or after play, which is the only thing I can base my opinions on since I'm not a researcher. Video game violence is so different from anything in real life that I can't draw any kind of emotional association, positive or negative.

What strikes me as the most positive thing about games is that they keep kids occupied and out of real-world mischief during their most psychologically challenging years. What I'm saying is based on nothing more than my own thoughts and teenage experiences, but for me the best thing about growing up with games is that they simply gave me something to do, and I was less tempted to put myself in harmful situations.

Boo-ya.

can i play bad games