I was playing Saints Row 2 again recently. It's a pretty rough around the edges game witha  freewheeling 'gangsta' sandbox and a tongue in cheek vibe.

But ever since that awful business in Norway I've found my taste for it, and a lot of these shooty shooter games (technically SR isn't a shooter game, though it has a lot of violence in it, no matter how OTT and silly the setting), has seriously waned. Not in a judgemental right wing populist way that the anti-video game brigade might espouse, but just a genuine 'this isn't really cool anymore' way.

Curiously i haven't heard much from the usual suspects in the media regarding the influence of violent media in the wake of these shootings. It's almost as if this was too serious a shooting (if that's possible) for these people to even start with that. Or maybe because people are feeling like me that maybe games ought to try and do somethign different now.

I will be interested to see what the sales are for BF3 and MW3 later this year, in the wake of this.

Other than in norway where both games may not get released till next year(if at all) i doubt your average shooter gamer will hestitate once those 2 games(or any other shooter due later this year for that matter) are released, afterall most players of shooters are teens these days on consoles and teens tend not to give a shit about people dying unless its right in front of them.

Maybe it's time things ought to change.

I really don't care for censorship.

I don't, in the main, believe that violence in video games turns people into crazed killers. However I also don't believe that what these kids see, or indeed play, has no impact on them. It all feeds into itself. There is a reason why these sort of games are so popular.

It's not about judgementalism or pious prejudice, but perhaps about needing a change.

Plus these games are old hat now, surely!

There was a book written by a US general called, "On Killing," where he talks about how soldiers historically were much more difficult to coax into killing people compared with people now. He believes that popular media are doing the military's job of preparing its soldiers to kill, which is handy for them. I haven't read the book, so I could be off, but even killers think there is a connection between media and shooting people.

I'm betting someone does a mod for running around an island shooting helpless kids, if it hasn't been done already. Goal to kill as many kids as possible before the cops show up. And I bet it ends up being one of the top downloads.

I wouldn't be surprised by either.

Back in its heyday GTA of course garnered all the populist ire and while I would be among those that enjoyed playing it (while remaining sane) I couldn't help but notice that only those that should never play such games would be those you'd hear, in shops etc, talking it up. "hey mate it's that game where you kills coppers!"

And routinely these people would be underage and equally routinely get served.

Now I'm weary of it. I'm not interested i a diatribe, just a change of attitude I think. I'm not sure I want to play SR3 unless it really is more OTT and humourous as opposed to just an excuse to slaughter people - now matter how cartoony. I foudn that, with SR2, playing missions such as one where you have a MASSIVE gang war in a graveyard (with a ton of innocent civilians, if such people exist in that sandbox), was losing me.

Quote from: Cranewings;471932There was a book written by a US general called, "On Killing," where he talks about how soldiers historically were much more difficult to coax into killing people compared with people now. He believes that popular media are doing the military's job of preparing its soldiers to kill, which is handy for them. I haven't read the book, so I could be off, but even killers think there is a connection between media and shooting people.

It's a little more complicated than that in Grossman's account. The bulk of the responsibility falls on the military's conditioning.

A book that draws the connection more clearly between media portrayals of mass killings and their propensity to cluster around one another is Paul Cialdini's Influence, esp. where it talks about news reports of suicide.

Agreed with Pseudo in that I think it's undenyiable there *is* a connection between the media and the acceptance of nearly any societal norm nowadays, whether we're talking about wearing hats, drinking vodka, wearing your underpants over your belt line, thinking Jesus is lame, killing people, whatever.

The way it actually comes into play and becomes formative with each and every particular individual is a LOT more complicated though. Since acceptance, embrace, or rejection are all symptoms of an effect of the message that is being reacted to in the first place, I think there is influence of the media in these matters. But how that actually functions for each individual will depend on psychological makeup, genes, experiences in life, etc etc.