Mind Over M.M.O.R.P.G.

            In our day and age, it’s becoming increasingly popular to try to point at art and saddle it with the blame for bad things that happen in our world. Whether it's through television, film, music, painting, or any other mode of creative expression, it seems that it’s becoming progressively more difficult to project thoughts or ideas in an artistic manner without being accused of doing something harmful, disturbing, or evil. A more modern example of this ridiculous cultural misconception is video gaming. As society transitioned into the Information Age, video games, a product of our newfound technological mindset, began to rise in popularity. Like all forms of art, video games are meant to engage the mind and senses in active entertainment. However, critics of video gaming claim that not only do video games desensitize its users from reality but they also claim that it can cause people to act on violent impulses because of their complete immersion in virtual reality. What do I think personally? I think it’s a sensational statement and a complete load. In today’s edition, I’m going to talk about the history of gaming, the actual effects that video games have on the human mind and explain why I believe that people shouldn’t waste their time worrying about this.

The video game industry exploded in the 80’s and 90’s with games like Pac-Man, Asteroids, Super Mario Bros., and Donkey Kong ushering in a new wave of virtual entertainment. Video gaming was a form of mindless fun, all about getting high scores and trying to one-up your friends, but as time progressed and cartoonish graphics began to become repetitive to the public, there was a noticeable change in the dynamic of both the visual quality and attitude of gaming around the turn of the New Millennium. Video games like Halo and Call of Duty (personal favorite) created an entirely different perspective on gaming. It wasn’t just about winning anymore; it was about being. With incredibly realistic visuals and serious, though mildly cheesy, dialogues and plots, video games created a new reality for people, a second life that after a long day of work or school they could retreat to and complete quests and objectives in a virtual body.

Inevitably, critics began to voice their concerns. People believed that video games like Halo and COD that are centered in violence would cause gamers to become desensitized from violence, blood, and gore and therefore lose their grasp on the concepts of morals and ethics. Some even suggested that those kinds of games would propel people to commit murders, rapes, and other unspeakable crimes because of their gradual recession from reality. However, the actual research that has been put towards discovering a tie between video games and desensitization has almost entirely yielded results that go against the claim. 

This isn’t to say that video games don’t have an effect on gamers. Many studies, including one by the American Psychological Association, claim that video games do lead to an increase in aggressive behavior. However, as it is stated in the APA study as well as in one reported by the Washington Post, the aggression is not caused by violence depicted in the video games but rather by the competitive atmosphere produced by gaming in general. It makes perfect sense. Competitive people that compete in competitive activities naturally become more aggressive.

In fact, to further go against critics' claims, researchers claim video games actually yield many positive benefits. MSNBC reported that studies have shown that video games help elevate people's abilities to multitask, a skill popularized by the technological world and now a necessity within it. Other skills like quick thinking and sociability are shown to be enhanced by the video game experience.

So basically, what you get from all of this is that a group of people complained about video games making kids violent but was then shown that its concerns are incredibly minimal, almost unnecessary. I personally think that video games are great. I play games from all different spectrums of gaming, ranging from violent video games like Call of Duty to fantasy-based games like Skyrim to classics like Super Smash Brothers. Though I'm not as huge of a gamer as I once was, there was a point in my life where I would play games at any given opportunity and yeah, I did get angry and yell at my screen when I lost. It's rumored that if you stop by my dorm room and listen really closely, you can hear me cursing at my roommates when they lap me on Mario Kart, but have I ever wanted to kill them or harm them in any way because I lost? Absolutely not because I’m sane.

My music analogy to this violence claim is to Marilyn Manson and his "involvement" in the Columbine shooting of 1999. The Columbine shooting was one of the most horrific massacres in recent history, carried out by Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, two students at Columbine High School. Harris and Klebold, who killed 13 people in the shooting and then committed suicide, were reported as fans of goth-rock musician Marilyn Manson. Manson is known for his violent, dark lyrical content and onstage imagery, which media outlets began to cite as the sole motivation behind the killers' plan. For months, Manson was dogged as a murderer and instigator by the media until he fired back at critics in a Rolling Stone op-ed "Columbine: Whose Fault Is It?" In the article, which I think is one of the most brilliant things I've ever read, Manson responded to the accusations of his influence on the situation saying that:

1. The media falsely reported that the killers were inspired by him and were in fact not even fans of his music. Because they were reported as dressed in gothic clothing, which was also later reported as false, the media immediately attributed the clothing to him because he was the figurehead of that genre of clothing and music.

2. Society is to blame as the instigator and the audience of its problems. As Manson puts it: "When it comes down to who's to blame for the high school murders in Littleton, Colorado, throw a rock and you'll hit someone who's guilty. We're the people who sit back and tolerate children owning guns, and we're the ones who tune in and watch the up-to-the-minute details of what they do with them."

3. People tried to pin the murders on him because the shooters were children and that society is contradictory in the way that it approaches personal responsibility. As Manson once again adeptly puts it: "Isn't killing just killing, regardless if it's in Vietnam or Jonesboro, Arkansas? Why do we justify one, just because it seems to be for the right reasons? Should there ever be a right reason? If a kid is old enough to drive a car or buy a gun, isn't he old enough to be held personally responsible for what he does with his car or gun? Or if he's a teenager, should someone else be blamed because he isn't as enlightened as an eighteen-year-old?"

I'm not even a fan of Marilyn Manson's music, but the man's point is strong and simple. In our society, blame is the game and personal accountability is a myth. We all try to point out the negative aspects and possibilities of something without first looking at it objectively. In Manson's case, he was falsely accused of inspiring murders with baseless evidence that was later proved to be completely false. On top of that, it's ridiculous to assert that a person that had no direct involvement with the murders should be scapegoated while the actual murderers, troubled though they may have been, are released from their responsibility. 

Coming full circle, in the case of video games, there was a media frenzy over the possibility that they could cause people to act upon violent impulses, but after years of research, an overwhelming majority of studies have shown that the threats of desensitization and the transformation of adolescents into mindless murdering machines are just works of fiction inspired by fear. In the rare cases (and by rare, I mean really rare because I can't find any cases that directly say it) in which a person claims that they committed a crime because of a video game, does that automatically mean that the blame should be shifted off of them? Does that mean that every time something horrible happens in this country, we should blame it on the perpetrator's influences? 

Hypothetical situation: I am a huge fan of Shakespeare and also engaged. Because I am such an avid fan of Shakespeare, I convince my fiancé to commit suicide along with me because I want us to die like Romeo and Juliet. 

Does that mean that we should blame Shakespeare for my actions? Should his works be banned in classrooms across the nations out of fear that he'll inspire kids to do the same thing? In this situation, I took it upon myself to become immersed in his work and am also the person that directly killed myself and convinced my fiancé to kill herself as well. But by society's logic, I shouldn't be held accountable because I really liked Shakespeare.

That is the kind of logic that needs to be dispelled in our country - logic that is rooted in fear. The two concepts are contradictory to each other, yet that combination of thoughts is the media's trademark and still manages to convince millions of people every day to believe the most absolutely inane things.

 Do I believe it’s unhealthy to play video games every waking moment of my life? Yes but not because I think I’m going to become a sociopathic murderer. I think it’s unhealthy because for one to prefer to live in a virtual reality as opposed to the one he or she was born into is a pathetic existence and arguably not even an existence at all. But regardless, video games are helpful when I want a momentary escape from reality because everyone needs that catharsis. So until someone can prove to me that video games totally eliminate empathy and inspire me to literally kill, it’s back to Super Smash Bros. for me.