Tonight on the ten o'clock news, I watched a story about a boy who killed his younger brother as they were playing out parts of the video game Half Life. The two were known in the neighborhood as "Good, friendly and were children that were easy to get along with," said a neighbor. They were acting out parts of the action/adventure game when the younger boy grabbed his dad's loaded gun. The oldest brother grabbed the gun, and not knowing it was loaded fired it. The kid was pronounced dead at the hospital. Should video game violence be cut back?
The game is rated T for teen, for ages thirteen and above, but personally (from playing the game myself), the game is no more than fake animated violence which would never make me want to act the game out. Even if I was the age of twelve or even eight, I have enough common sense to distinguish from a video game situation and a real life situation. Violence in video games cannot be taken away... It destroys the whole purpose of an action/adventure game.
Another game on the market, which made headlines on local news channels is Grand Theft Auto 3, a new hot-seller in which the object of the game is to be the top hit man in the city. The industry is already debating whether or not to take it off the shelves for extreme violence. Yet some stores have taken the game off it's back order list, I again disagree with the whole situation. Why should a perfectly enjoyable game which is fun-filled with violence and gore be taken off the shelves because some people are offended by it? If you don't like it, then stay away from it.
Video game violence sells itself to young adults, adults and even parents all over the nation. Personally I really can't see how a video game could turn someone into a stone cold killer. A video game is fantasy, and killing in a video game is fiction. Why can't people distinguish fiction from the real thing?