Wirehead Studios

http://www.ggl.com/news.php?NewsId=3535 (http://www.ggl.com/news.php?NewsId=3535)

The best part is where he recognizes that using the phrase  "keeping kids safe" with media, is for jackasses.

While I do largely agree with that fellow, I think his argument on the definition of the word violence is a bit flawed.  I do agree that there should be a word that relates to the depiction of simulated violence, but the definition of violence the author gave is broad enough to cover simulated violence.

Here's what I mean...

The author said... "We do not have a word that means 'depicting, or analogous to, violence.'"

Yet the definition he provided for "violence" was, ?representing or describing a situation marked by, acting with, or resulting from great force."  To me "depicting" and "describing" are nearly synonyms, as are "representing" and "analogous to."  I know he also mentions the difference between the legal definition of "violence" and "social protest," but I still think he's selling himself short on his claim.

Violence is violence.  Chemical reactions can be said to be violent.  A bee buzzing frantically around a flower could be buzzing "violently".  It's just a word, sheesh.  I don't see what all the fuss is.

The sun is violent. go stand next to it and see.

The point is, simulated violence is not violence. it's simulated.

Huh? Simulated violence is violence, simulated. Graphic violence is violence, graphical. Fictional murder is murder, fictional. And so on. You do not remove the implications of something by slapping on an adjective.

Is fictional, graphical, simulated child pornography devoid of everything that the real thing is? Or is there still a connection to it somehow? I'd say the latter is very much true. It is not the same thing, but the difference lies in the adjective, not in the is or is not of the noun.
Instead of foolishly haggling over whether simulated violence is violence, you should ask what the practical and/or theoretical difference between simulated and real violence is.
Playing with words is only useful when you know what you're doing.

Indeed, otherwise you're only arguing semantics, which is pretty useless.  If I type fast, I could be typing violently, or the cursor could be moving violently across my screen.  If I'm playing Pac-Man, the ghosts do violence to my Pac-Man, and Pac-Man is doing violence to the dots (and to the ghosts once he gets one of those power pills).  Are people clammoring to outlaw Pac-Man?  Is the pixel peace lobby after me?

The real issue is, and always will be, whether or not video games that depict violence against humans influences people who would not otherwise be prone to commiting actual acts of violence against humans to do so.  That is the only context in which any of this is relevent to the real world.  Trying to change the definition of a word, or trying to change how that word can be applied, is avoiding the issue entirely, or at best trying to "move the goal post" as it were.  Not dealing with an issue head on is a sign of weak convictions, and is a sure way not to win any debates over it.  If we could get the damned politics out of the issue and apply real, objective science, I'm sure we could prove one way or another the truth of this matter.  Since that will never happen, the best you can do is look at how many gamers there are that are not in prison, and compare them to people who are actually serving time in prison for violent crime who will cite video games as their motivating factor, as opposed to the usual, historical motivating factors for people commiting violent crimes.  Someone ever does that study and a lot of idiots will have to (http://www.wireheadstudios.org/phoenix/pics/emoticons/STFU.gif)

GTA told me to do it!


..and yes, Pac-Man is a violent game. I mean.. it's like one of the only games I know of where eating enemies is highly encouraged.

You forgot the most evil game of them all brother,  Kirby!  Ha!  Nintendo?  More like Nintendevil!

 <3

You forgot Rampage too :evil:

If you consider the literal definition of the word "violence" then it's hard to think of a game which doesn't contain violence. Even Pro Evolution Soccer 5 has its moments :D

Chess involves implied violence, and worse.  "Knight takes Queen" can be interpretted many ways...