Hatred is back on Steam Greenlight, Gabe Newell apologies.

[Lewellyn]

EDIT: and because you seem to be stuck on cognition I thought I better link that too, it is the entire set of mental functions that determine how we function.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognition

 

Um, yeah, no. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_psychology

 

Specifically in terms of meta-cognition and self awareness.

[mr moose]

Do you just not understand publication bias? or are you being willfully ignorant to that?

 

Here is an article talking about meta-data analysis of such studies. http://www.pcgamer.com/violence-and-videogames-we-look-at-the-studies-cited-in-the-aftermath-of-sandy-hook/

 

I'm almost curious to ask what institution is daring to give you a damn degree.

 

You assume I suffer publication bias after posting peer reviewed research and you respond with an article from a tech gaming website.  :rolleyes:

Not only that but that article does not counter any of the things I have said, nor does in invalidate any of the references I have made.

 

You haven't had enough time to read and validate the links I sent.  Yet you still think I'm wrong. 

 

 

Um, yeah, no. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_psychology

 

Specifically in terms of meta-cognition and self awareness.

 

O.K then.  Any hope you had of convincing me you knew what you were talking about is now officially gone.

 

You do not have the required understanding of this topic to continue a relevant discussion so please stop.

[Lewellyn]

You assume I suffer publication bias after posting peer reviewed research and you respond with an article from a tech gaming website.  :rolleyes:

Not only that but that article does not counter any of the things I have said, nor does in invalidate any of the references I have made.

 

You haven't had enough time to read and validate the links I sent.  Yet you still think I'm wrong. 

 

 

 

O.K then.  Any hope you had of convincing me you knew what you were talking about is now officially gone.

 

You do not have the required understanding of this topic to continue a relevant discussion so please stop.

 

First, publication bias actually refers to both peer review and journalism. It's about publishing positive results.

Second, the articles you posted were garbage fear pandering

 

Didn't even bother to read Christopher Ferguson's analysis of multiple studies? Sad.

 

Any hope you had of convincing me you knew what you were talking about is now officially gone.

 

Don't worry about that, I didn't have any faith in you to begin with. Your annoying conflation of the topic of desensitization with that of correlations in physical violence was too stupid for me to think you had any grasp of what you were going on about.

[mr moose]

First, publication bias actually refers to both peer review and journalism. It's about publishing positive results.

Second, the articles you posted were garbage fear pandering

 

Didn't even bother to read Christopher Ferguson's analysis of multiple studies? Sad.

 

Any hope you had of convincing me you knew what you were talking about is now officially gone.

 

Don't worry about that, I didn't have any faith in you to begin with. Your annoying conflation of the topic of desensitization with that of correlations in physical violence was too stupid for me to think you had any grasp of what you were going on about.

 

No seriously, Please stop.  The world doesn't need to read so much drivel.

 

For everyone else who might have got confused let me just reiterate what I sad in the first place:

 

 

 

Video games don't make us violent, but they do effect the way we react to our environment, and this is most pronounced if the games are experienced during behavioral development.

[Lewellyn]

No seriously, Please stop.  The world doesn't need to read so much drivel.

 

For everyone else who might have got confused let me just reiterate what I sad in the first place:

 

What you actually said:

 

It stands to reason that the motivational sway of a game will play a role in the likely effects that game has,  ergo killing a person in a war scenario will likely effect brain development and result in a personal  understanding of war and survival, However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

All cognitive experiences effect the development of the the brain and lead to behavioral outcomes. This is not conjecture and not up for debate, it is one of the known fundamental underpinnings of development and has been proven.

The exact state of our behaviour is literally built on our experiences, to say otherwise is ludicrously ignorant.

 

Behavioral psychology purism (especially when it undermines sociology) is probably one of the worst ways you could ever go about it.

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359178907000055

 

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2010-12651-004

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563212000623

 

http://www.isfe.eu/sites/isfe.eu/files/literature_review_violent_games_-_summary.pdf

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/17/ten-country-comparison-suggests-theres-little-or-no-link-between-video-games-and-gun-murders/

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/04/19/as-video-game-sales-climb-year-over-year-violent-crime-continues-to-fall/

 

http://www.economist.com/node/4247084

 

http://www.economist.com/node/4246109

 

http://ideas.time.com/2012/12/20/sandy-hook-shooting-video-games-blamed-again/

 

@Trik'Stari Might like these links if he ever intends to write another report on something to do with gaming journalism. 

[SpaceCore]

Again, I'm not saying the game should be banned I'm just saying I have a lot of sympathy for that argument and I wouldn't lose any sleep if it was. And don't try and turn me into that person because that's not at all what I am. Being not that person is about 80% of my political ideology, the internet filter from a few years ago here and the mandatory data retention? That's the sort of crap that gets me into protest mode more than anything else. Not a stupid game being released. Hell, I was this close to voting for the Wikileaks party in the last election until I remembered I could already vote for someone who better fit the bill and that wikileaks put parties who wouldn't defend what I assumed were their ideals ahead of him.

 

All I was saying was that clearly there is a point where content does become inappropriate. It is subjective but there is a point. Also that people pretending that anything goes are kidding themselves. There are shades of everything and I reckon there is a point where not publishing and giving money to vile crap is more important than maintaining your political idealism. The fact that the line is apparently nowhere to be seen when there appears to be a thunderous agreement that it is vile crap is the bit that I think is surprising. The fact that people think the events in Sydney and Pakistan this week shouldn't change things at all is even more surprising. Have we become that immune to this?

The music industry crossed the line and made it just fine to the other side: the court cases with Eminem and Marilyn Manson.

The movie industry has also crossed that line and made it just fine to the other side.

 

that "line" is subjective. as long as it remains that way, it'll be trampled again, and again, and again by every new medium of entertainment.

 

Rome had Gladiators

We have video games.

 

If we let current events dictate what is "allowed" to exists, where does it end?

 

edit:

holy mother of god.. no one here has played the game and is basing their entire opinion on the trailer.

WOW.

 

edit2:

I don't believe in "too soon" I was laughing at steve jobs jokes the day-of. as I'm sure many more were.

ugh.. this is all so subjective makes me wanna slap this meme everywhere on this thread:

[Lewellyn]

The music industry crossed the line and made it just fine to the other side: the court cases with Eminem and Marilyn Manson.

The movie industry has also crossed that line and made it just fine to the other side.

 

Did you watch the co-optional podcast? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_6LSOYRVKw#t=7210

 

Jesse says almost exactly that.

[SpaceCore]

Did you watch the co-optional podcast? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_6LSOYRVKw#t=7210

 

Jesse says almost exactly that.

time, please? I won't be watching it until tomorrow evening. this one is 3 hours long 0.0

[Lewellyn]

time, please? I won't be watching it until tomorrow evening. this one is 3 hours long 0.0

 

Press the link, time's already there.

[SpaceCore]

Press the link, time's already there.

wow he referenced the same cases lmao! 

well now that I think about it, it doesn't surprise me. those were the "big music court cases" of when we were growing up.

[mr moose]

What you actually said:

 

It stands to reason that the motivational sway of a game will play a role in the likely effects that game has,  ergo killing a person in a war scenario will likely effect brain development and result in a personal  understanding of war and survival, However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

All cognitive experiences effect the development of the the brain and lead to behavioral outcomes. This is not conjecture and not up for debate, it is one of the known fundamental underpinnings of development and has been proven.

The exact state of our behaviour is literally built on our experiences, to say otherwise is ludicrously ignorant.

 

Behavioral psychology purism (especially when it undermines sociology) is probably one of the worst ways you could ever go about it.

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359178907000055

 

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2010-12651-004

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563212000623

 

http://www.isfe.eu/sites/isfe.eu/files/literature_review_violent_games_-_summary.pdf

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/17/ten-country-comparison-suggests-theres-little-or-no-link-between-video-games-and-gun-murders/

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/04/19/as-video-game-sales-climb-year-over-year-violent-crime-continues-to-fall/

 

http://www.economist.com/node/4247084

 

http://www.economist.com/node/4246109

 

http://ideas.time.com/2012/12/20/sandy-hook-shooting-video-games-blamed-again/

 

@Trik'Stari Might like these links if he ever intends to write another report on something to do with gaming journalism. 

 

 

Nothing like repeating the same old same old and expecting a different result.  :rolleyes:

 

If anything some of those studies re-enforce my comments and the articles I already linked to.

 

 

Results indicated that randomized video game play had no effect on aggressive behavior; real-life violent video game-playing history, however, was predictive of decreased hostile feelings and decreased depression following the frustration task. Results do not support a link between violent video games and aggressive behavior, but do suggest that violent games reduce depression and hostile feelings in players through mood management.

 

 

Sounds like a change in behavior to me, how do you propose that a study that shows a change in behaviour directly after game play proves that playing games does not change behaviour?

 

You really don't get this is do you? you seem to be stuck at some irrevocable understanding of behaviour, on one hand you say cognitive experience doesn't change behavioral outcomes and then try to prove it by showing research that shows a change.  Which do you believe?

 

And for the record, none of these studies actually test a persons aggressiveness toward other people (conflict) because that is unethical and cannot be accurately tested.

[Lewellyn]

Nothing like repeating the same old same old and expecting a different result.  :rolleyes:

 

If anything some of those studies re-enforce my comments and the articles I already linked to.

 

 

Sounds like a change in behavior to me, how do you propose that a study that shows a change in behaviour directly after game play proves that playing games does not change behaviour?

 

You really don't get this is do you? you seem to be stuck at some irrevocable understanding of behaviour, on one hand you say cognitive experience doesn't change behavioral outcomes and then try to prove it by showing research that shows a change.  Which do you believe?

 

And for the record, none of these studies actually test a persons aggressiveness toward other people (conflict) because that is unethical and cannot be accurately tested.

 

How fucking intellectually dishonest do you have to be to do this shit? Really?

 

"ergo killing a person in a war scenario will likely effect brain development and result in a personal  understanding of war and survival, However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict."

 

"If anything some of those studies re-enforce my comments and the articles I already linked to."

 

No. No it did not. The studies you linked tried to prove that there was a positive link between physical aggression in video game consumption and outward physical expression. The articles and papers I linked revealed the many incredible inconsistencies in testing and the flawed undermining of other social factors such as familial status, sense of self worth, or social inclusion.

 

how do you propose that a study that shows a change in behaviour directly after game play proves that playing games does not change behaviour?

 

Oh. My. God.

 

Immediately after reading The Christmas Carol I was 'generous'. Immediately after watching The Avengers I was 'enthusiastic'. After playing Bioshock I was 'aggressive'. After listening to Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata" I was 'calm'. Would you kindly go fuck yourself?

 

 

After I learned about Gamergate I was interested enough to go watch videos on the subjects they propose with shitty rhetoric. The sources I linked came from this video. The man is a pediatrician, works with children. 

 

[mr moose]

 

No. No it did not. The studies you linked tried to prove that there was a positive link between physical aggression in video game consumption and outward physical expression.

 

How can you say that, you didn't even read them and you have the nerve to call me dishonest!

 

Here's a quote from the first:

Although a

less well-researched medium at this point, violent video and computer games

(referred to simply as video games) may have particular impact because of their

actively engaging, content-generating nature

 

 

It suggests an impact, it does not define the outcome of that impact. This insinuates quite strongly that their is a change in behavior as a result of the engaging component of the stimuli.

 

 

From the second article:

 

Though social and behavioral effects of TV violence have been studied extensively, the brain systems involved in TV violence viewing in children are, at present, not known. ... This pattern of brain activations may explain the behavioral effects observed in many studies, especially the finding that children who are frequent viewers of TV violence are more likely to behave aggressively.

 

 

Note they say "viewing in children" and "finding that children" ,  indicating that effects on children are unknown, but that the studies indicate supporting brain activity to known clinic studies.  This is why I specifically said:

 

however what is known is that brain development is effected by both visual violent stimulus and the interactivity of video games.

 

 

I and the papers did not say anything about whether the changes were positive or negative, only that there is a change.

 

And this is just from the abstract which surely you can at least read.

[skywake]

 

1. I never said the game should be banned I just said I had sympathy for those who think that about this particular game. Even moreso after recent events.

2. I never said that games cause violence and I firmly believe that they don't

3. I don't have a particular thing against games at all. Movies, books and film can also "cross the line"

4. Of course I haven't played the game, the game isn't out yet, none of us are discussing this having played the game

5. The game's whole shtick is trying to hit a nerve to get exposure, why deny the fact that it is hitting a nerve?

 

No good disagreeing with a strawman, as others have you're not responding to the point I was actually making

[Lewellyn]

-bunch of bullshit I have already addressed and can't be bothered to quote my own posts again to show the inconsistencies of contradictory arguments and downright invalid conjecture spewed-

 

I and the papers did not say anything about whether the changes were positive or negative, only that there is a change.

 

I can't even. I can't. You're so full of shit. Any competent person who has actually read through everything said could see the bullshit you posted. 

 

The first paper you posted was about desensitization and trending popularity not correlative links to behavior. I ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS!

 

The second paper you posted goes over fMRI readings in the moment and directly afterward to find brain activation and specifically does not talk about long term behavior patterns. I ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS!

[mr moose]

I and the papers did not say anything about whether the changes were positive or negative, only that there is a change.

 

I can't even. I can't. You're so full of shit. Any competent person who has actually read through everything said could see the bullshit you posted. 

 

The first paper you posted was about desensitization and trending popularity not correlative links to behavior. I ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS!

 

The second paper you posted goes over fMRI readings in the moment and directly afterward to find brain activation and specifically does not talk about long term behavior patterns. I ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS!

 

My posts are there for all to read,  I have posted them several times before.

 

here it is again for everyone:

 

 

There is truth to what you say,  many researchers are still trying to find the links, however what is known is that brain development is effected by both visual violent stimulus and the interactivity of video games.  It stands to reason that the motivational sway of a game will play a role in the likely effects that game has,  ergo killing a person in a war scenario will likely effect brain development and result in a personal  understanding of war and survival, However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

I am keenly waiting further research on this topic, as the outcomes will surely make us rethink what recommendations we make to parents with regard to their child's development and behavioral integration in to the school system.

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056499305000258

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0801_3#.VJM5gXuPU5A

 

 

TL:DR

Video games don't make us violent, but they do effect the way we react to our environment, and this is most pronounced if the games are experienced during behavioral development.

 

 

Now here's what you said:

 

 

...

- gotta love the purest conjecture void of all knowledge of already proven sociological + psychological concepts.

 

I've played tons of violent video games and watched tons of violent movies when I was pre-13, and I still find violence to be disgusting and brutal. Instead, I've seen children cry, scream, and beat each other over games of minecraft, monopoly, and battleship.

 

The causal link has time and time again been proven to be false, and not only that, the desensitization that has been proven true is applicable to any other form of stimulus in media (News, T.V., Books, Movies) and has not been linked to any increased aggression. Children are not prone to any more aggression because they are playing a violent video game, rather than the fact they are children. This skewing of sociology and psychology is so backwards.

 

Anyways, this game isn't meant for children, so I find this kind of arm chair pandering to illiterate, soccer mom SJW's incredibly annoying.

 

You openly dismiss the the most basic of behavioral concepts and then try  argue the exact opposite. 

 

 

"All cognitive experiences effect the development of the the brain and lead to behavioral outcomes."

 

Incorrect. Take an actual sociology class or a psychology class instead of this one line pseudo-science. Or better yet, go and look up the moral panic over comic books in the 1950's and the moral panic over the death race game in the 1970's.

 

 

 

So you argue that our behaviors are not the result of our experiences but positive behaviors that result from game experiences are?  

[SpaceCore]

 

5. The game's whole shtick is trying to hit a nerve to get exposure, why deny the fact that it is hitting a nerve?

No one is denying that. This is the point of the trailer. to be controversial and get you to talk about it. it worked, didn't it? the thing hit number one on greenlight.

 and if you haven't played the game yet, then how do you know the game is inappropriate? The trailer? no one has any context yet.

[Lewellyn]

You openly dismiss the the most basic of behavioral concepts and then try  argue the exact opposite. 

 

 

So you argue that our behaviors are not the result of our experiences but positive behaviors that result from game experiences are?  

 

You're Ken Hamming it I see. I've already gone over this before. I've already highlighted what was wrong with your arguments, and I've already dismissed your 'proof' of learned behavior because it wasn't proof. Nothing of what you posted validated what you said happens in the long term when people play video games, not a single damn thing. I'm not continuing this any further because you're just full blown not accepting the fact that I've beaten down your assumptions. If you had actually read what I wrote, and what I highlighted, I never dismissed behavioral psychology (no matter how many times you have conditioned yourself into believing I have) I have however dismissed your assumptions on long term behavioral change with incredibly more probable sociological factors and the knowledge of what constitutes a substantial behavioral change. Not only that, I've already addressed your sources and how they don't provide any merit when it comes to learned behavior, as well as addressing your conflation of desensitization with aggressive behavior change (no they are not the same thing).

 

If you are indeed studying this subject, please give me your professors contact information so I can inform them that they need to cover what a longitudinal study is in respects to learned behavior. It's quite disturbing that I need to do this, but apparently I do.

[frostin1990]

Love this game idk what the fuss is all about(silly hypocrites  ).I'd be pretty bored if this were a silly zombie shooter like those other billions of generic games.

[mr moose]

You're Ken Hamming it I see. I've already gone over this before. I've already highlighted what was wrong with your arguments, and I've already dismissed your 'proof' of learned behavior because it wasn't proof. Nothing of what you posted validated what you said happens in the long term when people play video games, not a single damn thing. I'm not continuing this any further because you're just full blown not accepting the fact that I've beaten down your assumptions. If you had actually read what I wrote, and what I highlighted, I never dismissed behavioral psychology (no matter how many times you have conditioned yourself into believing I have) I have however dismissed your assumptions on long term behavioral change with incredibly more probable sociological factors and the knowledge of what constitutes a substantial behavioral change. Not only that, I've already addressed your sources and how they don't provide any merit when it comes to learned behavior, as well as addressing your conflation of desensitization with aggressive behavior change (no they are not the same thing).

 

If you are indeed studying this subject, please give me your professors contact information so I can inform them that they need to cover what a longitudinal study is in respects to learned behavior. It's quite disturbing that I need to do this, but apparently I do.

 

You need to stop pretending you know what you are talking about.

 

You keep misrepresenting what I am saying, you keep arguing points that I have not made.  You have not addressed anything other than to say I am wrong but without qualification. 

 

 

All cognitive experiences effect the development of the the brain and lead to behavioral outcomes.

 

 

You said this was flat out wrong.  Yet you haven't proven it isn't, Yet this is the foundation of many behavioral facets, like, automated response, social conditioning and PTSD.

 

Why you think they are wrong when there is plenty of research showing it in reality is beyond me.  You then go on to say games don't have an effect on behaviour and then post articles showing a behavioral effect.

 

If indeed you are studying psychology your black and white (in the box) thinking will either cause your failure or result in your ridicule in the field later on.

[Lewellyn]

You said this was flat out wrong.  Yet you haven't proven it isn't, Yet this is the foundation of many behavioral facets, like, automated response, social conditioning and PTSD.

 

Why you think they are wrong when there is plenty of research showing it in reality is beyond me.  You then go on to say games don't have an effect on behaviour and then post articles showing a behavioral effect.

 

If indeed you are studying psychology your black and white (in the box) thinking will either cause your failure or result in your ridicule in the field later on.

 

The research shows that the association between media consumption and learned behavior is near to negligible when taking into account that other social factors are far more likely the reasons for behavioral outcomes.

 

All cognitive experiences effect the development of the the brain and lead to behavioral outcomes.

 

However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

I would have thought by now you would have understood how this is wrong. You are basically saying that every single thought you have turns into a behavior - which is incorrect. No one says that reading books about murders makes you more prone to violence, no one says that books about romance make you more prone to flirting, no one says that reading The Catcher in the Rye makes you more prone to be socially immature when it comes to sex. No one, not a single god damn competent person. Your professor sure as hell wouldn't say this.

 

You then go on to say games don't have an effect on behaviour and then post articles showing a behavioral effect.

 

No, the articles I posted showed a critical review of how other social factors were almost completely unaccounted for in the studies done by behavioral psychologists and that there were inconsistencies across the board.

 

If indeed you are studying psychology your black and white (in the box) thinking will either cause your failure or result in your ridicule in the field later on.

 

I'm the one talking in terms of black and white? Really? Post your professors contact information, this is ridiculous.

[mr moose]

The research shows that the association between media consumption and learned behavior is near to negligible when taking into account that other social factors are far more likely the reasons for behavioral outcomes.

 

All cognitive experiences effect the development of the the brain and lead to behavioral outcomes.

 

However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

I would have thought by now you would have understood how this is wrong. You are basically saying that every single thought you have turns into a behavior - which is incorrect. No one says that reading books about murders makes you more prone to violence, no one says that books about romance make you more prone to flirting, no one says that reading The Catcher in the Rye makes you more prone to be socially immature when it comes to sex. No one, not a single god damn competent person. Your professor sure as hell wouldn't say this.

 

You then go on to say games don't have an effect on behaviour and then post articles showing a behavioral effect.

 

No, the articles I posted showed a critical review of how other social factors were almost completely unaccounted for in the studies done by behavioral psychologists and that there were inconsistencies across the board.

 

If indeed you are studying psychology your black and white (in the box) thinking will either cause your failure or result in your ridicule in the field later on.

 

I'm the one talking in terms of black and white? Really? Post your professors contact information, this is ridiculous.

 

Stop putting words in my mouth, I did not say any of that, I said our experiences effect our behaviour, FULL STOP. I did not say anything about reading books and instantly becoming more like the content, The fact you can't get past this shows your grave lack of understanding.

 

 

 

Now please stop pretending you know what you are talking about,  If you knew what you where talking about then you'd understand that there is absolutely nothing wrong with my post and that you have clearly gotten some idea in your head that I am saying things I am not, this is evident by your consistent misrepresentation of my posts and complete lack of understanding of how cognitive experience effects behaviour.  

 

I don't know why you keep insisting cognitive experience only be limited to your confined understanding.  Maybe this will help:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2010771?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

 

 

I have linked to many articles showing a link between experience and changes in the brain/behaviour yet you still claim it doesn't happen.  Stop it.

[Lewellyn]

 I did not say anything about reading books [games] and instantly becoming more like the content

 

However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

You. Are. Insane.

[mr moose]

However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

You. Are. Insane.

 

In CONTEXT please.  You can't take a snippet of a sentence and construct a whole new meaning for it, you have to respond to the whole statement in context.

 

I can't believe you think you're capable of psychology when you have to extract single statements from a whole paragraph in order to appease your personal emotional beliefs.

 

 

 

What I said (again!)

 

 

There is truth to what you say,  many researchers are still trying to find the links, however what is known is that brain development is effected by both visual violent stimulus and the interactivity of video games.  It stands to reason that the motivational sway of a game will play a role in the likely effects that game has,  ergo killing a person in a war scenario will likely effect brain development and result in a personal  understanding of war and survival, However a game that kills for no other reason than "it's fun" will likely result in a lessened appreciation of mortality and a more aggressive response to conflict.

 

I am keenly waiting further research on this topic, as the outcomes will surely make us rethink what recommendations we make to parents with regard to their child's development and behavioral integration in to the school system.

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056499305000258

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0801_3#.VJM5gXuPU5A

 

 

TL:DR

Video games don't make us violent, but they do effect the way we react to our environment, and this is most pronounced if the games are experienced during behavioral development.

 

I have highlighted the words I think you need to spend a little more time considering.  I have not said this happens all the time nor have I said it is an instant observable behaviour resulting from one game. These comments speak to the interaction with the content and the likely difference in behavioral outcomes due that, not that those outcomes are concrete and will happen because of it.  I have backed up my comments with published articles. 

 

On top of that I have also pointed out (as any realistic professional will) that there is so much we still don't know and I keenly await this research. I really don't know what else to say, it seems pretty simple to me, but then I currently work in the field so it's possible I just have more experience.  Come back to me after you've worked in education for ten years specializing in behavioral and special needs integration.  You may then have a whole different appreciation for the topic.

 

 

 

 

 

There is nothing more to say,  It is the start of the weekend here, and I have no intention of wasting any more time on this thread (unless I get bored).