« Peer Response: Evan Reynolds | Main | Blog Portfolio 3 »

Peer Responses: Kayla Lukacs, Gina Burgese

Kayla Lukacs-
Kayla, I agree that video games are actually very good means for teaching adolescents as well as adults. Simulataions and games engage the subject, even if they are doing someting as mundane as cleaning the house, which you could argue is being taught [The Sims] (Juul). Games are especially useful for visual learners. Simulation scenarios are often used by the various military brances which includes the air-force and their use of flight simulators. And since we defined simulations as part of games, they are essentially using games to teach/train. Many other countries already use video games in the classroom in order to teach younger children. You may want to look into this, but one time I remember reading or seeing something on television that said children that play video games can become better test takers because they have mastered the skill of focus.

Gina Burgese-
Nice work Gina. Violence in video games is an issue that has been discussed since the emergence of games like Mortal Kombat and the elusive Street Fighter (both which were made into more violent movies). It is one of those issues that can go either way. If the kids aren't already seeing this stuff in movies, they might as well get a taste of it in video games. We are a culture and society that enjoys watching this sort of thing. I mean, you [people in general]can't tell me that when you are watching Resident Evil I (the movie) and that guy gets diced into cubes by the lasers that you didn't watch? The reaction from the audience may have been 'holy cow' or the converse which is 'omg that was cool.'

Something that comes to my mind specifically is violence depending on the genre of the game. There is not an authorized game to my knowledge that is called Serial Killer. I guess the better question is to ask whether killing in a game in order to advance is wrong? Does it depend on how you kill the enemy? It is part of the games rules. In Super Mario III (NES) you have to kill the ninjas and turtles in order to advance, but you are not stabbing them and watching oodles of blood pour out onto the screen, you simply bop them on the heads like little bunny foo-foo. Is this still violence? Can it be argued as animal cruelty?

You have to remember that these are games, and things that happen in the context of games are not always true to real life. If the rules of the game say you've got to kill someone, well I mean then I guess you have to do it in order to win. Which is more important to you as a player, winning or holding a game to the same moral standards as you hold people in real life? Sometimes critics over analyze things like violence in games.

Comments (4)


Do you want to trade for Ex 8?

Leslie, if I may offer another example.
Castlevania, in and of itself, is a pretty violent game series. You have to whip vampires, zombies, werewolves, ghosts, etc. Yet, according to the game rules, and old world tradiitons--this is perfectly acceptable.

I think violence in video games is more a cultural thing than an age thing. For example, in my lifetime I have seen two "wars" in Iraq for no reason, two "police actions" in Bosnia and then Kosovo, a president go to impeachment, etc. I also saw the collapse of the Berlin Wall when I was roughly 7-8 years old. As an American (and Scottish, Irish, British, German, and Middle Eastern) person, violence for the sake of violence is perfectly normal. Heck even violence in the name of "God" is perfectly acceptable. But if you go to Japan, China, or any other Asian country, where the religion promotes peace, or the government promotes cooperation with neighboring countries--you'll find that violence for the sake of violence is not acceptable.

Your statement, "if the kids aren't already seeing this stuff in movies, they might as well get a taste of it in video games" is true. At the same time though, and I am sure Dr. Jerz will attest to this for his childhood--books were pretty darn vioence--especially the Trekkie books and westerns. In Bram Stokers Dracula--which was written in 1897 (when violence and sex was a taboo subject)--the book was pretty sexual and violent.

I think, to wrap up my point that, if children don't read, their gonna see the violence on the 5 o clock or 11 o clock news or in their favorite cartoon (anime is my favorite!) or even in a sporting event (such as the AFC Championship game or your soccer matches with the tackling). If they don't see it there, then they see it on the big screen in moves (Underworld, Peter Pan, even Bambi). If they don't see it there, they see it in their games (Crash Bandicoot, Mario Brothers for us old heads and even Tetris--because in the "colored" versions, and even some parodies and what not, the bars exploded.) Violence is aceept, like you said if you remember it's only a game, it's only a piece of fiction.

Thank you and see you all on Monday!

Leslie Rodriguez:

Lou thanks so much for youe comment. I appreciate your involvement and will see you soon. Take care.

I wondered if you could set up some system where when your publish a new article, i get emailed to alert me?

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on January 19, 2006 9:08 AM.

The previous post in this blog was Peer Response: Evan Reynolds.

The next post in this blog is Blog Portfolio 3.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.