Anushka Bhatt
July 21st, 2024
Violent Role-Playing Games; Harmful or Beneficial?
You’ve been a teenager at least at some point in your life whether it's now, or ten years from now. You’ve also probably played some sort of game or sport that many people may or may not label as, “violent.” In times like now, almost all teenagers across the world have played a violent game of some sort in their life; whether it’s a video game like Fortnite, or a contact sport such as capture the flag. On the other hand, other teens and people such as I, say that teens should be allowed to play violent role-playing games because students build social skills, and make themselves more self-motivated/determined. Not to mention that now all of a sudden, many people are trying to helicopter against roleplaying games and frame them as,” violent.” Inferring that these games cause physical or mental damage to a person, but we also quickly shut that “rumor” down because most roleplaying games don't even do that. So, now let’s get into why with more detail and with justification.
The first reason I believe teenagers should also be allowed to play these types of role-playing games is that they build many valuable social skills that many teenagers use later in life. Many people say they are three different aspects that individually help a person build teamwork skills. These three different outlooks include; cooperation, time management, and lastly, critical thinking/listening skills. Now, you may be asking how does this relate to violent roleplaying games at all? Well, in the story High Jinks; shoot out, the article states, “Paulie Lowther, Charlotte Istel, and Mark Croitoroo-mowed through entire teams, racking up thirteen kills in four days.” (Martin) This suggests the three aspects of teamwork, becuase they couldn’t have done that without cooperation, time management, and most importantly, a game plan. It’s just impossible. In all likelihood, the team found some way of communicating with each other via texting or at their house, then discussed what they were going to do, then how they were going to do it and where. They had a strategy, whether it was divided and conquer, or etc. They also got 13 kills in four days, that's an average of 3 kills every day! Imagine all the thoughts and perceptions they had to take into count to try their best to win, and as only high school students imagine how much time and effort they put into the game, especially after all their extra circulars and studies. Not to mention in the same article it also helped their school come together as a team as well, “The School became a souk of information” (Martin) says the article. When the school becomes a souk of information it brings the kids together. Hence, the three components create teamwork as well, because without the game the school wouldn't have been this together and connected. And trust me, everyone wants to be connected, if you’re not you’d be disconnected, and who would want to be labeled as that? This also made the school smarter before it was, who would think that a role-playing game could give a school so much intelligence? The book also said that it was twenty dollars per team (Martin), which in terms gives the school a source of more revenue as well, to help the school become a better place and organization than it already is. It’s a win-win for all everyone; it helps the school and motivates the players to win.
Speaking of motivation, in addition to that, the second reason why I believe that teenagers all around the world would be able to play “violent” video-playing games is that it teaches students/teens how to become self-motivated or determined in these types of activities and situations. One quote that exhibits this is in the article High Jinks; Shootout and stated, “Students have developed a 17-point rulebook for the game as well..” (Martin) This shows us, parents, educators, and readers how self-motivated and determined kids are to invent a whole game by themselves. They’ve thought, discussed, and finalized seventeen extremely important rules to the game. You may think that this isn’t that big of a deal, but it is. Rules build a foundation of a game, and without them, a game wouldn't be played the way it was meant to, due to people always trying to find shortcuts now. Not to mention, kids are always being told what to do by their elders, so they barely have any free will to control, manage or lead anything. The fact that they’ve made rules, which are usually made for them, and seventeen of them as well, so not only were they determined and motivated to do this, they did something out of their comfort zone and what they're used to. Another reason, according to NBC News reveals that “The game is called "Assassin" or "Killer," and it's played at schools across the country, usually in May after exams end.” (Connor) This quote shows us not one, but two pieces of valuable information that help support my claim during this debate. The first piece of evidence is about one key phrase these sentences possess which is “..usually in may after exams end.” This shows us that studying won’t interfere with kids' studies or exams since the game they’re playing is after the exams. This is good and helpful because students can stay focused during their exams, and because after their exams it’s a good way to cool off the pressure they had. This also technically makes kids more determined in their studies and exams as well. Another reason why they should be allowed is that they’re now too popular and too fun for kids not to be. We know this because the piece of evidence expresses that the game is played across America. Hence the quote, “it’s playing at schools across the country.” This causes kids to be more determined and self-motivated than ever because it shows them how big it is, and how much it could mean if they win for their school.
Many people also say that most violent role-playing games can cause physical damage to someone or eventually cause something terrible. They are violent, and people may or may not pick up on what they're playing. However, I believe that this isn’t true for various reasons, one of them including, “...if they're caught playing a popular toy-gun game in or near the school building.” (Connor). One key word in this sentence is how the article states, “toy”. If you aren’t familiar with the word toy, which I’m sure most people are an oxford definition is an object for a child to play with, typically a model or miniature replica of something. So when kids play video-playing games with a harmless model of a gun, which shoots water and is specifically made for children just like them, it's highly unlikely they’re violent or cause any physical or mental damage to a child. Most kids have already seen other more violent things in their life than shooting each other with water, especially in the 2000s when we have movies, shows, and the internet. Furthermore, PCWorld also states that “the most interesting takeaway hidden in the numbers is that violent video games may have directly contributed to the decrease in real-world violence” (Dashevsky). This quote means that people who are bound to do something violent or people who are violent in general are more focused at home playing these types of games, instead of being out in the world causing crime and danger to innocent people. People who have this type of mindset will appease themselves by fulfilling their wishes in the form of a video game instead of hurting people. If you weigh out your options, which are letting people play “violent” video/role-playing games or letting the same people do real-life and serious crimes. This also proves and concludes why violent video or role-playing games aren’t “violent” as people say they are after all.
To conclude, I believe that teenagers all around the world should be able to play “violent” video or role-playing games because they help build social skills. Which can be used later on in life and help teach kids to be more self-motivated and determined as being overall. We also went thoroughly through how these video/role-playing games are labeled as “violent” when they aren't at all and do the opposite of that. Now, what would you do if someone would offer you to play one of these games now, would you take the controller?
Works Cited
Connor, Tracy. “High Schools Take Aim at “Assassin” Game.” NBC News, 20 May 2013, www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/high-schools-take-aim-assassin-game-flna6c9999813.
Dashevsky, Evan. “Violent Video Games May Stop Crime by Keeping Criminals Busy Playing Violent Video Games.” PCWorld, 27 Nov. 2013, www.pcworld.com/article/448847/violent-video-games-may-stop-crime-by-keeping-criminals-busy-playing-violent-video-games.html.
Martin, Guy. “Shoot-Out.” The New Yorker, 15 June 2009, www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/06/22/shoot-out-3.
No comments:
Post a Comment