there is nothing to fear
                     if aggression is a result of fear
                    then fear is the fear of aggression
                    so if you're afraid of an aggressor
              you're afraid of a person which is afraid of you
                        a person ruled by its fears
                 and why should you be afraid of someone
             who is behaving like a small child in the darkness
                     break the circle we are living in
               and don't be afraid there is nothing to fear

                                                     "fear" by project pitchfork

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        VIOLENCE IN COMPUTER/VIDEO GAMES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The  intention to  write an  article  about that  topic was the  massacre on the
highschool  in Erfurt/Germany  as a former  pupil killed  16 people, mainly  his
former teachers. You surely heard  about that and I wont roll up the things that
happened there again... But surely you heard also that the police found out that
this guy, Steinhäuser with  name, was a computer games  addict and that he liked
most the game "Counter Strike", a very realistic and quite brutal ego shooter.

So the victim was found, the offered  violence in that game was called to be the
reason for his hunt on the teachers and discussions came up about the control of
those games, to  set them onto an index, to make them not accessable for younger
people anymore. And here starts the idea/theme of this article...

It is surely  no secret  that the  today's  high-end computer  systems and video
consoles are able to create  semi-realistic scenarios on their screens, and this
power and possibilities are mainly  used by the games industry and  there mainly
to produce  different versions  of 3d games, mainly ego shooters. 1o years back,
als "Wolfenstein 3d" was  released, nobody thought  that we would ever  see such
games  like "Alien vs. Predator" (the PC  version!), "Unreal", "Quake", "Counter
Strike", "Halflife", "Resident Evil", "Soldier Of Fortune" and so on. The market
exploded over the last years and the sales of those games broke any records, and
after all it is no secret that those games are a lot played by kids of about 1o/
12 years, too.

But is it really the new  quality of violence  and the brutality  on the screens
that makes  the gamers  mad about  those games? Or is it more the fascination of
the  semi-realistic  scenarios?! I doubt  that all those  gamers are  just blood
hungry, sadistic subjects  that just want to  see blood spreaded  over the walls
and floor and exploding  heads and limbs... Sure, those "gimmicks" are some kind
of fascinating  too for the  one or other, but  over all I think, the gamers are
more  interested  in the  game itself, in the  action, the  surroundings, in the
fight  to  survive  against the  humble  computer a.i. or  human network players
intelligence. I don't believe  that all the  players on  todays  LAN parties are
just there to massacre the opponents in the most bloody way.

Sure, there is the question, if those  bloody gimmicks are a must for the games,
and I have to say, without any doubt they aren't, but in the end why not use the
possibilities of  the technic to  its end? This  isn't only  a fault of the game
developpers on  the PC or  a fault of  the todays  high end computer/video games
technic, nope. This movement exists since  computer games  are existing, to make
the games as realistic as the technic makes it possible.

Here I want to went over to our Atari scene... Our systems aren't that powerful,
but violence in games  isn't a foreign  word for us. Sure, so  far the ST gamers
were left out in some way of pixel floods of blood and  bones, but at the latest
point with the conversion of "Wolfenstein" by my  group mate Ray, we, on the ST,
will have our own bloody ego shooter! But  is it really  the blood that makes us
hungry for that  game? No, surely, not, it is the  technic, the scenery the game
offers, a scenery never seen before in that quality on this machine.

And except those  ego shooters, there are a lot  more games around on our ST/STE
machines, that  are  offering pixel  brutality... surely not  in the way  of the
todays PC games, but in the best way to create them on this machine. Ok, not all
enemies in Atari games are  disappearing  in a bloody pixelstorm but the way you
are "deleting" them from  the screen, is violence enough if you see it from this
point of view. So you use a wide range of weapons, guns, daggers, swords and not
only  those, also  guitars, baseballbats, stones, nearly  everything you can get
your hands on, and those items  are used to  fire onto your opponent or to smash
it onto his head or body... You want to  have titles, even  if there is no blood
running  onto  the  floor? Why  not... "Motörhead", "Legends Of Valour", "Double
Dragon"... I could create  a long long  list here but  apart from  the fact that
violence is ruling those games the small possiblities of the ST machines was the
reason for us gamers to see the brutality in a different light. It doesn't looks
that violent and dangerous in just 16 colours and a quite low resolution...

Other games aren't that oversensitive, in games like "Wings Of Fury" or even the
sweet little "Cannon Fodder" the killing of the enemies is a bit harder and esp.
the last one that was announced with the slogan "War has never been so much fun"
makes me a bit wonder... war and fun? I doubt that... It makes fun to play those
games, but war itself isn't funny for anyone...

While the STf is a  bit left  out here, the STE offers already a bit more. While
its only ego  shooter, "Substation" is quite  spartanic with  gore effects, some
other games are showing more, in the  game "Ultimate Arena" for example you have
some gore  effects too, and in Dynabusters it  makes a lot  of fun to blast your
opponents away in a little pixel explosion... splat!

Last but  not least  the  Falcon, he offers more power  and nearly  by force the
games  on this  machine are  showing  more violence. Games like "Men At War" are
just a laughter against "Running", "Aazhom Krypht" or "Robinsons Requiem"... But
is it really the violence that makes us  run those games again  and again? Is it
the missing  of new  and more  brutal ones? Or  is it  just the gameplay and the
scenery? I still think the last one...

Back to the  games scene at all. Sure, there  are games  using gimmicks that are
speaking  of very weird  and cruel  minds of their  developpers... Weapons  like
chainsaws, nailguns, flamethrowers  and rocketlaunchers  aren't included only to
kill the enemie, no, they're included  to kill the enemies in a very spectacular
way. So I doubt that there is a need to use fire  bullets in the game "BLOOD 3D"
on the PC  that are  setting the  enemies  on fire  after a while, leaving  them
running  around as  living torches, but we  have to think  here that those ideas
came up of the minds of human beings... That is the cruelty in my eyes, far more
than the presentation... I know... the masses get  what they demand, but I doubt
that the people are yelling for a most  brutal game and I doubt as well that the
players are voting in polls about  the kind of violence  they want to see in the
next production... The violence  is included as  gimmick... Just for example the
game "Sudden Strike"... a real time strategic war game, there is no need to show
how people are dying  when you're rolling with your Tiger tank over them, but it
is included, leaving a  red spot on  the ground... It's  just a gimmick... but a
very  brutal one since  being overrolled  by a tank  is surely  one of  the most
horrible ways to die...

After all this  lines should show  my idea that those  games, showing  brutality
aren't creating  such ideas  in the minds of  the  players since those  ideas of
horror, blood and violence already  surrounding us, every day in  TV we see dead
and  tormented  people, in  reality  or in  movies, it doesn't  matter. The only
further step of video/computer games is  the fact that  now the player itself is
able to make an enemy  suffer like hell, but  we shouldn't forget that those are
"just" digital enemies while in TV, magazines and also Internet -real- brutality
was shown and sometimes used to make jokes about as well.

Sure, the intensive bombardement with brutality, in TV, Internet, Games and Mags
is making  the people a  bit harder but  still the -normal- human being  can see
what is virtuality  and what  reality. An  already ill  mind with such murderous
fantasies doesn't  needs those  impressions since mass murders were around since
the human race  exists and  violence is  a "feature" of  the human race since as
long as we're existing  we're  trying to  kill each other, violence to solve any
problems was and still is very welcome...
And the deadliest weapons and ways to kill people were  designed by sane people,
nobody would call the developpers of the nuclear bomb insane and brainless guys.

So after all the  consumers of violent video/computer games shouldn't be seen as
special threatened to change  into mass  murders... My brother-in-law is playing
"Soldier Of Fortune" and "Halflife" a lot and working in the intensive care unit
of a big hospital without killing his patients... and others are running around,
surely have never touched a computer but murdered their neighbors...

To end this... Even if  the games on  nowadays machines  are often  stuffed with
violence we always should remember that this is just virtuality and we should be
happy in some way to have those possibilities to leave our hate and aggression a
free way sometimes, without  smashing the face off of the next  passanger on the
street...

And... contains not even "Space Invaders" some kind  of violence? Against aliens
and in monochrome... but after all... just think...

_.tSCc.__________________________________________________________moondog_o7/2k2_