In the controversial new video game "Manhunt 2," you’re required to
sneak up behind innocent victims, hit them over the head with a garden
spade and then use that same weapon to decapitate, them. The whole
thing is pretty graphic, because the game has, well, pretty graphics.
As blood gushes, you’re supposed to feel satisfied that you’re ready
for the next challenge. But…

Scene from Manhunt 2

To some, this scenario captures everything wrong about video games.
"They’re too violent," detractors say. "And they glamorize violence.
Children might be tempted to copy them." While this is an
understandable concern, it misses more obvious problems with many video
games today: primarily, an utter lack of moral consequence.

Countless studies have tested the alleged links between virtual
violence and its real counterpart. Conclusions vary, but I certainly
don’t need a panel of academics to explain to me that the teen across
the street isn’t going to attack me with a garden spade.

Still, if you’re a parent, the sheer intensity of violence in many
games today ought to be a valid concern. You wouldn’t let your children
view online pornography, so why let them decapitate people in a video
game?

Yet many parents buy their children games rated inappropriate for
anyone under 17. Why? Perhaps it’s a hangover attitude from the "Pac-Man"
past, when all video games were presumed to be harmless fun. Or maybe
they just want their kids to think they’re cool. Whatever the reason,
there’s clearly a disconnect between the level of parental angst and
parental tolerance.

One of many dubious arguments against violence in video games is that children find it hard to distinguish between "real" and "virtual" situations.

If that’s true, is CNN not a more pernicious peddler of unsavory
material for kids? When kids turn on the TV and see footage of soldiers
shooting each other for real, is there any substantial difference
between that and playing a first-person shooter game?

Years ago, after the tragic shootings in Columbine, the news media
were quick to lay blame at the game industry’s door. Could they not as
easily have turned that criticism on themselves?

What’s surprising about the media’s obsession with violence in games
is that it overlooks more serious lapses in values. By concentrating on
the bloodthirsty and dramatic, they’re ignoring influences that are
much more harmful to children long term.

Take, for instance, the idea of ruthless competition, that for every
winner there are necessarily losers. Regardless of what game you’re
playing, the message is almost always the same: Do whatever it takes to
win, even at the expense of everyone else.

Imagine if that were the moral of every movie and TV show you ever
watched. Would the world be a better or worse place? Would you let your
children play a game that promoted such a dog-eat-dog mentality?

Fundamentally, most games operate within a moral framework: good
versus evil (or vice versa). But what games conspicuously lack is moral
consequence. Once you’ve killed someone, stolen something, or blown up
a building, that’s usually the end of it – you’ll rarely get to see the
emotional impact of your actions on the characters around you.

Every bit of mayhem becomes just another item on a video-game to-do
list. Games ignore moral consequence and emotional nuance to focus on
the purely visceral. There are only two types of decisions you can
really make: the strategically correct one or the strategically
incorrect one. There is no "right" or "wrong" – only success or failure.

Unbridled competition combined with no moral consequence eventually
leads to a lack of compassion. And without compassion, humanity is lost.

What games risk instilling, not just in kids, but in anyone who
plays them, is a kind of sociopathy: a dearth of conscience. Whether
this might be imitated outside of gaming is beside the point. What we
should be asking ourselves is if we really want to spend ever more time
playing things that encourage these values. That’s a moral question,
one that’s easily sidelined in favor of simply having fun, but it’s
something we all must consider as the pastime grows more popular.

I’m not calling for stricter regulation of the video-game industry.
Rather, I hope to widen the debate to include issues that might not be
considered if we believe the sensational, trivial hysteria of the
media. By concentrating so heavily on the immediate (and short-term)
effects of video-game violence,
we’re distracted from discussing more important moral dimensions. It’s
time for parents to stop asking what is appropriate for their children
and to start asking what is morally right.

Via Yahoo