online games should not be banned essay

Banning Violent Video Games Argumentative Essay

Introduction: banning violent video games, violent video games should not be banned, violent video games should be banned, conclusion: why video games should not be banned.

The essay is an argumentative one; violent games should not be banned. Recently there has been an endless and fierce debate on whether or not to banned violent video games. For instance, the countries that constitute the European Union are planning to ban some of the European games. However, it is the view of the majority of video games, just like any other games, are there to educate and entertain.

Although there are strong reasons brought forth by those who want violent video games to be banned, here are reasons why we should not; increases self-esteem, reduction of pain, encourages teamwork, sharpening players’ wit, among others (Sterngold, 2006).

With regards to those in support of banning the game, they hold the view that the games continuously poison the minds of the viewers, especially young individuals.

It is worth noting that there are indeed strong points that need to be given a second thought before we rush in banning violent video games. It has been argued and even proved that when kids play such games, especially when the multiplayer type of game is available, then the children get to learn at a very early age to work as a teammate, which requires teamwork. Arguably, this is advantageous as it helps in keeping children together in times of need (Lebrilla, 2010).

For this matter, when they grow up, such individuals will be in a better position to be good team players. This concept has been currently deemed very vital in ensuring the success of an organization. Throughout the game, it is indeed tough to beat the opponent.

However, through concentration, acquisition of skills, and knowledge on how to win, which has been learned from each other, children are capable of the emerging winner. With this, they grow, knowing that to win, there is a need to have a team behind them.

As suggested by Bissell, 2008 violent video games have been thought to help, especially those with very high tempers, to release their anger by not hurting anybody. When very angry and one feels like inflicting pain on another human being or even killing others, it has been thought appropriate to transfer such anger to violent video games. When one engages in a shoot-out with an enemy in a video game, he/she might feel that the mission is accomplished.

Aside from assisting young individuals in sharpening their wits and problem-solving skills, violent video game plays a significant role in helping young individuals, even a few older members of society, to learn how to persevere. On the same line of thought, these games have made it possible for people to have well-coordinated hand and eye movements (Craig et al. 2007).

This has helped in making sure that reflex action/response is normal. The advantage of this is that it will play a significant role in keeping progressive illnesses at bay.

Another major point that is in support of violent video games is that it helps in sustaining the country’s economy. It is apparent that the industry of violent video games has played a significant role in the economic growth of the country. The export of the same product to other nations generates foreign income for the country.

Additionally, a good number of Americans derive their daily bread from the same industry(Konijn et al., 2007). For this reason, banning of violent video games will mean that the unemployment rate will go up, and the money generated from the industry will be lost. The industry generates close to 21 billion dollars annually (Jones & Ponton, 2003).

Additionally, doctors have proved that despite violent games being useful; in releasing anger, it is also helpful in helping a patient reduce pain. The current efforts hospitals show this making to install such games. More importantly, the games help entertain the plays as well as the viewers.

Just like when people feel entertained by watching a football match, violent game provide the same to the affected party. Considering the fact that slightly over 70.0% of American teens play these games, if it is banned, then they will indulge in even more risky activities in their quest to be entertained, for instance, drug abuse (Goldstein, 1998).

It would not be rational if the argument that supports the banning of violent games were not brought to light. It has been brought into the violent limelight game that pollutes the minds of American children.

When young individual engages too much in these games, they are addicted. The result is that they will grow up and may put into practice what they saw. A recent incident where a student walked into an institution of learning and started shooting at others, killing them on the spot, has been linked to violent video games (Anderson & Dill, 2000).

Similarly, just like any other thing that can bring addiction, violent video games, when making a young individual addicted, can be detrimental to their quest to learn. This is because most of the time, whenever they are free will, they spend time playing such games (Ferguson, 2008).

Although it has been argued that the game fosters socialization skills, it is evident that when one plays in non-multiplayer support, they grow up being persons with poor skills to socialize.

From the review of the issue of violent games, even though the game is intense, banning it will bring more harm than good. For those who advocate for the banning, it would be rational to critically analyze the benefits of the game to individuals and even society at large. For instance, it enhances teamwork, helps reduce pain, aids in releasing anger, and improves wit and hand-eye coordination, among others.

However, the disadvantages include polluting or poisoning young individuals, and addiction eats their time hence cannot engage actively in other vital activities. This thus warrants careful consideration from relevant stakeholders such as parents and the government.

Anderson, C. & Dill, K. (2000). “Video Games and Aggressive Thoughts, Feelings and Behavior in the Laboratory and In Life.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 78(4):722.

Ferguson, C. (2008). “Blazing Angels or Resident Evil? Can Violent Video Games Be a Force for Good?”, Review of General Psychology, 14(1): 68-81.

Konijn, E. et al. (2007). “I Wish I Were a Warrior: The Role of Wishful Identification in the Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggression in Adolescent Boys.” Developmental Psychology, 43(1): 1-12.

Craig, A. et al. (2007). Violent Video Game Effects on Children and Adolescents: Theory, Research, and Public Policy . Oxford University: Oxford University Press.

Bissell, T. (2008). Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter . New York: Macmillan Publishers.

Sterngold, A. (2006). “Violent video games.” Web.

Jones, G. & Ponton, L. (2003). Killing Monsters: Why Children Need Fantasy, Super Heroes, and Make-Believe Violence . New York: Basic Books. P. 172.

Goldstein, J. (1998). Why We Watch; The Attraction of Violent Entertainment . Oxford University Oxford University Press. P. 188.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 28). Banning Violent Video Games Argumentative Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/violent-video-games-should-not-be-banned/

"Banning Violent Video Games Argumentative Essay." IvyPanda , 28 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/violent-video-games-should-not-be-banned/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Banning Violent Video Games Argumentative Essay'. 28 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Banning Violent Video Games Argumentative Essay." October 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/violent-video-games-should-not-be-banned/.

1. IvyPanda . "Banning Violent Video Games Argumentative Essay." October 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/violent-video-games-should-not-be-banned/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Banning Violent Video Games Argumentative Essay." October 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/violent-video-games-should-not-be-banned/.

• Multiplayer Online Battle Arena Video Games and Technologies
• Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games
• Should Animals be Used in Research: Argumentative Essay
• Argumentative Essay Writing
• London Olympic Games: Banning Reasons
• Choosing The Best Sharpener for Kitchen
• Political Philosophy: Liberalism and Libertarianism
• Has the Internet Positively or Negatively Impacted Human Society? Argumentative Essay
• Pros and Cons of Abortion to the Society Argumentative Essay
• Division of Labor and Capital Accumulation as Sources of the Wealth of Nations
• Importance of Adopting Children
• Stereotypes of American Citizens
• Social Care in Ireland
• Evaluating the debate between proponents of qualitative and quantitative inquiries
• The Effects of Social Networking Sites on an Individual's Life

Filed under:

The frustrating, enduring debate over video games, violence, and guns

We asked players, parents, developers, and experts to weigh in on how to change the conversation around gaming.

Share this story

• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on Twitter
• Share this on Reddit
• Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: The frustrating, enduring debate over video games, violence, and guns

In the wake of two mass shootings earlier this month in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, the societal role of video games grabbed a familiar media spotlight. The El Paso shooter briefly referenced Call of Duty , a wildly popular game in which players assume the roles of soldiers during historical and fictional wartime, in his “manifesto.” And just this small mention of the video game seemed to have prompted President Donald Trump to return to a theme he’s emphasized before when looking to assign greater blame for violent incidents.

“We must stop the glorification of violence in our society,” he said in an August 5 press conference. “This includes the gruesome and grisly video games that are now commonplace. It is too easy today for troubled youth to surround themselves with a culture that celebrates violence.”

Trump’s statement suggesting a link between video games and real-world violence echoed sentiments shared by other lawmakers following the back-to-back mass shootings. It’s a response that major media outlets and retailers have also adopted of late; ESPN recently chose to delay broadcasting an esports tournament because of the shootings — a decision that seems to imply the network believes in a link between gaming and real-world violence. And Walmart made a controversial decision to temporarily remove all video game displays from its stores, even as it continues to openly sell guns.

But many members of the public, as well as researchers and some politicians, have counterargued that blaming video games sidesteps the real issue at the root of America’s mass shooting problem: a need for stronger gun control . The frenzied debate over video games within the larger conversation around gun violence underscores both how intense the fight over gun control has become and how easily games can become mired in political rhetoric.

But this isn’t a new development; blaming video games for real-world violence — any kind of real-world violence — is a longstanding cultural and political habit whose origins date back to the 1970s. It’s also arguably part of a larger recurring wave of concern over any pop culture that’s been perceived as morally deviant, from rock ’n’ roll to the occult , depending on the era. But as mass shootings continue to occur nationwide and attempts to stop them by enacting gun control legislature remain divisive, video games have again become an easy target.

The most recent clamor arose from a clash among several familiar foes. In one corner: politicians like Trump who cite video games as evidence of immoral and violent media’s negative societal impact. In another: people who play video games and resist this reading, while also trying to lodge separate critiques of violence within gaming. In another: scientists at odds over whether there are factual and causal links between video games and real-world violence. And in still another: members of the general public who, upon receiving alarmist messages about games from politicians and the news media, react with yet more alarm.

Subscribe to Today, Explained

Looking for a quick way to keep up with the never-ending news cycle? Host Sean Rameswaram will guide you through the most important stories at the end of each day.

Subscribe on Apple Podcasts , Spotify , Ove r cast , or wherever you listen to podcasts.

What is new, however, is that recent criticism of the narrative that video games lead to real-world violence seems particularly intensified, and it’s coming not just from gamers but also from scientists , some media outlets , even mass shooting survivors: David Hogg, who became a gun control advocate after surviving the 2018 mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, unveiled a new March for Our Lives gun control initiative in August, pointedly stating in his announcement on Twitter, “We know video games aren’t to blame.”

And on all sides is a sense that frustration is growing because so little has changed since the last time we had this debate — and since the time before that and the time before that.

There’s no science proving a link between video games and real-world violence. But that hasn’t quelled a debate that’s raged for decades.

Historically, video games have played a verifiable role in a handful of mass shootings, but the science linking video games to gun violence is murky . A vast body of psychology research, most of it conducted before 2015, argues strenuously that video games can contribute to increases in aggression . Yet much of this research has been contested by newer, contradictory findings from both psychologists and scholars in different academic fields. For example, Nickie Phillips , a criminologist whose research deals with violence in popular media, told me that “most criminologists are dismissive of a causal link between media and crime,” and that they’re instead interested in questions of violence as a social construct and how that contributes to political discourse.

That type of research, she stressed, is likely to be less flashy and headline-grabbing than psychology studies, which are more focused on pointing to direct behaviors and their causes. “Social meanings of crime are in transition,” Phillips said. “There’s not a single variable. As a public, we want a single concrete explanation as to why people commit atrocities, when the answers can be very complex.”

The debate over the science is easy to wade into, but it obscures just how preoccupied America is with dangerous media. The oldest moral panic over a video game may be the controversy over a 1976 game called Death Race , which awarded players points for driving over fleeing pedestrians dubbed “gremlins.” The game became mired in controversy, even sparking a segment on 60 Minutes . Interestingly, other games of the era that framed their mechanics through wartime violence, like the 1974 military game Tank , failed to cause as much public concern.

In his 2017 book Moral Combat: Why the War on Violent Video Games Is Wrong , psychologist Patrick Markey points out that before concerned citizens fixated on video games, many of them were worried about arcades — not because of the games they contained, but because they were licentious hangouts for teens. (Insert “ Ya Got Trouble ” here.) By the 1980s, “Arcades were being shut down across the nation by activist parents intent on protecting their children from the dangerous influences lurking within these neon-drenched dungeons,” Markey writes.

Then came the franchise that evolved arcade panic into gameplay panic: Midway Games’ Mortal Kombat , infamous for its gory “fatality” moves . With its 1992 arcade debut, Mortal Kombat sparked hysteria among concerned adults that led to a 1993 congressional hearing and the creation of the Entertainment Software Rating Board, or ESRB . The fighting game franchise still incites debate with every new release.

“Like people were really going to go out and rip people’s spines out,” Cypheroftyr , a gaming critic who typically goes by her internet handle, told me over the phone regarding the mainstream anxiety around Mortal Kombat in the 1990s. Cypheroftyr is an avid player of shooter games and other action games and the founder of the nonprofit I Need Diverse Games .

“I’m old enough to remember the whole Jack Thompson era of trying to say video games are violent and they should be banned,” she said, referencing the infamous disbarred obscenity lawyer known for a strident crusade against games and other media that has spanned decades .

Cypheroftyr pointed out that after the Columbine shooting in April 1999, politicians “were trying to blame both video games and Marilyn Manson. It just feels like this is too easy a scapegoat.”

Politicians have long seized on the idea that recreational fantasy and fictional media have an influence on real-world evil. In 2007, for example, Sen. Mitt Romney (R–UT) blamed “music and movies and TV and video games” for being full of “pornography and violence,” which he argued had influenced the Columbine shooters and, later, the 2007 Virginia Tech shooter.

Video games seem especially prone to garnering political attention in the wake of a tragedy — especially first-person shooters like Call of Duty. A stereotype of a mass shooter, isolated and perpetually consuming graphic violent content, seems to linger in the public’s consciousness. A neighbor of the 2018 Parkland shooter, for instance, told the Miami Herald that the shooter would play video games for up to 12 to 15 hours a day — and although that anecdotal report was unverified, it was still widely circulated.

A 2015 Pew study of 2,000 US adults found that even though 49 percent of adult Americans play video games, 40 percent of Americans also believe in a link between games and violence — specifically, that “people who play violent video games are more likely to be violent themselves.” Additionally, 32 percent of the people who told Pew they play video games also said they believe gaming contributes to an increase in aggression, even though their own experience as, presumably, nonviolent gamers would offer at least some evidence to the contrary.

One person who sees a correlation between violent games and a propensity for real-world violence is Tim Winter . Winter is the president of the Parents Television Council , a nonpartisan advocacy group that lobbies the entertainment industry against marketing graphic violence to children. He spent several years overseeing MGM’s former video game publishing division, MGM Interactive, and moved into advocacy when he became a parent. Growing up, his children played all kinds of video games, except for those he considered too graphic or violent.

In a phone interview, Winter told me his view aligns with the research supporting links between games and aggression.

“Anyone who uses the term ‘moral panic’ in my view is trying to diminish a bona fide conversation that needs to take place,” Winter said. “It’s a simple PR move to refute something that might actually have some value in the broader conversation.”

During our conversation, he compared the connection between violent media and harmful real-world effects to that between cigarettes and lung cancer. If you consume in moderation, he argues, you’ll probably be fine; but, over time, exposure to violent media can have “a cumulative negative effect.” (In fact, studies of infrequent smokers have shown that their risk of coronary disease is roughly equal to that of frequent smokers, and their risk of cancer is still significantly higher than that of nonsmokers.)

“What I believe to be true is that the media we consume has a very powerful impact on shaping our belief structure, our cognitive development, our values, and our opinions,” he said.

He added that it would be foolish to point to any one act of violence and say it was caused by any one video game — that, he argued, “would be like saying lung cancer was caused by that one specific cigarette I smoked.”

“But if you are likely to smoke packs a day over the course of many years, it has a cumulative negative effect on your health,” he continued. “I believe based on the research on both sides that that’s the prevailing truth.”

The debate endures because gun control isn’t being addressed — and games are an easy target

Like many people I spoke with for this story, Winter believes that the debate about gun violence has remained largely at a standstill since Columbine, while the number of mass shootings nationwide has continued to increase.

“If you look at the broader issue of gun violence in America, you have a number of organizations and constituencies pointing at different causes,” he said. “When you look back at what those arguments are, it’s the same arguments that have been made going back to Columbine. Whether it’s gun control, whether it’s mental illness, whether it’s violence in media culture — whatever the debate is about those three root causes, very little progress has been made on any of them.”

The glorification of violence is so culturally embedded in American media through TV, film, games, books, and practically every other available medium that there seems to be very little impetus to change anything about America’s gun culture. We can define “ gun culture ” here as the addition of an embrace of gun ownership and a nationwide oversupply of guns to what Phillips described as “ a culture of violence ” — one in which violence “becomes our go-to way of solving problems — whether that’s individual violence, police violence, state violence.”

“There’s a commodification of violence,” she said, “and we have to understand what that means.”

Naomi Clark , an independent game developer and co-chair of New York University’s Game Center program, agreed. “I find it more plausible that America’s long-standing culture of gun violence has affected video games, as a form of culture, than the other way around,” she told me in an email. “After all, this nation’s cultural traditions and attachments around guns are far older than video games.”

In light of incidents like Walmart’s removal of video game displays after the recent mass shootings while continuing to advertise guns, the connection between the shootings and America’s continued valorization of guns feels extremely stark. “We could ban video games tomorrow and mass shootings would still happen,” Cypheroftyr told me.

“What’s new about the current debate is that the scapegoat of videogaming has never been more nakedly exposed for what it is,” gaming sociologist Katherine Cross wrote in an email, “with Republicans and conservatives manifestly fearful of blaming systematic white supremacism, Trump’s rhetoric, or our nation’s permissive and freewheeling gun culture for the recent rash of terrorism.”

Because of the sensitivity around the issue of gun control, it’s easy for politicians to score points with constituents by focusing a conversation on games and sidestepping other action. “Politicians often blame video games because they are a safe target,” Moral Combat author Markey told me in an email. “There isn’t a giant video game lobby like other potential causes of mass shootings (like the NRA [National Rifle Association]). So [by targeting games], a politician can make it appear they are doing something without risking losing any votes.”

And the general public is often susceptible to this rhetoric, both because it’s emotional and because it may feed what they think they already know about games — even if that’s not a lot. “The narrative that violence in video games contributes to the gun violence in America is, I think, a good example of a bad idea that seems right to people who don’t look too closely at the facts,” Zak Garriss , a video game writer and designer who’s worked on a wide range of games, told me in an email.

“Video games are a global industry, dwarfing other entertainment industries in revenue in markets comprised of gamers from the UK, Germany, France, Japan, the US, and basically anywhere there’s electricity. Yet the spree shooting phenomenon seems to be seriously and uniquely a US issue right now. It’s also worth noting that the ratings systems across these countries vary, and in the case of Europe, are often more liberal in many regards than the US system,” Garriss said.

He also pointed out that this conversation frequently overshadows the important, innovative work that many games are engaged in. “Games like Stardew Valley , Minecraft , or Journey craft experiences that help people relax, detox after a day, bond with friends,” he said. “Games like Papers, Please , That Dragon Cancer , or Life Is Strange interrogate the harder and the darker elements of the human experience like love, grief, loneliness, and death.”

In other words, a conversation that focuses on games and guns alone dismisses the vital cultural role that video games play as art. “Play video games and you can jump on giant mushrooms, shoot a wizard on the moon, grow a farm, fall in love, experience nearly infinite worlds really,” Garriss told me. “If games have a unifying organizing principle, I’d say it’s to delight. The pursuit of fun.”

He continued: “To me, the tragedy, if there is one, in the current discourse around video games and violence, lies in failing to see the magic happening in the play. As devs, it’s a magic we’re chasing with every game. And as players, I think it’s a magic that has not just the potential but the actual power to bring people together, to aid mental health, to make us think, to help us heal. And to experience delight.”

But for some members of the public, games’ recreational, relaxational, and artistic values might be another thing that make them suspect. “If they don’t play games or ‘aged out of it,’ they might see them as frivolous or a waste of time,” Cypheroftyr says. “It’s easy to go, ‘Oh, you’re still playing video games? Why are you wasting your life?’”

That idea — that video games are a waste of time — is another longstanding element of cultural assumptions around games of all kinds, Clark, the game developer, told me. “Games have been an easy target in every era because there’s something inherently unproductive or even anti-productive about them, and so there’s also a long history of game designers trying to rehabilitate games and make them ‘do work’ or provide instruction.”

All of this makes it incredibly easy to fixate on video games instead of addressing difficult but more relevant targets, like NRA funding and easy access to guns. And that, in turn, makes it a complicated proposition to extricate video games from conversations about gun violence, let alone limit the conversation around violent games to people who might actually be in a position to create change, like the people who make the games in the first place.

Yet what’s striking when you drill down into the community around gaming is how many gamers agree with many of the arguments politicians are making. As a fan of shooter games, Cypheroftyr told me she routinely plays violent games like Call of Duty and the military action role-playing game (RPG) The Division . “I’m not out here trying to murder people,” she stressed. But like the Parents Television Council’s Winter, Cypheroftyr and many of the other people I spoke with agree that the gaming industry needs to do a lot more to examine the at times shocking imagery it perpetuates.

Many members of the gaming community are already discussing game violence

Multiple people I spoke with expressed frustration that the conversation about video games’ role in mass shootings is obscuring another, very important conversation to be had within the gaming community about violent games.

Clark told me that the public’s lack of nuance and an insistence on a binary reading of the issue is part of the problem. “Most people are capable of understanding that causes are complex,” she said, “that you can’t just point to one thing and say, ‘This is mostly or entirely to blame!’”

But she also cautioned that the gaming community’s reactionary defensiveness to this lack of nuance also prevents many video game fans from acknowledging that games do play a role within a violent culture. “That complexity cuts both ways,” she told me. “Even though it’s silly to say that ‘games cause violence,’ it’s also just as silly to say that games have nothing to do with a culture that has a violence problem.”

That culture is endemic to the gaming industry, added Justin Carter, a freelance journalist whose work focuses on video games and culture.

“The industry does have a fetishization of guns and violence,” Carter said. “You look at games like Borderlands or Destiny and one of the selling points is how many guns there are.” The upcoming first-person shooter game Borderlands 3 , he pointed out, boasts “over a billion” different guns from its 12 fictional weapons manufacturers , all of which tout special perks to get players to try their guns. These perks serve as marketing both inside and outside the game; the game’s publisher, 2K Games, invites players to exult in violence using language that speaks for itself :

Deliver devastating critical hits to enemies’ soft-and-sensitives, then joy-puke as your bullets ricochet towards other targets. ... Step 1: Hit your enemies with tracker tags. Step 2: Unleash a hail of Smart Bullets that track towards your targets. Step 3: Loot! Deal guaranteed elemental damage with your finger glued to the trigger ...

“There are very few [action/adventure] games that give you options other than murdering people,” Cypheroftyr said. “Games don’t do enough to show the other side of it. You shoot someone, you die, they die, you reset, you reload, and nothing happens.”

“I know that if I shoot people in a game it’s not real,” she added. “99.9 percent of people don’t need to be told that. I’m not playing out a power fantasy or anything, but I’ve become more aware of how most games [that] use violence [do so] to solve problems.”

An insistence from game developers on blithely ignoring the potential political messages of their games is another frustration for her. “All these game makers are like, there’s no politics in the game. There’s no message. And I’m like ... did you just send me through a war museum and you’re telling me this?!”

The game Cypheroftyr is referencing is The Division 2 , which features a section where players can engage in enemy combat during a walkthrough of a Vietnam War memorial museum. While she loves the game, she told me the fact that players use weapons from the Vietnam War era while in a war museum belies game developers’ frequent arguments that such games are apolitical.

Another game Cypheroftyr has found disturbing in its attempt to background politics without any real self-reflection is the popular adventure game Detroit Become Human , which displays pacifist Martin Luther King Jr. quotes alongside gameplay that allows players to choose extreme violence as an option. “You can take a more pacifistic approach, but you may not get the ending you want,” she explained.

She noted, too, that the military uses video games for training as part of what’s been dubbed the “ military-entertainment complex ,” with tactics involving shooter games that some ex-soldiers have referred to as “more like brainwashing than anything.” The US Army began exploring virtual training in 1999 and began developing its first tactics game a year later. The result, Full Spectrum Command , was a military-only version of 2003’s Full Spectrum Warrior . Since then, the military has used video games to teach soldiers everything from how to deal with combat scenarios to how to interact with Iraqi civilians .

The close connection between games and sanctioned real-world violence, i.e., war, is hard to deny with any plausibility. “When someone insists that these two parts of culture have absolutely nothing to do with each other,” Clark said, “it smacks of denial, and many game developers are asking themselves, ‘Do I want to be part of this landscape?’ even if they have zero belief that video games are causing violence.”

For all the gaming industry’s faults when it comes to frankly addressing gaming’s role in a violent culture, however, many people are quick to point out that critiques of in-game violence can also come from the video games themselves. In Batman: Arkham Asylum , for example, researchers Christina Fawcett and Steven Kohm recently found that the game “directly implicate[s] the player in violence enacted upon the bodies of criminals and patients alike.” Other games shift the focus away from the perpetrators to the victims — for example, This War of Mine is a survival game inspired by the Bosnian War that focuses not on soldiers but on civilians dealing with the costs of wartime violence.

But acknowledging that critiques of violent games are coming from within the gaming community doesn’t play well as part of the gun control debate. “It’s far too easy to scapegoat video games as low-hanging fruit instead of addressing the real issues,” Cypheroftyr said, “like the ease with which we can get weapons in this country, and why we don’t do more to punish the perpetrators [of gun violence].” She also cites the cultural tendency to excuse masculine aggression early on with a “b“boys will be boys” mentality — which can breed the kind of entitlement that leads to more violence later on.

All these factors combine to make the conversation around violent video games inherently political and part of a larger ongoing debate that ultimately centers on which media messages are the most responsible for fueling real-world violence.

The conversation surrounding violent games implicates violent gaming culture itself — which, in turn, implicates politicians who rail against games

Games journalist Carter told me he feels the gaming community needs to, in essence, reject the whole debate entirely because at this point in its life cycle, it’s disingenuous.

“We’ve been through enough shootings that you know the playbook, and it’s annoying that gamers and people in the industry will take this as a position that needs defending,” he told me. “It’s not a conversation worth having anymore solely on post-traumatic terms.”

Discussions about video game violence need to be held mainly within the games community, Carter said, and held “with people who are actually interested in figuring out a solution instead of politicians looking to pass off the blame for their ineptitude and greed.”

But some gamers told me they don’t trust the gaming community to frame the conversation with appropriate nuance. All of them cited Gamergate’ s violent male entitlement and the effect that its subsequent bleed into the larger alt-right movement’s misogyny and white supremacy have had on mainstream culture at large.

“The framing of that rhetoric that began in Gamergate as part of the ‘low’ culture of niche internet forums became part of the mainstream political discourse,” criminologist Phillips pointed out. “The expression of their misogyny and the notion of being pushed out of their white male-dominated space was a microcosm of what was to come. We’re talking about 8chan now, but [the growth of the alt-right] was fueled by gaming culture.” She points to Gamergate as an example of the complicated interplay between gaming culture, online communities full of toxic, violent rhetoric, and the rise of online extremism that’s increasingly moving offline.

Gaming sociologist Cross agreed. “At this moment, there is urgent need to shine a light on video game culture , the fan spaces that have been infiltrated by white supremacists looking to recruit that minority of gamers who rage against ‘political correctness,’” she told me.

“We treat video games as unreal, as unserious play, and that creates a shadow over gaming forums and fan communities that has allowed toxicity to take root. It’s also allowed neo-Nazis to operate mostly unseen. That is what needs to change.”

The resulting shadow over gaming has spread far and wide — and found violent echoes in the rhetoric of Trump himself . “Look at what the person in the very highest office of the US is cultivating,” Cypheroftyr said. “Toxic masculinity, this idea that men, especially white men, have been fed that they’re losing ‘their’ country.”

“While video games do not influence us in a monkey-see-monkey-do manner, they do, like all media, shape how we see the world,” Cross argues. “Republicans, in broaching that possibility, open themselves up to the critique that their leader, who makes frequent use of both old media and social media, might also be influential in a toxic way.”

And this, ultimately, may be why the current debate around video games and violence feels particularly intense: The extremes of toxic gaming culture are fueling the attitudes of toxic alt-right culture , which in turn fuels the rhetoric of President Trump and many other right-wing politicians — the same rhetoric that many white supremacist mass shooters are using to justify their atrocities.

So when Trump rails against violence in video games, as he’s now done multiple times , he’s protesting a fictionalized version of the real-life violence that his own rhetoric seems to tacitly encourage. If we are to accept the argument that media violence as represented by games is capable of bringing about real-world violence, then surely no media influence is more powerful or full of dangerous potential than that wielded by the president of the United States.

In 2018, Vice’s gaming vertical Waypoint devoted a week to “ guns and games ”; in a moving piece outlining the intent of the project, editor Austin Walker observed that unlike real-world violence, “in big-budget action games, and especially games that give the player guns and plentiful ammunition, violence is cheap and endlessly repeatable.”

Yet now, barely a year later, mass shootings and other incidents of real-world violence have also begun to seem endlessly repeatable. Perhaps that is why, at last, the urgency of shifting our cultural focus from fixing violence in games to fixing violence in the real world feels like it is finally outstripping the incessant debate.

Will you support Vox today?

We believe that everyone deserves to understand the world that they live in. That kind of knowledge helps create better citizens, neighbors, friends, parents, and stewards of this planet. Producing deeply researched, explanatory journalism takes resources. You can support this mission by making a financial gift to Vox today. Will you join us?

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

Biden might actually do something about ludicrously expensive concert tickets

Caitlin clark’s staggeringly low starting salary, briefly explained, why the case at the center of netflix’s what jennifer did isn’t over yet, sign up for the newsletter today, explained, thanks for signing up.

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

A Biola magazine for students, by students

Video Games and Violence: An Ongoing Debate

Written by Yunah Elsner

With the increase of popularity in violent video games and the rise of mass shootings throughout the United States in the last decade, many could suspect a correlation between the two. Debates on whether or not violent video games cause violence has become a large societal and political issue. In 2011, the state of California tried to ban violent video games, and last August after the shootings in Dayton, Ohio and El Paso, Texas, President Trump gave a speech, encouraging people to stand against violent video games as they are the cause of mass violence and are the “glorification and celebration of violence.” Due to claims of video games causing violence, gaming industries were put under fire and fought back. 

“ For video game fans, many of whom have endured a lifetime of defending a hobby that is seen, at best, as a harmless waste of time or, at worst, unsightly onanism enjoyed by the socially bereft, it was the inevitable buckshot of political blame r,” wrote Time Magazine .

 Executive Director of the International Game Developers Association, Renee Gittens, commented on Trump’s speech on violent video games saying, “Blaming video games distracts from the broader issues at hand.” 

 As Christians, is it okay to be playing violent video games? Should Christians be supporting and encouraging these games? This question has been researched and debated on for over fifty years, yet we have no definitive answer. So, what is the answer and why has  it not been found yet? 

Games Are to Blame

“Playing violent video games is to an adolescent’s violent behavior what smoking tobacco is to lung cancer,” said Senator Hilary Clinton in 2005. Senator Joseph Lieberman referred to violent video games as “digital poison.”  

As different studies and experiments were conducted throughout the years, those claims have turned into a national debate.  A seven year study published in 2018 of 17,000 adolescents, ages nine to 19, found that the playing of violent video games led to more physical aggression over time. Even with a study like this, it is difficult to say that video games cause violence.  Stephanie Chan, a sociology professor at Biola University, briefly studied the correlation between video games and violence . 

“There are studies that argue that violent video games contribute to more aggressive behavior, but researchers have a hard time saying it is more than a contributing factor, because there are multiple factors,” said Chan. “It is also unclear which way the arrow goes. Are video games causing children to be more aggressive, or are violent children attracted to those kinds of games?”

Multiple Factors

 Ian Godlesky, a sophomore journalism major at Biola University, plays games of different genres from Rocket League to Call of Duty.  

“I don’t think video games directly cause violence,” Godlesky said. “When it comes to violence and people try to tie it into video games, I think it comes from someone else’s background prior to playing the video games.” 

A report published in 2016 conducted a cross-sectional experiment that found a correlation between violent video games and aggressive behavior in children. The study looked at a group of children, 49% male and 51% female, and also looked at other contributing factors, such as ethnic background, parental enforcement, parental attachment and other variables. Researchers found that children who played violent video games were more likely to act violently. However, the study also showed that contributing factors added to this aggressive behavior. A correlation between these variables and attraction to violent video games were found as a result. Researchers who conducted this study concluded that social and family variables had more of an influence on a child’s aggressive behavior than a violent video game did. 

Christians and Violent Video Games

Is it bad for Christians to play violent video games? There is no ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to this question. Philippians 4:8 says, “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” We are called to guard our hearts as well as our thoughts. 

“I think the fact that we are Christians doesn’t have a whole lot to do with it, because for the most part, video games are neutral,” said sophomore business major and vice president of Biola University’s eSports club Mark Gieser. “In terms of how we use them, that’s the part that matters.”

 Just like technology, a person cannot say all technology is good or bad. In the end, it is up to an individual whether playing a violent video game will affect you positively or negatively. 

Related Posts

Press Release: The Point wins several awards at CCMA banquet

Retrospective

Taking Heart: A Nurse’s Ministry as a Patient

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

Violent videogames should worry us (but shouldn’t be banned)

Senior Lecturer, Research Unit in Media Studies, Monash University

Disclosure statement

Andy Ruddock does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Monash University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

The Connecticut town of Southington last week introduced a videogames return program , offering a $25 gift card to parents who wanted to rid their households of violent titles.

The program comes in the wake of the December 14 shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown – roughly 50km south west of Southington – which claimed the lives of 20 children and six staff members.

The main aim of the “buy-back” initiative is to create a forum where the media’s role in cultures of violence can be discussed. It is not an attempt to demonise games or the people who play them.

School officials recognise violence as a complicated social problem. They are aware that the media violence debate is but a strand of a much bigger conversation on the causes of the real thing .

The Southington buy-back scheme demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the lessons of research on the effects of playing violent videogames. It finds unlikely allies within the games community, as gamers have stepped forward to consider what a love of violent videogames really means , after Newtown.

In this sense, while elements of the National Rifle Association (NRA) seek to divert attention from the role that gun ownership plays in mass murder, gamers appear more willing to grasp the JFK nettle , asking what they can do for their country .

Right after the Sandy Hook massacre, the NRA pointed an accusing finger at the videogames industry . Their position has attracted congressional support . One reaction to these developments has been to argue that studies on the effects of videogame violence on gamers are inconclusive .

They are not.

In 2010, the noted effects researcher Craig Anderson was lead author of a survey which carefully analysed the results of 130 studies on videogame violence. Anderson’s findings were quite clear.

There is reliable evidence that a long-term diet of violent game playing leads to an increase in real-life aggression. The size of the effects noted in these studies were small, but statistically and socially significant.

In other words, gaming violence isn’t the major cause of real-world violence, but it probably is enough of a catalyst to warrant concern. All the more so because while many things can provoke aggression – for instance, non-violent games can do the same thing if they are frustratingly difficult to play – violent videogames are designed to spark aggressive responses.

At the same time, Anderson and colleagues cautioned that the policy implications of these findings are unclear.

First, where the research addresses aggression, social anxieties are focused on physical violence. In this way, most of what we know about (aggression) doesn’t directly address that which worries us most (physical violence).

Second, it may also be that videogame violence also has a range of positive effects. The problem, in this regard, is that there is a bias in effects studies toward looking for the damage games can cause among some groups.

In either case, the confident conclusion that videogame violence is bad for a significant number of people does not imply prohibition. Instead, Anderson argues that videogame violence is an environmental risk that has to be managed.

The problem, then, is that the research on videogame violence does not lend itself to quick and easy, crowd-pleasing policy action. In the resultant political vacuum, it’s been interesting to see gaming insiders step up to reflect on their role in glamorising guns .

Games reviewers have challenged the industry and its consumers to take action. The games industry has been accused of playing into the hands of the NRA, by becoming over-reliant on violence as a quick and easy narrative device.

This laziness has been criticised as an abrogation of creative responsibility; a failure of games and gaming as a form of creative expression.

Perhaps the most chilling exemplar here has been the collusion between the games and gun industries, where the former has become a product placement vehicle for the latter .

Approaching gaming as an art form, games reviewers have called for the industry to take more responsibility in making the genre about expression, rather than commerce.

This mirrors the argument put forward by MIT media scholar Henry Jenkins, in the wake of the 1999 Columbine Massacre which claimed 13 lives. There, too, first-person shooter games were identified as catalysts for mass murder.

Jenkins argued against banning games, but acknowledged there were reasons to worry about the prevalence of violence in them. The trouble with most gaming violence, for Jenkins, was that it was boring.

Gamers were offered the same scenarios and options time and time again, which meant that the genre rarely fulfilled its unique capacity to make users reflect on the morality of the choices they made.

Jenkins argued that videogames could spark a productive conversation about the motivations toward violence, and the fact that they rarely did was cause for concern indeed.

This is why the positions being taken by the Southington school system and the gaming community are so smart. Reviewers who are, in the end, part of a promotional machine that popularises the gaming industry, are exploring how they can become part of the solution by embracing a position as part of the problem.

By doing so, they enable a dialogue with people who are quite legitimately concerned about violent videogames – including parents and teachers in Southington.

Together, these groups have set a leadership standard for a debate on media and violence that might actually achieve something.

• Media violence
• Sandy Hook shootings
• Video games

Faculty of Law - Academic Appointment Opportunities

Associate Professor, Occupational Therapy

GRAINS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CHAIRPERSON

Technical Skills Laboratory Officer

Audience Development Coordinator (fixed-term maternity cover)

To Play or Not to Play: The Great Debate About Video Games

Two recent studies shed light on whether video games are good or bad for kids.

With more than 90 percent of American kids playing video games for an average of two hours a day, whether that's a good idea is a valid question for parents to ask. Video games, violent ones especially, have caused such concern that the issue of whether the sale or rental of such games to children should be prohibited was brought before the Supreme Court. 

In 2011, the Supreme Court ruled that video games, like plays, movies and books, qualify for First Amendment protection. “Video games,” the court declared, “communicate ideas – and even social messages.” But that didn’t stop the debate. Real-life tragedies continue to bring attention to the subject, like the revelation that the Sandy Hook Elementary School gunman was an avid video game player . Parents seeking an easy answer to whether video games are good or bad won’t find one, and two recent studies illustrate why. 

While many studies have made a connection between violent video games and aggression in adolescents, research published in August in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found that teens who played mature-rated violent video games were also more likely to engage in drug and alcohol use, dangerous driving and risky sexual behavior. 

[Read:  Read More, Play More: Simple Steps to Success for Today’s Children .]

Researchers evaluated more than 5,000 male and female teenagers between ages 13 and 18 over the course of four years and discovered that those who played violent video games were more rebellious and eager to take risks. The effect was greatest among those who played the most as well as those who played games with antisocial main characters. 

But a study published in August in Pediatrics of nearly 5,000 girls and boys ages 10 to 15 revealed that children who played video games for less than an hour a day were better adjusted than children who either played no video games or played for three or more hours a day. These children were found to have fewer emotional problems and less hyperactivity, and they were more sociable overall. Video games, the study suggests, play a very small part in children’s lives when compared to such influences as a child’s family, school relationships and economic background. 

So are video games harmful to children? “It depends on the content of the game and the outcome of interest,” says Marina Krcmar, an associate professor of communication at Wake Forest University. “Violent games have been found to be associated with aggressive outcomes, increases in hostility and aggressive cognitions.” There are several factors that may explain this. 

[Read:  7 Facts About Child Life Specialists .]

First, there are no negative consequences for bad behavior. Players are rewarded for violence with points, reaching a higher level or obtaining more weapons. And, Krcmar adds, players actively commit violence rather than passively watch it, as they may do through other mediums such as movies and television. 

“Another issue is that our daily behaviors and interactions actually change our brains – that’s why we encourage kids to study and read," Krcmar says. Research presented at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America in 2011 examined the neurological activity of a group of men who did not typically play violent video games but did so for the study over the course of one week, while a control group played none. MRI scans revealed that those who played the violent video games had less activity in the brain areas involved in controlling emotion and aggressive behavior. The control group showed no brain changes at all. “Keep in mind that these were players randomly assigned to play the games, not players who actively chose to do so,” Krcmar says. “We can’t argue here that people who seek out violent games are more aggressive to begin with.” 

The disadvantage of video games, other experts point out, is the simple fact that time spent playing them is time not spent doing such activities as reading a book, playing outside or engaging with friends. But that’s not to say all video games are bad. There are positives to consider, too. 

“Video game play is associated with improvements in hand-eye coordination, faster reaction times, improved visuospatial skill and peripheral awareness, while some educational games can also improve math, spelling and reading skills,” Krcmar says. 

[Read:  How Your TV Is Making You Sick .]

A report published in the January issue of American Psychologist points out that shooter games, where split-second decision-making and attention to rapid change is necessary, can improve cognitive performance, while all genres of video games enhance problem-solving skills. And despite the belief that it’s a socially isolating activity, one survey found that more than 70 percent of people who play video games do so with a friend, either cooperatively or competitively. 

“Video games are a wonderful teaching tool,” says Brad Bushman, professor of communication and psychology at The Ohio State University. Computer scientists from the University of California–San Diego recently revealed that children ages 8 to 12 who played a video game they developed that teaches how to code – for either four hours over four weeks or 10 hours over seven days – were successfully able to write code by hand in Java. 

So what should parents do? Monitor content and the amount of time spent on video games, Krcmar advises. And Bushman warns that you shouldn't let your children play age-inappropriate video games. “Video games rated M for 'mature audience 17 and older' should not be played by children under 17," he says. And remember: “The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no more than two hours of entertainment screen time per day for children 2 to 17, and no screen time for children under 2," Bushman says. This applies to video games as well.

Tags: video games , television , children's health , parenting

Most Popular

Best Hospitals

health disclaimer »

Disclaimer and a note about your health ».

Your Health

A guide to nutrition and wellness from the health team at U.S. News & World Report.

You May Also Like

The afterburn effect to burn calories.

Cedric X. Bryant April 16, 2024

How to Fix Bad Posture

Paul Wynn April 11, 2024

Time Blindness ADHD Productivity Tools

Claire Wolters April 11, 2024

The Best Supplements to Build Muscle

David Levine and Elaine K. Howley April 11, 2024

10 Ways to Calm Yourself Down

Stacey Colino April 10, 2024

D-Mannose for UTI: Is It a Cure?

Claire Wolters April 10, 2024

Hot Yoga for Depression

Jake Panasevich April 4, 2024

Should Kids Take Multivitamins?

Elaine K. Howley April 2, 2024

Nervous Breakdowns: Signs and Symptoms

Heidi Godman and Paul Wynn April 1, 2024

How to Stop Keto Without Gaining Weight

Elaine K. Howley April 1, 2024

• Human Editing
• Free AI Essay Writer
• AI Outline Generator
• AI Paragraph Generator
• Paragraph Expander
• Essay Expander
• Literature Review Generator
• Research Paper Generator
• Thesis Generator
• Paraphrasing tool
• AI Rewording Tool
• AI Sentence Rewriter
• AI Rephraser
• AI Paragraph Rewriter
• Summarizing Tool
• AI Content Shortener
• Plagiarism Checker
• AI Detector
• AI Essay Checker
• Citation Generator
• Reference Finder
• Book Citation Generator
• Legal Citation Generator
• Journal Citation Generator
• Reference Citation Generator
• Scientific Citation Generator
• Source Citation Generator
• Website Citation Generator
• URL Citation Generator
• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• AI Writing Guides
• AI Detection Guides
• Citation Guides
• Grammar Guides
• Paraphrasing Guides
• Plagiarism Guides
• Summary Writing Guides
• STEM Guides
• Humanities Guides
• Language Learning Guides
• Coding Guides
• Top Lists and Recommendations
• AI Detectors
• AI Writing Services
• Coding Homework Help
• Citation Generators
• Editing Websites
• Essay Writing Websites
• Language Learning Websites
• Math Solvers
• Paraphrasers
• Plagiarism Checkers
• Reference Finders
• Spell Checkers
• Summarizers
• Tutoring Websites

Most Popular

12 days ago

How Educators Can Reinvent Teaching and Learning With AI

11 days ago

Plagiarism vs Copyright

13 days ago

Do Humanities Researchers Read Everything They Cite?

14 days ago

How To Cite A Lecture in MLA

How to cite a source with no author, why teens should not be allowed to play violent video games essay sample, example.

Times when children would spend their entire free time playing with peers in the streets have mostly gone. Modern children and teenagers prefer calmer forms of entertainment, such as watching television, or in a large degree, playing video games. Although video games can contribute to a child’s development, many of them, unfortunately, are extremely violent. Moreover, games propagating murder and violence, such as Mortal Kombat, Outlast, Grand Theft Auto, and so on, are popular and are being advertised everywhere, making teenagers willing to play them; the fact that they are marked by the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) does not help much. However, considering the nature of such games, they should not be allowed for teens to play.

For the human brain, there is no big difference between a real-life situation, and an imaginary one; this is why we get upset even if we think about something unpleasant. For children and teens, who usually have a rich imagination, everything is even more intense. Virtual experiences for them may feel as real as daily life; this happens due to advanced technologies, making computer graphics look extremely close to reality, and also because players take a first-person role in the killing process (often with the view “from a character’s eyes”). If they would passively watch a violent game, it would make less harm than acting as a character who makes progress through a plot by murdering people and destroying what is in the character’s path. This situation is negative, as a child’s or teen’s brain forms new connections every day—they actually learn and memorize what is going on in their favorite games ( HuffingtonPost ).

Moreover, violent games directly reward violent behavior; many modern games do not simply make make players kill virtual reality characters of other players online, but also grant them with scores (experience) or points for successful acts of violence. These points are usually spent on making a player’s character even more efficient in killing, unlocking new cruel ways of murdering, and so on. Sometimes, players will be even praised directly, verbally; for example, in many online shooters, after conducting a killing, players hear phrases like “Nice shot!” encouraging further violence. This is much worse than watching TV, as TV programs do not offer a reward directly tied to the viewer’s behavior, and do not praise viewers for doing something anti-social ( ITHP ).

According the American Psychological Association, violent video games increase children’s aggression. Dr. Phil McGraw explains, “The number one negative effect is they tend to inappropriately resolve anxiety by externalizing it. So when kids have anxiety, which they do, instead of soothing themselves, calming themselves, talking about it, expressing it to someone, or even expressing it emotionally by crying, they tend to externalize it. They can attack something, they can kick a wall, they can be mean to a dog or a pet.” Additionally, there’s an increased frequency of violent responses from children who play these kinds of video games ( Roanna Cooper ).

Unfortunately, many modern games incorporate violence. Having youth play these video games are dangerous, as teenagers and children usually take a first person role in the killing process, and even get rewarded or praised for doing so. According to numerous studies, this leads to an increase of aggression in them.

John, Laura St. “8 Ways Violent Games Are Bad for Your Kids.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

“The Effects of Violent Video Games. Do They Affect Our Behavior?” ITHP. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

“Children and Violent Video Games.” Dr. Phil.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

Follow us on Reddit for more insights and updates.

Comments (0)

Welcome to A*Help comments!

We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.

We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More from Best Persuasive Essay Examples

May 28 2023

How does outdoor exercises impact our health and well-being? Essay Sample, Example

Should Screen Time Be Limited? Essay Sample, Example

Why Video Games are Good for the Brain. Essay Sample, Example

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

Banning Video Games-Pros & Cons for Excellent Essay/Speech

Introduction.

Video games are a multi-billion-dollar industry that has skyrocketed in popularity over the years. Video games are produced for all age groups, ranging from children to old adults. Because of this extensive fan base and variety, video games have become a huge part of our culture today.

However, with every great thing, there is always criticism and controversy. There has been a growing debate over whether video games should be banned or not. This is an un-debatable issue because there are both pros and cons to banning any entertainment material, no matter how destructive it may be to society.

Let us look at some of the best pros and cons that you can include in your speech or essay to make it great.

Banning Video Games-Pros

Prevent gaming disorder/ video game addiction.

One of the significant pros of banning video games is that it will help prevent video game addiction, also known as gaming disorder. Some gamers lose track of time when playing video games which can lead to health complications. Additionally, children may be encouraged to play violent video games if they are not monitored.

It is not uncommon to see those in their late teens or early twenties go on epic gaming binges where they game for hours without eating or even going to the bathroom. Those suffering from gaming addiction are usually unsuccessful with their careers and relationships.

Promote good time management skills

Another excellent pro of banning video games is that it will promote good time management skills. Many people waste a lot of time playing video games. In addition, being hooked on video games can affect a person’s productivity at work.

Among the adverse effects of video games is time wastage among students. When you are in college or high school, it is very easy to get distracted by your video game and postpone homework assignments or personal study plans. If there were no more video games, students could spend their time doing something productive like studying for exams or catching up with school work.

Improve good morals

Among the cons of video games is that they introduce innocent kids to playing violent video games filled with nudity against society’s ethics. For example, a kid might pick up profanity language from online gamers, which is not good. Banning video games would ensure that the kids have a better outlook on life and positive morals.

You may be interested in our collection of controversial debate topics

Encourage Family Bonding

Another excellent pro to banning video games is allowing parents to bond with their children and be involved in raising them. Kids today spend so much time with video games that they have minimal contact with their parents. Banning video games will result in kids having more quality time with their families.

Prevent the Danger of Health Problems Caused by Video Games

Playing video games has been linked to some health complications. Therefore, banning video games will prevent gamers from developing health issues. Video gamers spend a lot of time sitting in front of the computer, leading to poor health and bad posture.

This can result in back problems, neck problems, headaches, and eye damage, among other issues. If parents knew this, most would be happy to have their kids banned from playing video games.

Video games cause aggressiveness and violent behaviour influenced by what is presented to the kids.

Most video games are very violent, which can cause teens to develop negative behavioural traits such as anger, hostility, depression, nervousness, and anxiety.

These issues have been found to elevate among those who frequently play video games. Banning video games will reduce the risks of teens developing behavioural problems.

We also have a list of debate topics that are appropriate for kids

Reduce academic failure in students by removing distractions

Video gaming is a major distraction to students since it takes time away from studying. Kids play video games to pass time and eventually get distracted from doing homework or concentrating on their studies. This results in poor academic performance among students who spend more time gaming than studying.

If this habit is not curbed, there is a high risk of these kids who play video games dropping out of school or failing their exams since they cannot make good use of the allocated time.

The above pro illustrates why banning video gaming in schools and colleges would help improve the academic performance of students.

Develop other skills

Playing video games is not only a waste of time, but it also causes preoccupation, which results in kids neglecting other essential life skills such as cooking and housekeeping.

Banning video games would force people who play them to develop these skills, which will enable them to become independent adults in the future.

Develop a healthy adolescent lifestyle

Playing video games can be very addictive, especially for adolescents who like new challenges that keep emerging with every level you pass. It is not uncommon to see players who stay up all night playing games. Banning video gaming will reduce the risk of addiction amongst kids and teenagers as they learn to balance playtime with other priorities in life.

Develop self-discipline

A significant advantage of banning video games is that it reduces preoccupation, which will then help develop self-discipline amongst players. Self-discipline is critical for any person wanting to succeed in life as it ensures that you don’t neglect other important things in life, such as education and personal development.

Our collection of entertaining debate topics is sure to keep your audience entertained

Banning Video Games-Cons

Loss of employment.

With the video game industry at a loss for profit, they have begun to turn towards comic books, novels, and movies. This has caused a significant increase in revenue in these industries as well. In fact, many of today’s most popular comic book heroes started on television or in movie theatres. For example, Superman and Ironman are now household names, both having been around for decades. Many of today’s popular computer games were based on or inspired by these characters. It is clear that if the video game industry is banned outright, it will take over a billion dollars away from these other struggling entertainment industries.

Loss of Revenue

The video game industry has billions of dollars in annual revenue; if this ban is passed, there will be far-reaching consequences on the economy. The loss of thousands of jobs and income will hurt the rest of the economy because many companies rely on video games to stay afloat.

In today’s economy, many countries are facing an economic crisis. The United States is quickly approaching a point in which the government will be unable to continue paying its people working jobs. Right now, the free market gives us two choices: cut salaries or find new income sources. Many voters would prefer to stay employed instead of searching for another job in this tough economy. When a new job comes along, it will either require less skill or pay significantly less money. We are already suffering enough from the recent economic crisis and don’t need to put ourselves at risk of losing even more jobs if video games are taken away.

You may also want to check cause and effect essay topics

Loss of Other Jobs that Depend on Video Games

Video game development is not the only way to make money. In fact, there are millions of jobs within the video game industry that can be saved. Video game testers and programmers are just two of many valuable employees who could lose their jobs if this ban occurs. At-risk would also be all other related industries such as movie theatres, comic book stores, and webcomic sites. Even on-demand entertainment services are at risk because many have come to rely on video games for additional revenue.

Video game developers create many types of jobs for people from all walks of life. Video game testers are responsible for checking if a game is ready to be sold in stores. Testers make sure that the gameplay works and that there aren’t any glitches or bugs in the program. These workers have an invaluable role in making certain video games work properly before they hit store shelves.

There are many more industries than just the video game industry that will be affected if this ban is passed. We must protect the jobs of millions of hardworking and skilled individuals who have nothing to do with violent video games. Additionally, there are so many other ways we can begin to make a positive change in our world without banning an entire entertainment option from society.

Loss of Social Connectivity

In the future, we may not be able to sit down with our friends to play a game of Halo; we might have nothing more than board games or card games to look forward to. Some people may question, “Why don’t we just leave the video game industry alone and let other industries take care of themselves.” But some things are more important than money; children’s health is one of them. The US judicial system would do well to remember what is most dear to the American people before deciding on an important issue.

Perhaps someone may argue that banning violent games does not mean we are taking away their hope for a brighter future; they can still use the internet, read books and newspapers, play chess, or do whatever else they would like to do. The problem is that video games offer something more exciting than any other option. Video games provide a social network that is difficult to describe. Millions of people play these games because they enjoy the competition, and it would be wrong to take that from them.

Throughout history, many great thinkers have had a slow start before becoming great. These people are highly regarded as some of the greatest thinkers ever to live because they could make progress in difficult situations. Video games give the youth of today extraordinary opportunities to connect with others and learn how to succeed in life. Banning these games from society is like banning dreams simply because they sometimes come with a negative influence. We cannot take away one person’s hope for an exciting future merely because they choose the wrong entertainment options.

Rampage and Underground Video Games

The video game industry is here to stay, so we must learn how to deal with it in the best way possible. Banning games from society will have negative impacts; there are millions of copies owned around the world. This ban will not stop people from playing violent video games; instead, it will drive the industry underground where there is no oversight or guarantee that children are being protected. If we allow this to happen, then all of our worst fears about violent video, especially to game players, may soon come true in the real world.

What if one day a child becomes so frustrated with the society that he or she decides to go on a violent rampage because the community has taken away their favourite entertainment option? What other options will they have then? We cannot take away one person’s leisure time just because someone else was harmed by it.

Seeing that video games may be the only viable outlet for some people, society risks pushing them into despair as we take away one of their passions.

The HALO game series is well known for having an extensive collection of games that are all very similar in design yet still provide hours of entertainment and problem-solving skills. This series has been around for more than ten years and has even been adapted into a movie. The way that the game is played is similar to chess because both games reward strategy and thinking ahead; however, they are very different in many aspects. HALO rewards players for strategic thinking, whereas chess does not include any special abilities. One can only assume that you will be halfway decent at either game if you are good at the other.

Two teams of four people each play HALO; one team plays the aliens (Covenant), and the other plays humans (UNSC). Each unit has a specific set of goals that they must complete to win, but we will discuss that more later.

HALO is a game where teamwork reigns supreme. The player who chooses to go at it alone and run around the map killing all enemy players will find themselves quickly overwhelmed by superior numbers. That being said, this concept applies just as strongly in real life; both games teach good values.

More Important Concepts in HALO

Covenant and UNSC : these are the two teams that play against each other; one team will be defending while the other is attacking. The Covenant has something important called the shield world (Halo), which serves as their base of operations, and it is this item that they need to defend at all costs. The UNSC has a giant ship that serves as their base of operations, and this is what they need to capture to win.

UNSC Marine : these are the foot soldiers for the humans; like all military forces, they have a wide range of capabilities from basic riflemen to heavy weapons specialists, pilots, medics, etc. They are also all equipped with jet packs, allowing them to gain an elevation advantage or escape quickly.

Covenant Soldier : they can be thought of as the alien equivalent of a UNSC Marine; they have a wide range of soldiers like riflemen, engineers (who can repair vehicles), and so on. They, too, are equipped with jet packs.

Vehicles : the UNSC has various cars to use, from jeeps, tanks, and bombers to aerial assault vehicles. These are extremely useful when used appropriately in battle.

The Covenant, on the other hand, has only two air-based vehicles: banshees (fast flying units) and ghosts (armoured, fast driving units). This makes them less flexible in terms of attack and allows them to focus on ground-level combat; this also makes the alien units a lot easier to kill.

Battle Rifle : this is the standard rifle for UNSC Marine and one of their best weapon in general as it has near-perfect accuracy at both short and long ranges. The battle rifle machine can zoom in and out to identify the target.

As can be seen, the HALO is an actual video game that teaches children problem-solving skills and collaboration. To execute all these actions, children will need to develop comprehension skills that can be well learned through interaction with those around them. As a result, banning such games will mean that children will lack social skills. Therefore, the game players will have to find an alternative means to interact and collaborate with others. We can see that in this way, the creativity of children will be negatively affected.

You may want to check our collection of essay topics, such as those expository essays

Infringement on the Freedom of Choice

When parents burn these games, they are in effect denying their children fundamental freedom of choice. The law is very clear regarding this matter; it states that you should never make any individual do anything against their will as it constitutes an infringement on the said person’s freedoms. Therefore, if your child is not interested in playing video games, it is your responsibility to identify what they are interested in and then try to introduce them into the world of video games.

If you insist on burning the video game industry despite this fact, remember that many other consequences may be felt not only by your child but also by the general society at large.

Theft and High Crime Rates

Indeed, children who aren’t allowed to play video games will have a lot of time on their hands, which may inadvertently lead them to commit crimes such as stealing. Studies show that those who use the internet for evil purposes are more likely to steal than those who do not (Chao).

Theft is another con of banning video, primarily due to job loss. As many people lose their jobs, they will have to seek other means of sustaining their livelihoods. Some of these jobless people who might not be lucky enough to secure another job will resort to stealing. Therefore, banning video games is a disadvantage for society.

In conclusion, we can say that video games are both good and evil in society. Many people depend on video games for survival. The industry has employed many people, and as such, it generates high revenues for different countries. On the other hand, if children are left to play too many video games, they will become lazy. Therefore, it is advisable to moderate video games in society.

Lastly, in case you still do not know where to start, our ivy league writers are ready to step in and ace the speech/essay for you. All you need to do is click the green button below!

Similar Posts

How to Write a Good Conclusion (With Examples)

Do you always wonder how you will best conclude your essay? To some students, this is by far the most challenging part of the essay. They find it even more difficult than choosing a great essay topic, stating a thesis, or even writing a good essay outline. But don’t worry, we will guide you…

Top 150 Debate Topics for Kids

Debate topics for kids can be fun, and they give children the opportunity to learn more about an issue, debate their viewpoint with others or simply be creative. A good debate topic will get a child thinking and also introduce that child to new vocabulary words. This article will provide you with 150 debate topics that are appropriate for kids…

5 Examples of Evaluative Essays

As the name implies, an evaluation essay evaluates anything – typically an idea, a work of art, or a product. Evaluation essays are common in the academic world. Writing an evaluation essay or evaluation paper is a valuable skill that will be useful for you in your studies and future career. There are many different…

How to Make an Essay Longer: Proven

Writing a long essay is not an easy task to do. Most students find it hard to write longer papers than shorter ones because they lack the knowledge on how they should be written and published. Essay writing is essential in academic work since this is what assesses students. But, writing a long paper requires…

Headings in Essays -A Definitive Guide and Examples

Essay titles are not just for organization. They can be used to create a sense of progression, highlight key points and provide visual interest. This article will cover the basic types of essays, title examples of each type, characteristics of good titles, and much more. Why are Headings Important? The following are reasons why you…

Top 150 Cause and Effect Essay Topics

A cause is an event that leads to the occurrence of something, while effects can be outcomes or consequences. There are various kinds of causes and effects, which could vary depending on the situation. The following is a list of cause-and-effect essay topics that are general enough to be of interest to a variety of audiences…

Home — Essay Samples — Entertainment — Video Games — Video Games: A Sport or Not

Video Games: a Sport Or not

• Categories: Video Games

About this sample

Words: 689 |

Published: Jan 31, 2024

Words: 689 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, definition and criteria for a sport, video games and their competitive elements, factors that distinguish video games from traditional sports, arguments against video games being considered a sport, counterarguments and rebuttals.

• Physical exertion
• Competitive nature
• Organized structure and rules
• Skill requirement
• Blomberg, R. (2019). Video Games Can Never Be Sport. Huffpost. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/video-games-sport-no_n_5bec5f35e4b0a043787eceeb
• Bromberg, M. (2020). What IS a Sport? And Why Does It Matter? ABC News. Retrieved from https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/sport-matter/story?id=67409964
• WHO (2019). WHO | Physical Activity. WHO. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/physical-activity
• Norris, E. (2021). Esports’ global revenue will break $1 billion in 2020. Medium. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@blakepanzinoesports/esports-global-revenue-will-break-1-billion-in-2020-c8c2f608b368

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Entertainment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

5 pages / 2086 words

2 pages / 831 words

1 pages / 505 words

2 pages / 998 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Video Games

Video games have become an integral part of modern society, with millions of people engaging in gaming activities on a regular basis. The prevalence of video games raises important questions about their impact on individuals, [...]

Can video games make you smarter is a question that has sparked considerable interest and debate in recent years. Video games, once regarded solely as a form of entertainment, have evolved into complex interactive experiences [...]

The notion that video games cause violence has been a topic of debate and concern for many years. However, a wealth of research challenges this belief, suggesting that the relationship between video games and violent behavior is [...]

Video games have become an integral part of modern society, with millions of people across the globe engaging in gaming activities. Despite the widespread popularity of video games, they are often criticized for their negative [...]

Whether or not you are a drum player, drumming on a computer sometimes could be very fun. It is a great way to cut your time when you’re bored or you want to have some fun with your friends. Moreover, those drummers who are [...]

Mobile gaming is quite popular and it started with the first ever mobile game Tetris, this game was launched on the Hagenuk MT – 2000 phone in 1994. Although this was the first ever game it wasn’t as popular as Snake, this was [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Listening Tests
• Academic Tests
• General Tests
• IELTS Writing Checker
• IELTS Writing Samples
• Speaking Club
• IELTS AI Speaking Test Simulator
• Latest Topics
• Vocabularying
• 2024 © IELTS 69

online games should be banned. do you agree or disagree?

IELTS essay online games should be banned. do you agree or disagree?

• Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
• ? One main idea per paragraph
• Include an introduction and conclusion
• Support main points with an explanation and then an example
• Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
• Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
• Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
• Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
• Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
• Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
• Check your writing for errors
• Answer all parts of the question
• ? Present relevant ideas
• Fully explain these ideas
• Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
• ? Currently is not available
• Meet the criteria
• Doesn't meet the criteria
• 5 band wealthy nations and poorer nations There are so many people in the earth, there are wealthy nations and poorer nations as well. The wealthy nations have a lot of money to spend and the poorer nations have a lot of money to make. In this case the poorer nations government don't want to give people there money, that make people's statu ...
• 5 band as more and more people move to city area Nowdays young people who leaves in rural area are moving to cities for their job or better education. This essay shall cover the reality behind it as well as consequences of this phenomenon, and also suggest some measures to improve situation. To begin with, the major reason is young people found t ...
• Learn a language, and you’ll avoid a war. Arab Proverb
• 5.5 band College should provide free education for everyone? Universities must provide free education for students who are really willing to study and come from weak classess, same way even they must charge fees because they must run the insitutute and maintain well for years and payments must be given who educate them. Firstly I agree that public and private ...
• 5.5 band Good situation and bad situation In this world of unknown, plant is divided into two halves whether to accept bad situation or not to agree over the same and try harder to overcome those difficult times. Both of the point have a strong hold looking over the idea of accepting the bad situation as fate. Accepting the bad times helps ...
• If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head. If you talk to him in his own language, that goes to his heart. Nelson Mandela
• 5 band Despite the advances made in agriculture, a tangible per cent of world population still suffer from famine. What are the primary causes of that? What solutions can you suggest? Despite the advances made in agriculture, a tangible per cent of world population still suffer from famine. This essay will examine the main causes of starvation around the Earth and possible solutions of this problem. The two main causes are remote location of some countries and frequent devastati ...
• 5.5 band Government in richer nations should take more responsibility to help poorer nations. What extend Achievement in international trade, health index and all round education of citizens development as well as sustainability of a country however it is impossible for a less supplementation to excel in those fields without support from where the countries therefore I completely agree with the view tha ...
• Learning a new language is becoming a member of the club – the community of speakers of that language. Frank Smith

• India Today
• Business Today
• Reader’s Digest
• Harper's Bazaar
• Brides Today
• Cosmopolitan
• Aaj Tak Campus
• India Today Hindi

Games people play: Should online gaming and gambling be banned or regulated?

Many state governments have been on a spree to ban online gaming. however, one of the bans has been overturned by the court and in other cases, the government is considering regulatory frameworks that make online gaming safer. regulating online games is a challenge globally..

Listen to Story

A fortnight ago, the Karnataka government banned online gambling in the state. The ban extended to all kinds of gambling, including “any act of risking money or otherwise on the unknown result of an event including on a game of skill”.

This demolishes the subtle difference between what used to be categorised as a “game of chance”, where the outcome is not based on anything that the players do, versus a “game of skill”, wherein, the outcome may be based on the skills of the players involved.

Karnataka is not the first government to ban online gambling. In fact, even before ban on online gambling, we had seen ban on even video games. On November 19, 1981, President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, banned video games in the country through a presidential decree, making the Philippines the first nation to forbid video games.

Then again, in July 2016, the then president of the Philippines announced that he planned to stop the proliferation of online gambling in the country and revoke existing licences.

He specifically targeted Pagcor, a popular online gambling game. He blamed it for “proliferation of gambling activities all over the country.” He later changed his stance and went ahead with regulating the gaming industry. This earned him significant tax revenues.

However, a few years later, the move snowballed into a geopolitical issue with their not-so-friendly neighbour China breathing down fire on the Philippines for not banning these gambling apps as they made their way into China. President Duterte made it clear that banning of such online games would have considerable negative impact on the Philippines economy.

However, this again changed in April of this year. The Philippines banned online gambling not because they were harming the youth or the general population, but because the live streaming of the games was choking the internet.

Closer home, we saw a string of attempts to ban online gaming or gambling. The words gaming and gambling are being interchangeably used and essentially imply playing online games after betting on the outcome with real money. Starting with Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Odisha, Sikkim and Nagaland have also banned online games that involve any money.

The bans had different hues with some states banning all kinds of online games that involved betting. Others maintained the fine difference between game of chance and game of skill.

However, in all cases, they were driven by the need to protect ordinary citizens who were falling for the instantaneous, anywhere, anytime gambling access that were ruining lives and families leading to suicides. As a responsible government, one has to address the situation. It is not an easy issue to resolve, as the governments have been accused of interfering with the lives of people.

Businesses that provided such services and built up multi-billion-dollar valuations, have taken up cudgels against the state governments for banning online gambling. In fact, the ban of online gambling by the government of Tamil Nadu was appealed against in the Madras High Court.

Unlike the case of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, the Tamil Nadu law did not put a blanket ban on offering online games. Online games involving skill continued to be exempted from the application of the restrictions under the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act. However, the honourable high court of Tamil Nadu struck down the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act terming it as “excessive and disproportionate” and being ultra vires.

We now see the gaming industry promptly approaching the Karnataka High Court to appeal against the recent Karnataka amendments to the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 that banned all forms of gambling in the state, including online gambling.

India’s online gaming industry is expected to reach $3 billion by 2022. In the last five years, the sector has attracted over $350 million in venture capital investments from many marquee investors such as Tiger Global, Sequoia, Raine, Tencent, Kalaari, Chryscapital and Matrix.

Naturally, the industry is not happy and those who were getting employment due to the gaming industry are also not happy. There have been many counter-arguments such as the need to restore the differentiation between the game of chance and game of skill, and to enable the game of skill to continue.

Arguments have been put forth that even trading in stock market is betting, and is akin to a game of chance. Also, online gaming is recreational and was a relief to many who were locked down in their homes during the Wuhan Covid pandemic.

So, should the state really ban online gaming in India? Should the government be telling adults what to do and what not to do when such people are not harming anyone else and minding their own business? Should governments interfere with people’s lives?

The questions do carry weight. Just like the Philippines came back to allow online gaming by providing a regulated environment, states in India are also considering regulations that can enable online gaming to operate with safeguards.

Telangana is now working on a policy to allow players to operate in the state with safeguards. However, it would not be easy to do such fine policy tight-walk in the matter, given the civil-society pressures that build up every time there is a suicide due to online gaming.

Here again is a challenge that is being posed by technology to the regulators, wherein regulatory frameworks are a step behind technology. Online gaming like many things borne out of technological developments can provide joy and also destroy people and families. It would be interesting to see how we evolve as a society to create a safe operating environment for online gaming.

(This article has been authored by Dr Jaijit Bhattacharya, President, Centre for Digital Economy Policy Research . Views expressed are personal.) Published By: Chanchal Chauhan Published On: Oct 12, 2021 --- ENDS ---

IELTS Practice.Org

IELTS Practice Tests and Preparation Tips

• Band 9 IELTS Essays

Computer And Online Gaming Should Be Banned At School | Band 9 IELTS Essay Sample

by Manjusha Nambiar · July 18, 2019

Computer and online gaming should be banned for students at school as they have no educational value.

Here is a band 9 IELTS essay on this topic. Need help with IELTS writing? Get your IELTS essays, letters and reports corrected by me.

Band 9 IELTS essay sample

Nowadays, computer and online games are extremely popular among students. Some people insist that children should be prohibited from playing these games at school because they do not serve any educational purpose. I do not quite agree with this view. In my opinion, games should not be banned because they do offer certain benefits and some of them are educational. However, teachers should limit the amount of time children can play such games.

To begin with, young people are fascinated by electronic gadgets. They play games whenever they get an opportunity. This certainly is bad because playing online games for long hours affects the health and academic progress of students. Even so, banning them at school is not the solution because they do offer many benefits to students. Computer games help children unwind after a boring lecture or practical session. Nowadays, children are under tremendous academic pressure. They need a short break every few hours. If they are made to sit in the classroom for hours on end listening to lectures, their grades will only suffer. Asking them to play outside is possible only during favourable weather conditions. Inclement weather will confine kids to the classroom and during those times, online games provide them the much needed relaxation. Also, playing online games allows them to enhance their cognitive and problem solving skills. These games require a great deal of concentration and can actually boost the brain development of children when played in moderation.

However, it is important for teachers to limit the amount of time children get to play these games. Studies have shown that sitting in front of a computer or a console can cause eyestrain, headache and several other health problems. Also, excessive gaming may make children aloof and they may refuse to socialize with their peers, friends and neighbours. This will hurt their self confidence and also divert their attention from their studies. Hence, gaming should be permitted for only limited amounts of time.

In conclusion, online games educate and entertain kids; hence, they should not be banned at schools. However, it is important to limit the amount of time children can play online.

Do you have an essay on this topic? Submit it below in the comments for a free band score estimate.

Tags: band 9 essay band 9 essay sample ielts band 9 essay

Manjusha Nambiar

Hi, I'm Manjusha. This is my blog where I give IELTS preparation tips.

• Next story  Now We See A Lot Of Comfort In The Life Of Children | Band 9 IELTS Essay Sample
• Previous story  Positive And Negative Effects Of Technology Through Mass Media | Band 9 IELTS Essay Sample

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

• Academic Writing Task 1
• Agree Or Disagree
• Band 7 essay samples
• Band 8 Essay Samples
• Band 8 letter samples
• Discuss Both Views
• Grammar exercises
• IELTS Writing
• Learn English
• OET Letters
• Sample Essays
• Sample Letters
• Writing Tips

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

IELTS Practice

Advertisement

Supported by

Critic’s Pick

‘Civil War’ Review: We Have Met the Enemy and It Is Us. Again.

In Alex Garland’s tough new movie, a group of journalists led by Kirsten Dunst, as a photographer, travels a United States at war with itself.

• Share full article

‘Civil War’ | Anatomy of a Scene

The writer and director alex garland narrates a sequence from his film..

“My name is Alex Garland and I’m the writer director of ‘Civil War’. So this particular clip is roughly around the halfway point of the movie and it’s these four journalists and they’re trying to get, in a very circuitous route, from New York to DC, and encountering various obstacles on the way. And this is one of those obstacles. What they find themselves stuck in is a battle between two snipers. And they are close to one of the snipers and the other sniper is somewhere unseen, but presumably in a large house that sits over a field and a hill. It’s a surrealist exchange and it’s surrounded by some very surrealist imagery, which is they’re, in broad daylight in broad sunshine, there’s no indication that we’re anywhere near winter in the filming. In fact, you can kind of tell it’s summer. But they’re surrounded by Christmas decorations. And in some ways, the Christmas decorations speak of a country, which is in disrepair, however silly it sounds. If you haven’t put away your Christmas decorations, clearly something isn’t going right.” “What’s going on?” “Someone in that house, they’re stuck. We’re stuck.” “And there’s a bit of imagery. It felt like it hit the right note. But the interesting thing about that imagery was that it was not production designed. We didn’t create it. We actually literally found it. We were driving along and we saw all of these Christmas decorations, basically exactly as they are in the film. They were about 100 yards away, just piled up by the side of the road. And it turned out, it was a guy who’d put on a winter wonderland festival. People had not dug his winter wonderland festival, and he’d gone bankrupt. And he had decided just to leave everything just strewn around on a farmer’s field, who was then absolutely furious. So in a way, there’s a loose parallel, which is the same implication that exists within the film exists within real life.” “You don’t understand a word I say. Yo. What’s over there in that house?” “Someone shooting.” “It’s to do with the fact that when things get extreme, the reasons why things got extreme no longer become relevant and the knife edge of the problem is all that really remains relevant. So it doesn’t actually matter, as it were, in this context, what side they’re fighting for or what the other person’s fighting for. It’s just reduced to a survival.”

By Manohla Dargis

A blunt, gut-twisting work of speculative fiction, “Civil War” opens with the United States at war with itself — literally, not just rhetorically. In Washington, D.C., the president is holed up in the White House; in a spookily depopulated New York, desperate people wait for water rations. It’s the near-future, and rooftop snipers, suicide bombers and wild-eyed randos are in the fight while an opposition faction with a two-star flag called the Western Forces, comprising Texas and California — as I said, this is speculative fiction — is leading the charge against what remains of the federal government. If you’re feeling triggered, you aren’t alone.

It’s mourning again in America, and it’s mesmerizingly, horribly gripping. Filled with bullets, consuming fires and terrific actors like Kirsten Dunst running for cover, the movie is a what-if nightmare stoked by memories of Jan. 6. As in what if the visions of some rioters had been realized, what if the nation was again broken by Civil War, what if the democratic experiment called America had come undone? If that sounds harrowing, you’re right. It’s one thing when a movie taps into childish fears with monsters under the bed; you’re eager to see what happens because you know how it will end (until the sequel). Adult fears are another matter.

In “Civil War,” the British filmmaker Alex Garland explores the unbearable if not the unthinkable, something he likes to do. A pop cultural savant, he made a splashy zeitgeist-ready debut with his 1996 best seller “The Beach,” a novel about a paradise that proves deadly, an evergreen metaphor for life and the basis for a silly film . That things in the world are not what they seem, and are often far worse, is a theme that Garland has continued pursuing in other dark fantasies, first as a screenwriter (“ 28 Days Later ”), and then as a writer-director (“ Ex Machina ”). His résumé is populated with zombies, clones and aliens, though reliably it is his outwardly ordinary characters you need to keep a closer watch on.

By the time “Civil War” opens, the fight has been raging for an undisclosed period yet long enough to have hollowed out cities and people’s faces alike. It’s unclear as to why the war started or who fired the first shot. Garland does scatter some hints; in one ugly scene, a militia type played by a jolting, scarily effective Jesse Plemons asks captives “what kind of American” they are. Yet whatever divisions preceded the conflict are left to your imagination, at least partly because Garland assumes you’ve been paying attention to recent events. Instead, he presents an outwardly and largely post-ideological landscape in which debates over policies, politics and American exceptionalism have been rendered moot by war.

‘Civil War’ Is Designed to Disturb You

One thing that remains familiar amid these ruins is the movie’s old-fashioned faith in journalism. Dunst, who’s sensational, plays Lee, a war photographer who works for Reuters alongside her friend, a reporter, Joel (the charismatic Wagner Moura). They’re in New York when you meet them, milling through a crowd anxiously waiting for water rations next to a protected tanker. It’s a fraught scene; the restless crowd is edging into mob panic, and Lee, camera in hand, is on high alert. As Garland’s own camera and Joel skitter about, Lee carves a path through the chaos, as if she knows exactly where she needs to be — and then a bomb goes off. By the time it does, an aspiring photojournalist, Jessie (Cailee Spaeny), is also in the mix.

The streamlined, insistently intimate story takes shape once Lee, Joel, Jessie and a veteran reporter, Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson), pile into a van and head to Washington. Joel and Lee are hoping to interview the president (Nick Offerman), and Sammy and Jessie are riding along largely so that Garland can make the trip more interesting. Sammy serves as a stabilizing force (Henderson fills the van with humanizing warmth), while Jessie plays the eager upstart Lee takes under her resentful wing. It’s a tidily balanced sampling that the actors, with Garland’s banter and via some cozy downtime, turn into flesh-and-blood personalities, people whose vulnerability feeds the escalating tension with each mile.

As the miles and hours pass, Garland adds diversions and hurdles, including a pair of playful colleagues, Tony and Bohai (Nelson Lee and Evan Lai), and some spooky dudes guarding a gas station. Garland shrewdly exploits the tense emptiness of the land, turning strangers into potential threats and pretty country roads into ominously ambiguous byways. Smartly, he also recurrently focuses on Lee’s face, a heartbreakingly hard mask that Dunst lets slip brilliantly. As the journey continues, Garland further sketches in the bigger picture — the dollar is near-worthless, the F.B.I. is gone — but for the most part, he focuses on his travelers and the engulfing violence, the smoke and the tracer fire that they often don’t notice until they do.

Despite some much-needed lulls (for you, for the narrative rhythm), “Civil War” is unremittingly brutal or at least it feels that way. Many contemporary thrillers are far more overtly gruesome than this one, partly because violence is one way unimaginative directors can put a distinctive spin on otherwise interchangeable material: Cue the artful fountains of arterial spray. Part of what makes the carnage here feel incessant and palpably realistic is that Garland, whose visual approach is generally unfussy, doesn’t embellish the violence, turning it into an ornament of his virtuosity. Instead, the violence is direct, at times shockingly casual and unsettling, so much so that its unpleasantness almost comes as a surprise.

If the violence feels more intense than in a typical genre shoot ’em up, it’s also because, I think, with “Civil War,” Garland has made the movie that’s long been workshopped in American political discourse and in mass culture, and which entered wider circulation on Jan. 6. The raw power of Garland’s vision unquestionably owes much to the vivid scenes that beamed across the world that day when rioters, some wearing T-shirts emblazoned with “ MAGA civil war ,” swarmed the Capitol. Even so, watching this movie, I also flashed on other times in which Americans have relitigated the Civil War directly and not, on the screen and in the streets.

Movies have played a role in that relitigation for more than a century, at times grotesquely. Two of the most famous films in history — D.W. Griffith’s 1915 racist epic “The Birth of a Nation” (which became a Ku Klux Klan recruitment tool) and the romantic 1939 melodrama “Gone With the Wind” — are monuments to white supremacy and the myth of the Southern Lost Cause. Both were critical and popular hits. In the decades since, filmmakers have returned to the Civil War era to tell other stories in films like “Glory,” “Lincoln” and “Django Unchained” that in addressing the American past inevitably engage with its present.

There are no lofty or reassuring speeches in “Civil War,” and the movie doesn’t speak to the better angels of our nature the way so many films try to. Hollywood’s longstanding, deeply American imperative for happy endings maintains an iron grip on movies, even in ostensibly independent productions. There’s no such possibility for that in “Civil War.” The very premise of Garland’s movie means that — no matter what happens when or if Lee and the rest reach Washington — a happy ending is impossible, which makes this very tough going. Rarely have I seen a movie that made me so acutely uncomfortable or watched an actor’s face that, like Dunst’s, expressed a nation’s soul-sickness so vividly that it felt like an X-ray.

Civil War Rated R for war violence and mass death. Running time: 1 hour 49 minutes. In theaters.

An earlier version of this review misidentified an organization in the Civil War in the movie. It is the Western Forces, not the Western Front.

How we handle corrections

Manohla Dargis is the chief film critic for The Times. More about Manohla Dargis

Explore More in TV and Movies

Not sure what to watch next we can help..

Even before his new film “Civil War” was released, the writer-director Alex Garland faced controversy over his vision of a divided America  with Texas and California as allies.

Theda Hammel’s directorial debut, “Stress Positions,” a comedy about millennials weathering the early days of the pandemic , will ask audiences to return to a time that many people would rather forget.

“Fallout,” TV’s latest big-ticket video game adaptation, takes a satirical, self-aware approach to the End Times .

“Sasquatch Sunset” follows the creatures as they go about their lives. We had so many questions. The film’s cast and crew had answers .

If you are overwhelmed by the endless options, don’t despair — we put together the best offerings   on Netflix , Max , Disney+ , Amazon Prime  and Hulu  to make choosing your next binge a little easier.

Sign up for our Watching newsletter  to get recommendations on the best films and TV shows to stream and watch, delivered to your inbox.