CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
No. I know friends who have these games, and it completely consumes their lives. Normal teenagers go out to cinemas, go cycling, flirt with girls/boys, but most of my friends spend all their time at home playing on Call of Duty or Halo. And i can tell you, it is doing nothing good for them...
The cinema is so much more beneficial? At least video games are interactive. At least as mentally challenging as chess and more engaging than reading, if we're trying to objectively quantify the merits of things we do for pleasure.
It sounds like your friends have got problems, to be sure, but that often happens with too much of a good thing, or anything, really, in such excess. But if someone sat inside reading Twilight over and over 24/7 you'd think that they have a problem; we wouldn't blame books.
! Really, sir, they are nothing like chess. Chess improves your way of thinking, it is infinitally harder, and more challenging. Your pathetic games are amusing until you've done the same thing over and over, then you go waste more money on something pretty much the same! And no, if i had found a good book, i could spend all day reading it, people wouldn't think that's weird. Just people with small brains who can't handle reading without taking a break. I have tried video games, and in MY opinion, i hate them, for many reasons. You might like them if you want, i'm just saying all my friends have changed for the worse since playing them.
Some games, most notably real-time and turn-based strategy games, are very much like chess except they are far more complicated. I'm not sure how you plan to prove that chess is universally harder and more challenging (that seems like it all comes down to who you are playing), but any way that chess could improve your thinking video games could accomplish equally.
Your pathetic games are amusing until you've done the same thing over and over
You're trying to assert that chess is better than video games and use this in your argument? There is no argument here: chess is not as diverse or unique as video games. If you play chess you really are doing the same thing over and over, while the same cannot be said of someone who plays video games.
then you go waste more money on something pretty much the same!
Anything that brings entertainment and pleasure is hardly a waste of time. On the contrary, your listed cinema at one point as a more valid use of a teenagers time, but (at least here) the cost of two movie tickets and popcorn is equivalent to one video game. The movie will entertain you and your girl for a couple hours, if you're lucky, and then it's done; the video game will provide at least five times that in terms of play time, not to mention replay value, and every video game (from strategy games to run-and-gun shooters) is more interactive than a movie.
And no, if i had found a good book, i could spend all day reading it, people wouldn't think that's weird.
Yet you think it's weird someone might find a good video game and spend all day playing it. Sorry, not weird; you hate it. This doesn't strike your as a hypocritical double standard?
Not hypicrotical, books aren't the same as games! Simple. Instead, you have to go on the attack. Of curse, you see someone who you don't agree with, so you decide to attack. "Oh, theres something perfectly reasonable he just said, ill go contradict him, again, and again, and again." Don't give that BS about "thats what this is site is for."
Oh dear, have you been hitting your head against the wall again? Because you appear to have massive memory loss.
In every debate I've seen you in, you just launch ad hominem when you realize you're too stupid to respond.
And now you call out him on attacks? Chad did not attack you, he made a very logical and valid argument, which completely obliterated your maniacal jibberings. In fact, do you actually know what an attack is?
Oh, why thank you i can really see how weak patronizing and bullying is going to get us far. My two opinions, which seems to have played havoc with our minds, is the simple idea that we should ban cigarettes, and that video games aren't good for you. Now, i fail to comprehend how you can get so worked up over this. I did because of your towering incompetence to realize that A. Smoking should be banned to prevent harm to humans. and that B. Sitting in front of a television staring at flashing images cannot be good for the brain. His argument is not logical. Please explain, because i must have some strong form of autism to not understand how "responsible smoking is OK" makes sense. And sure, video games might be fun, but it is not good for you! Surely you can agree on that. You get away with "yes he admits they're fun" i get away with "but they're not all that good for you"
Seeing as this is about video games, I will only address points concerning this.
B. Sitting in front of a television staring at flashing images cannot be good for the brain.
This is an incorrect interpretation of video games. Video games are all about interaction, and reaction. What you just described was TV, not video games.
Your explanation is akin to me saying "sitting in front of paper staring at ink cannot be good for the brain".
His argument is not logical.
Do you understand what makes an argument logical or illogical?
i must have some strong form of autism
I was thinking that as well.
And sure, video games might be fun, but it is not good for you!
Some games are in fact very good for youn. Play any in depth strategy game, brain trainer, or exercise game, and you'll see.
Nope wrong again buddy. You can interact with it all day long you won't learn anything from it, it won't make you smarter, stronger, won't even improve your reflexes. And don't take a guess on this i searched it up and no it doesn't. Reading books increases your vocabulary, should you choose to use a dictionary for the words you do not know. video games "x,x,x, toggle, toggle jump jump, crouch o,o,o, DAMNIT!" Mostly what happens. Maybe you don't actually own any of these games, but i did. I know how they work, and i know that my eyes began to hurt after hours of staring intensely at the flashing images. Besides, as you so rightly said, violent games is the topic. And they certainly are not good for you. Logic is the basic principles we use to, in this case, to prove the validity of arguments. And, sir, so far you, are the one being illogical. I am saying that violent video games aren't good for you. All you're saying is "well some aren't bad." Tell me why violent video games are good. Please. "Oh, flashing images, fun, entertaining." Well yes, so is lying down and letting someone else do all the work for you. But that is lazy, undignified and shows a strong sense of idleness. There is no good in these games. I see no point in arguing with you. You do't really want an argument, you just want to prove to someone that you're right. Well, keep looking because you're not convincing me.
And don't take a guess on this i searched it up and no it doesn't.
Cite your source.
Reading books increases your vocabulary, should you choose to use a dictionary for the words you do not know.
Yes, I don't dispute that.
ideo games "x,x,x, toggle, toggle jump jump, crouch o,o,o, DAMNIT!" Mostly what happens.
No, that's Call of Duty, Halo, etc. Which actually do improve your reflexes, but it's still not a fair representation of the entire gaming market.
Maybe you don't actually own any of these games,
I do.
I know how they work, and i know that my eyes began to hurt after hours of staring intensely at the flashing images.
You're not supposed to stare intensely for hours, you'd get eye pain if you stared intensely at anything for hours.
Besides, as you so rightly said, violent games is the topic.
Yes, and nothing I've said doesn't apply to violent video games. If you want a list of games that I'm sure you'd enjoy, I'll give you one.
Logic is the basic principles we use to, in this case, to prove the validity of arguments.
Then you'd see that nothing I've said is illogical. You may disagree, but you can't fault the logic.
And, sir, so far you, are the one being illogical
How so?
I am saying that violent video games aren't good for you. All you're saying is "well some aren't bad."
Therefore, SOME should be allowed to play, no? I know you love your arbitrary and harmful prohibition, but if you agree that SOME aren't bad, then there's no reason to ban them.
Tell me why violent video games are good. Please.
I can tell you why SOME violent video games are good. Let's take a game series that I like, called "Civilization".
The aim of civilization is to choose a historical civilization, build them up from nothing, and turn them into a great and prosperous empire. Civilization teaches history, creative thinking, and planning in one entertaining package.
What is wrong with that?
You do't really want an argument, you just want to prove to someone that you're right. Well, keep looking because you're not convincing me.
I saw Jungelson throw down a few well thought out points about religion shortly after joining, entered into a few debates with him since and have entirely changed my opinion of him because of it. It's a frustrating combination of logical fallacies, emotional arguments, and a refusal to admit defeat or concede anything, even when he's obviously giving ground on his original arguments.
Good to know I'm not the only one who has noticed.
I think it's the constant use of "sir" that gives him the impression he is engaging politely in logical discourse, even when he's clearly doing otherwise. =D
I know, some of the things he says makes me think he must be trolling. Comments like "Stop trying to prove me wrong", and, "you're just trying to convince me what is true" must be BS.
I notice you favor the moral high ground the less defensible your original position becomes.
If you don't like debating on the debate site that's just fine; use it however you please. I, however, am going to keep debating on this debate site, particularly when I see something I don't agree with. Like your notion that debating on a debate site is BS, for example.
I am undoubtedly turning your words against you, perhaps you should choose them more carefully if you reply so I can't do so quite as easily and accurately as I did before and am about to do again:
Don't give that BS about "thats what this is site is for."
The topic of discussion here is using a debate site for debating. Either way you look at your statement, calling "thats what this is site is for" BS or calling what I was going to say (debate site is for debating) BS, they both amount to the same thing. I really don't know how I am supposed to look at your statement as meaning anything else, and if you intended it to mean something other than what it says it is still very unfair of you to fault me for not understanding your poor attempt to express your ideas. Be more clear initially instead of disputing my valid interpretations of your gibberish.
Violent video games are extraordinarily addictive. I, myself, have been stuck in that sticky situation where you just CAN'T get off the computer. Therefore, these video games should be banned in order to preserve the productivity of the human race.
I've lost enormous amounts of sleep because I stay up, glued to a good book when I should be resting. I know many people who have suffered the same. Should we ban books?
Sleep lost for a good book? Wonderful! You lost that sleep GAINING information from the book. It's mentally stimulating whilst providing people like us extra information that may help come a general ability test. While violent video games on the other hand? Nothing. Sure, let's talk about how the next generation of Call of Duty will help us, if nothing but the mere fact of hand-eye coordination which would be better developed from Basketball or other ball sports.
Run-and-gun shooters are to video games what trashy romance novels are to books. They're about the lowest of the low. If you sit up at night reading school textbooks, good for you, and I doubt you'll find a video game more informational. However I was talking about reading for pleasure, which has about as much potential to give you new information as The Elder Scrolls or Civilization.
My prefered analogy is chess, however. No parent in their right mind would freak out if they saw their child testing his wits on a game of chess. But any strategy game you could name is like chess only much more complicated, and therefore more difficult to play and master. Yet a double standard exists in this regard. What about the numerous games with puzzle-solving built in (you may be familiar with Zelda)?
Most gamers game because they enjoy the challenge of pitting themselves against AI or other humans. Watching TV or reading a book (for pleasure) is rarely a challenge. Compared to more passive forms of entertainment, video games draw a good level of attention and interaction, and require a substantial bit of skill and wit, more often than not.
Also in this day and age eye-hand coordination on the computer is a much more marketable job skill than eye-hand coordination on the basketball court.
Call of Duty is especially like chess in the respect that you can consider the people on both teams as pieces that the team leader uses to obtain a certain goal (Capture points, plant bombs or whathaveyou) Except that not only is the gameboard not restricted by squares, the pieces have minds of their own.
Now, if i was playing chess and suddenly the squares disappeared and the pieces started moving of their own accord, i'd call that game of chess the hardest i'd ever played.
Granted, you do often find yourself doing the same things over and over in general terms (killing enemies, planting bombs) The very game itself, on a personal and instance driven level is never, EVER the same. Different people bring different mindsets to the game, which necessitates a higher level of critical thinking if your goal is to win the game. Anticipation of opponent advances is something you do in chess and is invaluable on a digital battlefield.
This opinion comes from someone who actively participates on an organized team in a competitive circuit.
I can only speak for the bonuses that videogames have given me mentally. I think and solve problems faster, my interpersonal skills increased as i learned to interact with other people. Verbal skills increased dramatically, as i could not use gestures to convey my ideas. My stutter disappeared and I got smarter. My grades in school dramatically increased due to the critical thinking skills i acquired.
In short, there is nothing wrong with the games themselves. It is the people who play them that make them good or evil. When an imbalanced, potentially dangerous young psychopath pick up Black Ops 2 and starts to really fantasize about killing people, that is not the game's fault. It is the kid's own imbalances that caused the problem.
As long as you can differentiate reality from the game, you are and will continue to be, absolutely fine and possibly enriched.
For someone who starts their debate with LOL then quite contrarily wishes to be taken seriously- You succeed!
But on the other hand I am saying you may find them fun, but children growing up in such environments as to where they are exposed to violence, they will become more used to it, ergo later on in life, violence will not surprise them as much. It's little imbeciles that spend all their time playing COD that thing "yeah, I'll go in the army that looks cool!" Then ask for our sympathy when their legs are blown off because they were too stupid to realise that war, is not cool.
No, video games are like anything else- they must be used in moderation. They are, like it or not, an art form, allowing for interactive storytelling, and a level of immersion unnaccessable in a film or book. The fact that they appeal more than fine art to a general teen audience is beside the point.
Whether or not they are harmful is irrelevant(though I believe that they themselves are not), because they still fall under the category of free speech. We cannot place censors based on our own dislike or bias against something. I, for instance, find many games to be a waste of time. But that doesn't mean I can or should ban them.
Bah, I got my PS2 fixed again so I can now play Sta wars battlefront II so screw whatever I previously said (though I still believe children brought up with a larger presence of violence in the house will in turn become more violent people.)
Though If you are an American citizen, I would like very much for you to explain to me how your country is 'land of the free' given your previous statement about freedom of speech.
First have you ever wondered why there is a lot of porn in Europe, but not a lot of violence? Ever wondered why it's the complete opposite in North America, mainly the U.S?
America, or should I say North America is still young and ignorant like a kid. You see, the reason why America, or the youth, crave for it is because we really haven't experienced it.
Europe has always been in wars against it self, which includes Russia. In WW2, Germany and Russia lost 2 generations of men. 2 GENERATIONS!! Europe has experienced what violence really is.
Another example is my English teacher. He married a Russian women, and she is really nice and funny. But she really disapproves of anything in entertainment that really embraces violence. Her mother watched her father killed in front of her and her siblings at a very young age, back when Russia was part of the Soviet Union.
Unlike Europe, America really hasn't seen or experienced this kind of things. We don't have any ruins like Europe has from war. The only time America really did experience true violence was during 9/11. That was really the only time we really did experience what violence really is.
That is why I hate games like Call of Duty, Battlefield, or any kind of entertainment that embraces violence like that. The youth get a kick from killing, and enjoy all this destruction, and it shouldn't be like that. You're think "well it's just a game, it's not real." but how can you think that this is fun?
I recall quite a few bloody battles in our history, maybe not quite as recently as WWII, but still. We also helped a bit on the European side of WWII and fought our own rather vicious war against Japan concurrently. If Europe is so wholly inclined away from video game violence (they're not; I've met plenty of European FPS gamers) because of their involvement in WWII, I don't see why the US couldn't be the same.
You also seem to assert that there is less violence in Europe because there is more violence in Europe. A little confused on that one.
Also, not a lot of porn in the US? Are you serious?
Yes, incorrectly stated. There is a LOT of pornography in the USA, however one must look towards the figures comparing the amount of ^ to the amount of people in those countries. Then you will find out the exaggerated differences.
First off, video games may cause the person to become addicted to them. Addiction is merely bad. For the mind and soul.
Violent video games teach people the harms of weapons, etc. Although it may seem harmless, psychological studies show that people who play violent video games are more likely to do bad stuff. DUH!
Addiction to videogames comes from extreme enjoyment from performing the act of playing them.
For a long time, I was addicted to reading. Now that doesn't sound bad, does it?
Consider, i didn't have friends, i hardly slept, i paid no attention in school because i was reading constantly from the age of 3 to the age of 15.
Granted, i do have a higher vocabulary than most people i know because of my obsession, but it was hardly healthy. However, no one ever seemed to have a problem with it.
Why do people have a problem with videogames?
Most arguments consist of "kids who play violent videogames become more violent"
I didn't. I don't hurt people and I play violent videogames competitively. I also refuse to believe I'm unique, because I've met thousands of people who play the same games I do competitively and who also, don't hurt people.
In a violent videogame, all that really gets hurt is your ego, occasionally.
It is a case of "nurture vs nature", kids can be easily influence to one activity, they may think such idea be enjoyable, but the end of the day they can acquire some behavior from a certain scene of a games that may implicate their character. All internet games, online and video games should have restriction, like what the http://www.izombiegames.com/ , they are more educational instead.
YES y not afterall u c that video games are a medium to fun. and games have remarkable action and thrill increasing the adreline rush and u call such games violent!!!! i am amazed!its jst a medium of fun. even if it had some bad impact on some kids then its the kids fault not the games.it would be like some children saying studying sucks and u say children should not be educated!
Yes violent video games should be allowed for people to play. An age restriction could be placed on these games but I dont think it would help the cause that much for the majority of the people who play them.
yes people have been doing it for thousands of years, not neccisaerly video games but the violent game idea in general has been around as long as humans have
I thought the same when I saw this debate. I'd much rather have kids pretending to fight in a very fanciful, fake environment on their computers than actually practicing combat as a form of "sport," as has been the case throughout history. Between gamers and meat-heads which one is more likely to use violence as a go-to for problem solving?
They should be allowed and the restriction they have on them is pointless, I have never upheld it. If kids playing violent games receive "issues" then it is the parents fault for not raising them right.
Violent video games should be allowed. Even though they teach a rather gruesome reality of war, fighting, etc., they can make one more intellectually intelligent in aspects such as problem-solving, navigation (mental maps), and hand-eye coordination. They can even spark new interests and teach one important moral lessons, in which some violent video games are plentiful of. Applying my opinion, violent video games not only do all of this, but they are extremely fun and enjoyable as well, for all sexes.
If violent video games had any affect on us, I would be running around in a gimp suit beating up prostitutes with a dildo and stealing cars, then kicking an old woman in the minge until the money falls out.
I think you may be referring to the Grand Theft Auto series. However, you have to look towards the other physical and mental effects that violent video games presents. I might be playing video games, ending with just punching someone. That might sound miniature, however, once you look towards the end results, a fight may start, a larger fight may start from the result of that and even more fights will brew.
Such, a recipe for disaster will arise from violent video games.
I think it would only affect (correct grammar usage there) those who are predisposed towards violence, in much the same way that cannabis only promotes mental illness in those who are already predisposed towards it.
People who commit violent acts sometimes happen to play violent video games, watch violent movies and listen to violent music. I'm sure they all wear pants too...maybe we should outlaw pants. What video games did Hitler play?
My violent video games have actually helped me, battlefield have given me a sense of where and where not to go in airsoft and paintball wars, they do not make people violent, people just think it is ok to do what they do in the games in real life and. Think it makes no difference
I do believe that children who aren't of the age supported by their country's rating system should not be allowed to play, however video games are, on average, less violent than movies. A physiologist has recently stated that violent video games are nearly harmless.
Banning violent video games but not violent movies would be stupid!
I played games like Halo and Call of Duty when I was younger and do you know what they did to me? They taught me that good can only ever beat evil IF YOU ARE WILLING TO FIGHT! They taught me to take action and stand for what I believe in!
Even GTA 4 taught me that while crime may pay in the literal sense, it's a slippery slope into a world where survival is a struggle and the emotional loss or loss or innocence or friends far outweighs any monetary gain.
Violent video games should be allowed because their are some types of games that you experience war and how it feels to be on the battlefield or surviving zombies. If we ever had a zombie Apocalypse then people who have played Call of Duty zombies would know how to survive because they faced zombies in a video game.
I have to agree. No one who hasn't been in a war can know what it was like.
And no one who was in one would wish it on anyone else.
Violent videogames don't show you what it's like. I've heard the contrary from my stepfather, who served in Afghanistan. It's not like that.
and zombies? really? do you have a deficiency?
If a zombie apocalypse really did happen, chances are, the people who "know how to fight them because of call of duty" are probably going to be among the first to go.
It takes a lot more than one form of media to create a persons personality. I will agree that some people have been influenced by video games, but that person was pushed by other factors and video games get ALL the blame. Some people are just crazy but got an idea from a game, just like that person could get an idea from a movie, book, tv show, or scary story they heard from a friend. I think people are just too desperate to abolish violence in the world and are looking for a scapegoat to blame, no one wants to face the fact that some people are born shitty and will always be crazy.
