John Carmack Doesn’t Care About Violence
As one of the people responsible for bringing the world the mega-hit PC game Doom, John Carmack is no stranger to the controversy in violence in video games. As it turns out, according to an interview with Industry Gamers, the debate never really phased him.
Carmack says that he “never took seriously the violence in video games debate. It was basically talking points for people to get on CNN and espouse their stuff on there.” He mentions that, during the height of the video game violence controversy, he would be constantly hounded with questions at E3 and had to be reminded not to discuss his own opinions on the matter.
So, what effect do video games have on people? Carmack said:
“And I really think, if anything, there is more evidence to show that the violent games reduce aggression and violence. There have actually been some studies about that, that it’s cathartic. If you go to QuakeCon and you walk by and you see the people there [and compare that to] a random cross section of a college campus, you’re probably going to find a more peaceful crowd of people at the gaming convention. I think it’s at worst neutral and potentially positive.”
While Carmack, who is developing the new game Rage due out this October, has a vested interest in downplaying the effects of violent games, there definitely seems to be a bit of truth to what he has to say.
This weekend serves as a great example; both MLG Anaheim and the EVO world fighting game championships are drawing thousands of players to play games centered around violence, and stories of camaraderie and good sportsmanship abound from both venues.
What do you think about Carmack’s statements? Do violent video games have an effect on people, or is he right in referring to the issue as political “talking points?” Let us know in the comments.
He makes a good point with the CNN thing. I never thought of it that way.
Carmack is an incredibly intelligent person. Although he is sometimes wrong, it’s not very often.
I’d like to point out though, there is a lot of violent material on the internet. Stuff that is actually violent. Most of the stuff you see on tv or games doesn’t compare to this. When you see really violent things, you have a much different feeling, and it feels real.
My brother has been playing Halo and Call of Duty since he was ten or eleven years old. Although now he’s into guns and things of that sort, he’s one of the least violent people I know. If anything, violent children probably have to do more when parenting than anything.
He’s right. And so is Simon, violent children can most definitely be linked to a parenting issue rather than video games.
I don’t care about John Carmack. :>
I don’t care that you don’t care.
The thing about the claim that violent media makes people more aggressive is that it has only ever been found to be correlational. It is equally possible, and arguably more likely, that aggressive people prefer more violent video games. That might explain one factor in the aggressive video games the majority of males tend to prefer at pubescent psychological stages (13) compared to the nurturing video games like Nintendogs the majority of similarly young female gamers, at this point in time, choose. Now that’s arguably down to socialisation, I’d agree, but the bottom line is that the catharsis case is a bloody good one – it’s a release and if anything a comforting identifier with all ready aggressive individuals – and by aggressive I do not mean violent.
Then again, saying that won’t get me publicity on Fox.