An Analytical Summary

The author of the piece makes the assertion that creators of violent video games have neglected to explain the true intent behind their creations. Characters in violent video games are now more obnoxious than ever. Furthermore, the author believes that these games, particularly those released in 2013, feature a lot of defacing, shooting, and torturing that fail to clearly explain their purpose to the user. Additionally, they think that explicit but personal violence is a concept that most gamers of violent video games look for. Most of these violent video games include a degraded antagonist that the players must navigate through while having no sympathy for the characters (Wallace, 2014). When a game developer puts a name or face to a given character, then violence against them become personal and specific.

The article compares two video games; BioShock Infinite and The Last of Us both developed with different perspectives revealing how games are more violent than the audience may think. The BioShock Infinite is a story about a young woman and man battling it through a territory of nameless evil individuals while The Last of Us is survival game in a land conquered by zombies. Even though the violence in the latter video game seemed both grisly and direct, it served the purpose. The protagonists (Joel and Ellie) in the game narrowly survived, and the dreadful activities committed by and upon them leaves both emotionally distorted at the end of the game. Nonetheless, the violence in BioShock Infinite makes the audience feel gratuitous instead of being transformed.

The article has some value-based assertions to support the argument on how games are more violent than the player may picture them when playing. Most developers of games have failed to use the greatest strength of gaming, “the interactivity” to make games more lively. Some games have emphasized the depiction of the “enhanced interrogation” however; few are likely to interrogate the action itself. A section of game developers has done something noteworthy regarding the issue of torture by getting players involved in the action (Jia-Kun & Qian, 2016). For instance, Grand Theft Auto V makes the player sustain a prolonged action when the protagonist, Trevor tortures a yelling, innocent man for questionable-at-best intelligence.

However, I feel this evidence supported by the author of the article does not demonstrate or portray consistency in their argument. The article analyzes the torture that most violent video games have portrayed, claiming they are not transformative or powerful to influence the behaviour of the player.

The author supports some form of personal and specific violence forms than torture. However, the author recommends Grand Theft video game though it has actions of torture on an innocent man. Furthermore, the evidence is not relevant when arguing that violence should be more personal and specific than just torturing. According to my assessment, I believe violence in video games are relevant as long as they meet the objectives and goals of the developers regardless of whether they are unmistakable. However, the author has signaled the use of most critical elements in the article through the selection of appropriate words and transitions from one idea to the other. The choice of words by the author precisely conveys the message to the audience who may be from diverse cultural, social and educational background.

References

Jia-Kun, Z., & Qian, Z. (2016). Priming Effect of Computer Game Violence On Children’s Aggression Levels. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 44(10), 1747-1759.

Wallace, R. (2014). Modding: Amateur Authorship and How the Video Game Industry Is Actually Getting It Right. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2014219.