In the discourse of violence in video games, every group participating does not do so to solve the problem. Their only goals are to throw the blame around to each other so that they themselves are not responsible. This is because they do not want to go through the tediousness of devising solutions and step from their comfort zones.
Politicians are more apt to point fingers at another group and not offer any solutions for the issue of violence and video games. President Trump avoids responsibility by focusing on the video game industry. ”We must stop the glorification of violence in our society. This includes the gruesome and grisly video games that are now commonplace”(Limbong). During a press release after the El Paso shooting, the president spoke on what he believed to be the problems at large. He accuses the gaming industry of glorifying violence without addressing what he can do to solve the issue. Dan Patrick actively removes responsibility from himself and aims it towards video games. ”’We’ve always had guns, always had evil, but I see a video game industry that teaches young people to kill’”(Rocha). Commentary: Similarly, he addresses his opinions on violence after the El Paso shooting. He begins by blaming the video game industry and also fails to mentions how he can make a difference. These are people in high positions of power with the ability to enact change on a national scale. This evasion of responsibility is detrimental to finding a solution. They are so fixated on putting others into the spotlight without understanding how much they themselves can do to reduce the outbreaks of violence.
What makes parents different in this discourse is that they do not accuse another group. Parents aim their blame at other parents and their decision-making skills. ”A lot of parents don’t understand that you can turn off blood and gore./ Most parents just don’t like to admit they’re child has grown up and play games like this”(ChelyRating). This is a commenter under a review for a Call of Duty game. They point out the features of the game that attempt to reduce the amount of violence children are exposed to. “On issues such as violence, patriotism, call of duty and responsibility, children and even adults have learned what it means to know and understand these terms using the almost real world of the video game” (Becky). This example further illustrates who parents feel are responsible for what games their children play. Parents are not blaming, guns, games, or even another group for the violence. This group alone points the blame towards themselves. While the parents are infighting about what other parents should and should not do, the problem of violence only gets worse.
Game developers benefit from a lack of decisive action from other groups, which is why they remain relatively silent. Their press releases and statements only come after they have been accused. The executive director for a video game franchise, fires shots at American politics. ”’ The fact is, entertainment is consumed worldwide, but gun violence is uniquely American’”(Voytko). Zelnick responds to the accusations of video games causing violence. He blames the politics of gun control instead. This removes the responsibility from his company and others in the game developing industry. Pointing his finger at gun control would have everyone looking at the politicians for answers instead. ”’More than 165 million Americans enjoy video games, and billions of people play video games worldwide. Yet other societies, where video games are played as avidly, do not contend with the tragic levels of violence that occur in the U.S’”(Voytko). The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) is at the forefront of the video game industry. They respond in this statement to President Trump’s attack on their industry. Like every other group mentioned, they move the liability but they shift it to American society as a whole. This further complicates the discussion because it is a blanket statement meant to draw attention away from themselves and towards anyone else. The Entertainment Software Rating Board(ESRB) makes no attempts to change their direction even when attacked by another group. “‘Along with information to read on the box and online before you make a purchase decision, each game console offers robust parental controls that allow you to set time and spending limits, block content by age rating, restrict communication, and more,’ ESRB President Patricia Vance told USA TODAY. ‘There’s a ton of information available, so there should be no surprises.(Saltzman)” Vance points out that accusers are not looking into what they have done in the past to solve the issue of violence. She points at a different group to be responsible, the parents. The gaming industry is smart by betting the other groups go head to head in the discourse. Playing a reclusive role helps them but does not solve the more important goal of stopping the ongoing violence.
As you can see from the analysis of these groups, the discussion is circular in nature and does not converge onto a final solution. This is the underlying problem with violence and video games because when looking at the arguments from the ground level, it seems as though the different groups care about the solution. However, when taking in the discussion as a whole, it is clear that they are only avoiding responsibility themselves.
