Sales
1.http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ea-very-happy-with-battlefield-hardline-sales/1100-6427131/
This article talks about how the publishers of the
game are pleased with the sales that Battlefield Hardline has gained. This does
go against the negative views that the game has since the Battlefield franchise
is known for simulating wars.
2.
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Battlefield-Hardline-Bad-Idea-DICE-Said-2011-64729.html
This article talks about how annual releases may harm
the reputation that Battlefield may have. This is because competitors such as
Call of Duty would have annual releases that harm the creative freedom as there
wouldn't be much of a break to introduce a fresh new game for their fans. Over
the past, Battlefield had released instalments every 3 years. However, Hardline
was released one year later which had fans disappointed as some of them had
called it a "reskin" or that "it should've been DLC". Also,
the game wasn't a big departure as it had played similarly and the variety of
weapons for players to choose from wasn't so different from its predecessor
Battlefield 4.
3.
http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/23/battlefield-hardline-takes-arresting-lead-in-uk-sales-charts-5116403/
This article talks about the sales that Hardline had
in the UK as it had one of the highest sales in March 2015.
Controversy
4.
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/battlefield-hardline-how-real-world-police-controv/1100-6425198/
5. http://www.craveonline.com/entertainment/797623-battlefield-hardline-trailerbox-art-causes-controversy-wake-ferguson-shooting/
6.
http://kotaku.com/soldier-cops-are-giving-games-like-battlefield-an-image-1620511782
Reviews
7.
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/03/17/battlefield-hardline-review
8. http://www.trustedreviews.com/battlefield-hardline-review
9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZDVr3mZzg
10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEaOBQkh7PI
The first two are reviews done by businesses which
have praised the game and have rated it 8/10. However, the third review is from
the perspective of a fan named "AngryJoe". He is known for his
trustworthy reviews as his reviews are from the perspective of a gamer who
understands the values of games to a consumer. The same applies with
TotalBiscuit who both share similar opinions on the game. This could dictate
those big outlets such as IGN could be paid by EA to give a good review as this
aligns with the two-step flow theory.
Any other articles related to Gun Violence
11. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/11/joe-biden-games-companies-gun-control
12.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/12/battlefield-war-game-first-world-war
13.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/24/battlefield-hardline-problem-play-war-cop
“So this is the problem. Battlefield: Hardline is a war game reskinned as a
cops-and-robbers fantasy: the criminals are action-movie caricatures (they rob
banks by blowing holes in the walls and steal sports cars to joyride around the
city) and the cops are equally gung-ho.”
14. http://pss.sagepub.com/content/12/5/353.short
15.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/44913637/The_costs_of_gun_violence_against_childr20160420-21290-13u4mtc.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMTNPEA&Expires=1476441977&Signature=8P7Ye1OZ5rTeho6%2F602%2Fi3GOrd8%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DThe_costs_of_gun_violence_against_childr.pdf#page=75
“Guns are deeply embedded in American society. Indeed, many people around the
world perceive the gun as one of America’s primary cultural icons”
The beginning of this article talks about how iconic
guns have become iconic in American culture. However this would talk about the
negative impacts that they would have on a younger audience. However younger
audiences tend to want content that they aren’t allowed access to.
“Playing these video games allows young people to
practice violence—often gun violence—in ways television does not.”
This quote would also present how gun violence in
video games are also seen as bad. I would partially agree with the statement.
However I mostly disagree. In my opinion I see it as a form of diversion from
real life. This would be because it would immerse the players into the action.
“By the end of the Vietnam War, the military human
target hit rate jumped to 95%”
This has talked about how during the time, the
military would use simulations that are similar to video games to try and
increase their accuracy with firearms. The page had also stated that pilots
would also use simulations similar to videogames. As well as that there is also
the different sorts of areas that might also look into the different sorts of
areas that might also be included.
16. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.547.2832&rep=rep1&type=pdf
“That is, the person playing the game behaves
aggressively and is rewarded (with points, sound effects, access to new levels
of the game, etc.) for doing so.”
Although this article does look into the violence,
this has also looked into how the game would simulate violence from the
perspective of the player. They play as the character and go out guns blazing
as this would simulate violence. However the acts of gun violence would also
look into it as it would also have a positive view on gun violence as it is
seen as playful.
17.
http://www.csus.edu/faculty/m/fred.molitor/docs/video%20games%20and%20bullying.pdf
This would have key notes that can link into other
articles since they have been mentioned
"Our results suggest that the association between violent
video games and aggression related outcomes in
children,
even those with clinically elevated mental health
symptoms,
may be minimal. Our research contributes to the field
of youth and media by providing evidence that a
timely,
policy-relevant, and seemingly reasonable hypothesis—
that mentally vulnerable children may be particularly
influenced by violent video games—does not appear to
be
well supported. However, more research on this
population,
and on others likely to be at increased risk (such as
children exposed to violence in their homes or
neighborhoods),
is needed to guide parents, health professionals and
policymakers. It may be valuable for future
researchers to
consider alternate models of youth’s media use,
particularly
those that focus on motivational models in which
users, rather than content, drive experiences.
Content-based
theoretical models do not appear to be sufficient for
a
sophisticated understanding of media use and
effects".
"The tragic 2012 shooting of young children in Newtown, Connecticut by
a 20-year-old male reportedly fond of playing violent video games put the issue
back on the front burner (Gun Violence Prevention Task Force 2013). The
consensus from the government (e.g., Gun Violence Prevention Task Force 2013) seems
to have been that current research does not consistently link exposure to video
game violence with aggression or societal violence"
"In the current study, we used Entertainment
Software
Ratings Board (ESRB) video game ratings as an estimate
of exposure to violence in video games. Respondents
were
asked to write the names of five video games that they
had
‘‘played a lot’’ in the past 6 months. ESRB ratings
were
then obtained for each game, and ordinally coded (a
maximal score of 5 for ‘‘Mature,’’ 4 for ‘‘Teen,’’
etc.). The
sample reported mean was 29.97 and standard deviation
was 30.09."
This looks into the ESRB age ratings and what a gamer would
generally play. It appears to have a high average which can suggest that there
are a huge majority of players that would play mature content.
"These theoretical approaches have in common
the value of taking the user experience as a primary
driving
factor of the relationship between the user and media,
rather than presuming that content drives the relationship.
In the typical ‘‘hypodermic needle model’’ of media
effects"
18. http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc47.2005/KillBill/text.html
19.
https://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/media-magazine/articles/15902
20. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B0i5diL3vrEiSGxRNHIyZmM4Ums
- MM40 Page 16
This looks into the Violence that is presented in
video games.
“Violence which has led to bans and restrictions which
would restrict sales”
21.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B0i5diL3vrEiSGxRNHIyZmM4Ums - MM 47
Page 55
This would look into GTA and investigate the marketing
that would take in motion. This looks into the teases to the distribution and
how they would tease their game. Yearly breaks that would look into how it is
teased a year beforehand to generate hype for the videogame so that fans are
eager to preorder.
22. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9752141/Connecticut-school-massacre-Adam-Lanza-spent-hours-playing-Call-Of-Duty.html
23. https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/report-links-violent-media-mental-health-and-guns-to-mass-shootings-021413.html
"The NSF report examines exposure to violent
media, including video games, movies, television, apps, music and comic books.
Violent video games increase aggressive thoughts and behavior, angry feelings
and physiological arousal, and decrease helping behavior and feelings of
empathy for others, according to the report".
24. http://www.thefreeradical.ca/research/Effect_of_video_game_violence.pdf
" Several features of violent video games suggest
that they may have even more pronounced eVects on users than violent TV
programs and Wlms. Violent video game players are more actively involved, more
likely to identify with violent characters, more directly reinforced for
violent acts, and more frequently exposed to violent scenes. In the past, the
level of realism in video game images might have reduced their ability to
create physiological desensitization. But recent technological advances have
removed this obstacle from video games. Consequently, desensitization and
decreases in helping might well progress more quickly and eYciently in violent
video game players than in violent TV/Wlm viewers. Future research should
investigate how these diferences between types of entertainment media inXuence
desensitization to real violence. Future research also should investigate who
is most likely to become desensitized as a result of exposure to violent video
games".
This could suggest that the audiences of violent
content like video games have become desensitised. This could suggest that they
are used to seeing violence and their behaviour to real violence which could
also argue how this content could have a negative impact. I would agree that it
makes an audience desensitised to violence.
25. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3709666/So-violent-video-games-child-s-brain-Psychologist-explains-gun-filled-games-make-kids-think-ok-aggressive.html
"For decades, both therapists and researchers have argued that
observing violence increases the likelihood of a child being aggressive,
whether they observe it at home or school".
From this, I would argue against this comment. Although this comes from
research, this would argue that video games are being seen as a possible
outcome. As well as that the research suggested that this would also make
players look like they are easily manipulated by the audience. I would
argue against this because gamers aren't all going to behave in a violent
manner after exposure to violent content. If this was the case then video games
that are mass advertised shouldn't be presented to the public if they have a
negative impact on the audience. This would suggest that the audience of
violent video games are like the Hypodermic Needle Syringe as it would suggest
that video games have a passive audience that are prone to violence by
replicating what has been done.
26. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bruce_Bartholow/publication/222302681_Chronic_violent_video_game_exposure_and_desensitization_to_violence_Behavioral_and_event-related_brain_potential_data/links/0fcfd512398acc2a17000000.pdf
"Previous research has shown that playing
violent video games increases aggressive behaviour and decreases helping
behaviour".
"One possible explanation for these effects is
that people become desensitized to violence after prolonged exposure to it,
leading to reduction of normal inhibitions against aggression and making
individuals less responsive to the pain and suffering experienced by victims of
violence"
This would also reinforce the idea that video game
players would be desensitised to violent content to video games. In this
case it would also argue that gamers won’t feel sympathy. This could argue as
to how players are used to watching violent content to the extent that they are
used to watching violence in video games. This could extend to the point where
gruesome content in which the content is displayed for the audience wouldn’t
give them an emotional engagement.
“The top 5
selling games in the UK in 2013 are further proof that this trend is global,
with 4 of the top 5 being from the action and/or shooter genre.(4) Atop that
list is the latest instalment from the ever-popular Grand Theft Auto series a
franchise synonymous for gratuitous violence, sexuality and mature themes -as
evidenced by its M for Mature rating from the Entertainment Software Rating
Board (ESRB)”.
“A 2011 study out of the University
of Missouri-Columbia looked at the long recognized belief held by many
scientists that playing violent video games can cause players to become more
aggressive in their daily life. The study involved 70 young adult participants
who were randomly assigned to play a violent or non-violent video game for 25
minutes. The researchers then measured brain responses as they showed the
participants a series of neutral and violent photos. The final stage allowed
the participants to compete against an opponent in a controllable task that
allowed them to choose how aggressively they would blast their opponent with
sound. Researchers found that those who played a violent video game were more
aggressive in their blast by comparison to those who played a non-violent
game.(5)”
“Another study in the publication Social
Psychological and Personality Science, found that aggression triggered by video games
can last for up to 24 hours after the game is played -if the player continues
to think about the game”
“When
viewing real violence, participants who had played a violent video game
experienced skin response measurements significantly lower than those who had
played a non-violent video game. The participants in the violent video game
group also had lower heart rates while viewing the real-life violence compared
to the nonviolent video game group.
"The results
demonstrate that playing violent video games, even for just 20 minutes, can
cause people to become less physiologically aroused by real violence,"
said Carnagey. "Participants randomly assigned to play a violent video
game had relatively lower heart rates and galvanic skin responses while
watching footage of people being beaten, stabbed and shot than did those
randomly assigned to play nonviolent video games.
"It appears that
individuals who play violent video games habituate or 'get used to' all the
violence and eventually become physiologically numb to it."
Participants in the
violent versus non-violent games conditions did not differ in heart rate or skin
response at the beginning of the study, or immediately after playing their
assigned game. However, their physiological reactions to the scenes of real
violence did differ significantly, a result of having just played a violent or
a non-violent game. The researchers also controlled for trait aggression and
preference for violent video games”.
“They
conclude that the existing video game rating system, the content of much
entertainment media, and the marketing of those media combine to produce
"a powerful desensitization intervention on a global level."
"It
(marketing of video game media) initially is packaged in ways that are not too
threatening, with cute cartoon-like characters, a total absence of blood and
gore, and other features that make the overall experience a pleasant one,"
said Anderson. "That arouses positive emotional reactions that are
incongruent with normal negative reactions to violence. Older children consume
increasingly threatening and realistic violence, but the increases are gradual
and always in a way that is fun.
"In short, the modern entertainment media
landscape could accurately be described as an effective systematic violence
desensitization tool," he said. "Whether modern societies want this
to continue is largely a public policy question, not an exclusively scientific
one"
Books
·
Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A
Call to Action Against Tv, Movie, and Video Game Violence
“And that root cause is the steady diet of violent entertainment our
kids see on TV, in movies, and in the video games that they play - as they sit
in front of their screens and digital devices for forty hours each week. This
amount of continuous exposure to gratious violent images sensationalizing
murder, rape, and torture is neither benign nor cathartic. The fact is that
media violence primes children to see killing as acceptable”
“It’s abnormal for a civilized society to teach kids to kill
people. And it’s certainly not normal for so many kids to want to kill, harm,
bully, or hurt others as they do today”.
·
Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology - Bruce D. Bartholowa, Craig A. Anderson
Volume 38, Issue 3, May 2002, Pages
283–290
“Evidence of the effects of playing violent
video games on subsequent aggression has been mixed. This study examined how
playing a violent video game affected levels of aggression displayed in a
laboratory. A total of 43 undergraduate students (22 men and 21 women) were
randomly assigned to play either a violent (Mortal Kombat) or nonviolent (PGA Tournament
Golf)
video game for 10 min. Then they competed with a confederate in a reaction time
task that allowed for provocation and retaliation. Punishment levels set by
participants for their opponents served as the measure of aggression. The
results confirmed our hypothesis that playing the violent game would result in
more aggression than would playing the nonviolent game. In addition, a Game ×
Sex interaction showed that this effect was larger for men than for women.
Findings are discussed in light of potential differences in aggressive style
between men and women”.
“The game was played in two phases. During Phase 1, the
participant was informed that before each trial, the opponent would set the
duration and intensity of punishment that he or she would receive for
responding more slowly. During Phase 2, the roles were reversed; the
participant was told that before each trial, he or she could now set the
duration and intensity of punishment for the opponent when that person
responded more slowly. Note that because the game ended after this phase was
completed, the participant could retaliate for the punishment that he or she
received from the opponent during Phase 1 without fearing any retaliation by
that opponent. The severity of punishment that each participant set for his or
her opponent prior to each of the 25 trials during Phase 2 (retaliation) was
our measure of aggressive behavior. This and similar measures have been shown
to be valid indices of aggression (Giancola & Zeichner, 1995; see also
Anderson & Bushman, 1997; Anderson, Lindsay, & Bushman, 1999; Carlson,
Marcus-Newhall, & Miller, 1989).”
·
Media Violence and Children: A
Complete Guide for Parents and Professionals: A Complete Guide for Parents and
Professionals - Douglas A. Gentile
All quotes have been taken from Chapter 7 which focuses on
the topic in detail
Page 132
“Recent content analyses Violent Video Games: The Newest Media Violence
Hazard 133 of video games show that as many as 89 percent of games contain some
violent content (Children Now, 2001), and that about half of the games include
violent content toward other game characters that would result in serious
injuries or death (Children Now, 2001; Dietz, 1998; Dill, Gentile, Richter,
& Dill, 2001). Many children prefer to play violent games. Of course, what
constitutes a "violent" game varies depending upon who is classifying
them. The video game industry and its ratings board (Entertainment Software
Rating Board) claim to see much less violence in their games than do parents
(Walsh & Gentile, 2001) and other researchers (Thompson & Haninger,
2001). Even within the research community there is some inconsistency in
definition of what constitutes a violent video game. Generally, however,
researchers consider as "violent" those games in which the player can
harm other characters in the game. In many popular video games, harming other
characters is the main activity. It is these games, in which killing occurs at
a high rate, that are of most concern to media violence researchers, child
advocacy groups, and parents. (See Appendix A for recent recommendations
regarding features of violent video games.) In studies of fourth through eighth
grade children, more than half of the children state preferences for games in
which the main action is predominantly human violence or fantasy violence
(Buchman & Funk, 1996; Funk, 1993). In surveys of children and their
parents, about two-thirds of children named violent games as their favorites.
Only about one-third of parents were able to correctly name their child's
favorite game, and in 70 percent of the incorrect matches, children described
their favorite game as violent (Funk, Hagan, & Schimming, 1999). A
preference for violent games has been linked with hostile attribution biases,
increased arguments with teachers, lower self-perceptions of behavioral
conduct, and increased physical fights (Bushman & Anderson, 2002; Funk,
Buchman, & Germann, 2000; Lynch, Gentile, Olson, & van Brederode,
2001).”
Page 135
“1. Identification with an aggressor increases imitation of
the aggressor. It is known from research on violent television that children
will imitate aggressive actions more readily if they identify with an
aggressive character in some way. On television, it is hard to predict with
which characters, if any, a person will identify. One might identify most
closely with the victim, in which case the viewer would be less likely to be
aggressive after watching. In many violent video games, however, one is
required to take the point of view of one particular character. This is most
noticeable in "first-person shooter" games, in which the players
"see" what their character would see as if they were inside the video
game. Thus, the player is forced to identify with a violent character. In fact,
in many games, players have a choice of characters to play and can upload
photographs of their faces onto their character. This identification with the
aggressive character is likely to increase the likelihood of imitating the
aggressive acts. 2. Active participation increases learning. Research on
learning shows that when one becomes actively involved in something, one learns
much more than if one only watches it. This is one reason computer technology
in the classroom has been considered to be educationally beneficial.
Educational video games are theorized to be effective partly because they
require active participation. With regard to violent entertainment, viewers of
violent content on television are passive observers of the aggressive acts. In
contrast, violent video games by their very nature require active participation
in the violent acts. 3. Practicing an entire behavioral sequence is more
effective than practicing only a part. If one wanted to learn how to kill
someone, one would quickly realize that there are many steps involved. At a
minimum, one needs to decide whom to kill, get a weapon, get ammunition, load
the weapon, stalk the victim, aim the weapon, and pull the trigger. It is rare
for television shows or movies to display all of these steps. Yet, violent
video games regularly require players to practice each of these steps
repeatedly. This helps teach the necessary steps to commit a successful act of
aggression. In fact, some video games are so successful at training whole
sequences of aggressive behaviors that the U.S. Army has licensed them to train
their forces.”
Page 144
“The evidence
reveals that violent video games can have negative consequences. The research
literature is presently too small to allow sensitive tests of potential
moderator effects (moderator variables can enhance or diminish other effects).
Such effects, essentially interactions between exposure to video game violence
and moderating variables (e.g., sex, age), require very large samples for
adequate tests, and this research literature is simply too small. In fact,
Anderson and Bushman (2001) reported finding no statistically significant
evidence of sex or age moderator effects. Nonetheless, there are theoretical
and empirical reasons to expect some groups to be somewhat more susceptible to
violent video game effects than others, though there is no valid reason to
expect any particular group to be totally immune. Funk and her colleagues
(Funk, 2001, 2003; Funk & Buchman, 1996; Funk, Buchman, & Germann,
2000) have described how many of the effects of video game play could be
enhanced by other risk factors. These include player sex, age, status as
bullies or victims of bullies, children with poor social problem- 144 Media
Violence and Children Figure 7.2 Relation between Year of Study and Size of
Effect of Video Game-Playing Habits on Aggressive Behavior: Correlational
Studies 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Effect Size (r) 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year
y = 0.011x - 21.020 r = 0.738 solving skills, and children with poor emotion
regulation abilities. To this list we would add children who are generally more
hostile in personality, who have a history of aggressive behavior, or whose
parents do not monitor or limit their video game play”.
·
Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video
Games and What Parents Can Do - Lawrence Kutner, Cheryl Olson
Page 8
“It’s
unlikely that Harris and Klebold’s interest in violent video games or other
violent media played any significant role in their actions. An FBI
investigation concluded that Klebold was significantly depressed and suicidal
and Harris was a sociopath”
Youth
violence decreased significantly over the last decade. You are more likely to
be struck and killed by lightning than to di in a school shooting.
Video game
popularity and real world youth violence have been moving in opposite
directions. Violent juvenile crime in the US reached a peak in 1993 and has
declined ever since. School violence has also gone down. Between 1994 and 2001, arrests for murder,
forcible rape, robbery and Aggravated assaults fell 44% resulting in the lowest
juvenile arrest rate for violent crimes. Since 1983. Murder arrests which
reached a high of 3,800 in 1993 plummeted to 1,400 by 2001”
“
This can preasent the correlation that violent
content and violence in real life would have. This would mainly be because of
how video games would offer a form of escapism. This can thereore reinforce the
hypodermic needle in the sense that this form of media reflects an alternate
way to enjoy violence which could suggest why we should be concerned about the
increase in violent graphic content and how poeople have become desensitised.
However it does offer its perks in the sense that there are less violent crimes
being comitted. This could be because as previosly mentioned that violent
content especially videom games would offer an alternate which wouldn’t have as
much consequence as real life.
·
The Good, The Bad and the
Ugly: A Meta-analytic Review of Positive and Negative Effects of Violent Video
Games - Christopher John Ferguson
“At the time that this article is being written the mass-homicide at
Virginia Tech University in which Seung Hui Cho killed 32 students and faculty,
and wounded many more is but a few months old. Not surprisingly, as with the
Columbine shooting in 1999 [1], news media have indulged in speculation that
video game playing may be involved in the etiology of C. J. Ferguson (&)
Department of Behavioral, Applied Sciences and Criminal Justice, Texas A&M
International University, Laredo, TX 78045, USA e-mail: CJFerguson1111@Aol.com
123 Psychiatr Q (2007) 78:309–316 DOI 10.1007/s11126-007-9056-9 this shooting
although information about the shooter has thus far not supported a substantial
link [2]. It is not hard to ‘‘link’’ video game playing with violent acts if
one wishes to do so, as one video game playing prevalence study indicated that
98.7% of adolescents play video games to some degree [3] with boys playing more
hours and more violent games than girls”.
“However is it possible that a behavior with
such a high base rate (i.e. video game playing) is useful in explaining a
behavior with a very low base rate (i.e. school shootings)? Put another way,
can an almost universal behavior truly predict a rare behavior? This paper
concerns itself with issues related to playing of violent video games. Namely,
has the accumulated research evidence provided evidence that exposure to
violent video games causes or is otherwise predictive of aggressive behavior?
Is it possible also that exposure to violent video games specifically may be
associated with positive developments, such as increases in visuospatial
cognition? It is the goal of this paper to examine the overall impact of
violent video games, positive and negative, in order to help guide the
discussion of violent games in relation to aggression, crime and cognitive development.
Despite the intensity of the debate, research on the relationship between video
game violence and aggression (most studies do not consider violent crime
specifically) have produced mixed findings. Some articles find a relationship,
either causal or correlational between video game violence and aggression [4–6]
whereas others do not [7–9]. Examining one of the most cited studies a bit
closer provides some illumination of the ambiguity of this research area.
Anderson and Dill [6] claim to offer causal evidence for the video
game—aggression link”.
