Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game Studies

May 31, 2011 -

If there’s anything we love more than ponies here at GP, it’s studies that examine the effects of violent video games on those who play them.  Yes, we love writing about them and we know you love commenting on them.

Oh look!  This Critical Miss comic over at the Escapist features two violent video game studies and a gamer’s reaction to each.

...but no ponies.

-Reporting from San Diego, GamePolitics Contributing Editor Andrew Eisen


Comments

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

Except the situation is usually like this:

 

Scientist:  We found the only 4 children in this entire school of 500 students who've never played a videogame and claimed that they were perfect.  Then we called the other 496 students fat, stupid and lazy.

Gamer: Bullshit!

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

While I will admit that my initial reaction to these studies is to call bullshit, but that's because it's usually the case. The vast majority of them are blatently flawed science and biased against games.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

True; I mean it goes both ways. It could have been the exact same cartoon, only backwards with ant-gamers.

 

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

HA HA! Actually you gotta take all these studies, on both sides with a grain of salt. Many studies are so much flawed as are the researcher's conclusions.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

Tell any group that what they do is the bane of society that kills kittens, see what happens.

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

The over-the-top absurdity of the second panel kind of dulls the point they were making with the first panel.  It's too silly, and drives home to the viewer that the artist is painting an unrealistic caricature of gamers.

Of course, the choir they are preaching to probably thinks the second panel is accurate anyway, so...  Meh.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

"Of course, the choir they are preaching to"

Um, you mean, gamers?  Have you ever read any Critical Miss comics?  It's devoted almost solely to content only gamers would understand or even care about.

And let's be honest here.  Maybe a small percentage of gamers (a higher percentage at this site, to be sure) actually evaluate these studies and their research, and are able to pick out the relevant points and not overreact.  Then there's everyone else on the internet, who break into half hysterical rants if someone dares so link anything remotely negative to gaming.  "Increases aggression"?  How dare you call us cop killing sociopaths, you stupid scientists!  I hope someone kills you!  Rawr, rawr, rawr!  Oh, but "gaming increases visual responsiveness and reaction times"?  See?!  Gaming is the greatest thing ever and I could be a Nascar driver if I wanted because I play games!

Just because you percieve yourself to be rational doesn't mean you share company with a rational demographic.  If you draw from just the internet, gamers as a whole must be insane.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

Nope, I've never seen this comic before.  And like I said, my criticism isn't of the first panel, but of the second.  It's silly to the point of ruining the point the first panel was trying to make.  The second panel could have been something that actually has elicited the "Science!" reaction from gamers, like the visual responsiveness one you mentioned.  Instead, it's totally absurd crap like giving us flight and laser vision.  As far as I know, there haven't been any studies claiming such results, and if there were, I doubt many gamers would place much stock in it, except maybe in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way.  It's so off base, it makes one go "Pfft.  Just another clueless jab at gamers," rather than "Hmm.  That's a good point."

I know, it's a webcomic, needs a punchline, blah blah whatever.  All I'm saying is, the second panel kind of kills whatever point they were trying to make with the first.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

Dude. It's a joke. Laugh.

 

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

its hardly much of a joke to those it truly affects.

much like a racial joke, its only funny to those whome aren't afflicted by the commentary within.

most jokes of the sort would bring simple sattire and avoid direct implications, this one outright ousts many as braindead morons that are biased to their likings as opposed to actually knowledgable on the subject matter, without even a second thought or implication that there are some, if not many, that sit contrary to the overly outspoken masses of pre-pubescent children that plague the gaming community.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

That's on the Escapist and it's a gaming webcomic. The targeted readers are us. The authors are just poking us in the ribs...

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

Agreed. I think people may be missing the point that the comic is trying to make. It's not meant as a commentary on the studies themselves. (They're not trying to imply that these studies with "anti-gaming" results are all fair and reasonable. Most probably aren't). Rather, I think the point they're trying to make here is about gamer's reactions to such studies. Specifically, that at least some gamers have become just as obstinant as those who are critical of games. A valid point I think. Too often it seems like gamers will outright dismiss anything critical of games regardless of how reasonable or valid it may be while automatically accepting anything that tells them what they want to hear. That's what I would guess the comic is making light of.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

The problem is after so many bad studies they all look bad.

The cry wolf effect, I guess kinda in reverse.

Re: Webcomic Pokes Fun at Gamer Reactions to Violent Game ...

pretty bad pun tbh, and very badly thought out. most gamers would i think acknowledge a proper study.

in the case of that first panel (and the above) it has shown proof that it can exacerbate EXISTING conditions.

problem is, most "research" is claiming it creates NEW conditions without ever checking for pre-existing ones ahead of time, and then its done on a short term basis, where other studies have shown the effects of such stimuli are short lived (15 minutes or so IIRC)

thats where the BS comes in, not just at any research saying negative things.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician