Lee 1
Lee, Justin
Professor Breitenstein
Writing 39C
July 14, 2019
Online Video Games Foster Aggression
Video games are becoming an increasingly popular medium for recreation and social interaction. A recent study conducted by the Entertainment Software Association found that 63% of all American video game players, some 166 million adults, played online with other people.
Furthermore, the study also found that action and shooter games are some of the most popular genres of video games, particularly amongst adolescents and early adults (Entertainment
Software Association, 2019). As video games are slated to continue growing in popularity, it is important to question the real life effects that certain genres can have on players. In this essay, I would like to focus on the problem of aggression caused by action-based online video games and how a game’s content and competitiveness can facilitate aggressive behavior.
The relationship between online action video games and aggression stems back to the late
1990s. As Richard Moss notes, the action genre exploded in popularity during the 90s as games like Wolfenstein 3D and Quake that featured intense violence, blood, and gore took to the shelves. One game in particular, Doom, effectively changed the video game industry overnight, catapulting the action genre into the most dominant one. Moreover, Doom’s popularity eventually led to a series of spin-offs, known as “Doom clones”, that would eventually evolve into its own subgenre, the first-person shooter (Moss, 2). It was clear that many game companies
Lee 2 wanted to ride off of the success of Doom and this attitude would be carried over into the online video game genre as the internet became more popular.
However, as the action genre expanded in the mid 1990s, worry over how these violent video games could influence players’ real-life behavior became a national issue in the U.S.. The
National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), for example, noted that in 1993, a series of congressional hearings on the content of video games concluded with the creation of the
Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), an organization that assigns age and content ratings to video games. Moreover, the ESRB’s job was to discourage the sale of violent video games to immature audiences and although following the ratings were technically optional, video game ratings based on their content worked to an extent in the following years. Because of this, video games and the video game industry was left temporarily untouched by the government until the Columbine High School Shooting in 1998 (“A Timeline of Video Game
Controversies”). Columbine was a landmark event in video game history because of one of the shooter’s, Eric Harris, love for Doom. Harris was noted to have equated human beings to Doom zombies, an enemy in the game, created Doom levels based on Columbine High School, and even named his shotgun after a Doom character (qtd. in Langman, 1-11). As a result, violent video games became associated with encouraging violent behavior within players and this has carried into the 21st century. In fact, the NCAC has pointed out that since 2000, politicians both in the federal government and individual state governments have attempted and sometimes successfully passed legislation that regulates the sale and content of suggestive video games.
Even when tragedies strike in the contemporary period, politicians often blame violent video games as influences to aggressive behavior (Trump).
Lee 3
But, whether violence in particular from video games facilitates aggressive behavior or not is not clearly defined in the academic world. Numerous scholarly studies since the early
2000s have found evidence that supports both sides of the argument. As a result of this, scholars have looked at other aspects of video games to see if there are other factors to consider when discussing about video games and aggression. One such factor that scholars have observed is the advent of competitive and ranking systems into online video games. Because video games have become increasingly popular over the 21st century, many video games have experimented with competitive modes that pits teams of players against each other in order to achieve a rank up.
According to Christopher A. Paul, a professor of communication and researcher of video games and social interaction at Seattle University, these ranking systems create a sort of video game meritocracy where higher skilled players are rewarded with higher ranks than lower skilled ones and thus leaving higher skilled players with a sense of entitlement (qtd. in Euteneuer, 787-788).
Furthermore, Paul also believes that “toxic”, or aggressive, behavior in video game stems from this unofficial meritocracy which is created by the competitive ranking systems of the games (7).
This makes sense. Players who choose to play competitive games to achieve a rank are most likely psychologically and emotionally invested in the game that they choose to play; these players care about the game and choose to play competitively ranked games so that they can achieve something that may indicate a higher merit. Players who believe that they are held back from achieving a higher rank by teammates or other factors can build feelings of frustration which in turn, can lead to aggressive behavior. Similarly, Wai Yen Tang and Jesse Fox, two scholars who are also prominent in the field of video game research, have also argued aggressive
Lee 4 behavior caused by video games is not only a product of violence by itself but rather a combination of competitive video game environments and violence (“Men’s Harassment” 514).
In order to further examine this point that the content and competitiveness of a game can influence aggression within players, we can examine one of the most popular online games to date: League of Legends. League of Legends is an online video game made by Riot Games in 2009 and has since become one of the most popular games of the 21st century. Each match lasts around 30 minutes and consists of two teams, each with five players, battling each other to see who can destroy the other teams’ base first. Players take control of one character per match and can choose from a large pool of characters at the beginning of the game.
In terms of the content of League of Legends, many of the playable characters wield a multitude of weapons ranging from bows and guns to swords and spears. Although League of Legends is listed as being rated “T”, meaning that the game is
intended for teenage players or
older, by the ESRB, the game is
still characterized by blood and
violence. In fact, much of League of Legends’ objectives are centered around slaying the
enemy team to gain an advantage.
Essentially, the game rewards
players or teams that can kill the
Lee 5 other team more effectively and thus encourages players to improve at slaying their opponents to win the game. Figure 1-1 best represents this. The image depicts the first kill within one match of
League of Legends. In this particular scene, the rightmost character was stabbed to death by the character on the left with a large knife. The character on the right is also just about to fall onto the pool of his blood that was left from the stabbing just in front of him. To those who may have never been exposed to violence before, this can be perceived as a particularly gruesome scene and instead of punishing the player for murdering another person, the game rewards the player with in-game currency and a loud, satisfying “first blood” from the game’s announcer. This is the kind of violence that was previously noted to trigger aggression within video game players - the kind in which violence is not necessarily shamed or downplayed but rewarded. In other words, the glorification or rewarding for committing acts of violence is what ultimately leads to a desensitization of violence and an increase in aggression since the brain is trained to accepting of the violence seen in video games (Greitemeyer & Mügge, 578-589; Bartholow et al., 537-538).
As noted previously, online video games have also begun to implement competitive modes that ranks individual players based on skill which also tends to foster aggression. League of Legends is no exception to this and it has one of the most well-known ranking systems in all of video games. Based on a chess ELO system, those who choose to play the ranked option in
League of Legends are ranked based on their skill level. There are nine tiers of ranks in total with each tier containing four subranks except for the top 3 tiers. Furthermore, all of the ranks are distributed according to a bell curve meaning that average players will be generally placed in the middle ranks while below average and above average players will be placed in lower and higher ranks respectively. Ranking up in League of Legends is highly dependent on the amount of wins
Lee 6 you achieve and because League of Legends is a team-based game, the pressure is on an entire team of players to win games rather than individuals. Essentially, if one person on a team is doing bad, they may become a burden for a team rather than an asset and this happens often in
League of
Legends; when players queue to play a competitive, ranked match, players expect to win the match in order to rank up and it can be frustrating when obstacles, such as underperforming teammates, get in the way. And as studies have shown, competition may be even more influential to fueling player aggression than the game content itself (Adachi & Willoughby, 2011). This buildup of frustration for underperforming players or other obstacles can lead to increased aggression within players. This is clearly represented in Figure 2-1, where a player is encouraging another player, who was
Lee 7 perceived to be underperforming in a match, to commit violence against themselves. Given the competitive scenario in which the player is put in, it’s probable that the player is frustrated with his team’s underwhelming performance and decided to lash out. After personally searching for this player’s particular profile on League of Legends, this player was not punished for actions as he or she still plays League of Legends. The fact that this kind of behavior goes unpunished teaches players that it is tolerable to act in this aggressive fashion. This also shows that game companies are not putting enough effort into discouraging aggressive behaviors to keep video game environments civil.
In addition, there are millions of cases of aggression like the one depicted in Figure 2-1 that has occurred in League of Legends and as such, League of Legends has been notoriously labeled as the game with the most “toxic” community. Riot Games has attempted to put a stop to the rampant general harassment in League of Legends by implementing automatic chat filtration systems and issuing bans to repeat offenders (Fox & Tang, “Women’s Experiences” 1303). Yet the efficacy of these “solutions” are limited as many people have found ways to avoid being automatically detected by systems implemented by Riot Games and thus continue to express hostilities towards other players. There has not been a reworking of this system in recent years and more players are able to get away with aggressive behavior and verbal abuse further demonstrating how large companies, like Riot Games, are not effectively stopping this behavior.
But what is the importance of understanding aggression and its relationship with online video games? As stated previously, violent video games has been the subject of political debate since the 1990s. Many politicians believe that the answer to whether video game violence solely leads to increased aggression is a black or white scenario (Trump) when in reality, scholarly
Lee 8 discussion implies that the answer is actually grey. Therefore, when talking about video games and their relationship with aggression in the current political discourse it is important to draw attention to multiple factors of online video games that may facilitate aggression rather than just the violence itself. Furthermore, player aggression in multiplayer games is affecting the video game industry and particularly what kinds of players play which games. With the advent of multiplayer capabilities in video games, many developers hoped to foster communities centered around online games. To a large extent, many games have succeeded in building a sense of community around their games but have failed to take necessary precautions to stop and discourage aggressive behavior that stems as a result of both competition and game content. In other words, game companies have failed to stop jerks from entering games and ruining the game with harassment and as a result of this, many people who once saw some games as something that brought joy has now had that perception turned into something that is hurtful (Tang & Fox,
“Women’s Harassment” 1301). The most notable example of this in recent years was the infamous Cross-Assault Event incident where one female professional player was harassed on a live stream by fellow players and even her coach. In the video, you can tell from her body language that her love for the game that she played was slowly crushed as the perpetrators continuously harassed her (O’Leary). If video games are to be an entertainment platform for all people, then there needs to be more of an effort by the game industry to enforce stricter guidelines on the communities that they build.
In conclusion, video games have become a popular medium for recreation across the world and while societal problems have begun to emerge within the online world, it’s important to be conscious of how video games may be inciting these problems. Action themed games have
Lee 9 been shown to desensitize players to real world violence whilst also increase aggressiveness.
Competition in video games also adds an element of intensity to games that sometimes may not be needed as it may lead to increased aggression because of frustration.
Lee 10
Works Cited
“2019 Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry.” Entertainment Software Association, 29 May 2019, www.theesa.com/esa-research/2019-essential-facts-about-the-computer-and-video-game-
industry/. “A Timeline of Video Game Controversies.” National Coalition Against Censorship, ncac.org/resource/a-timeline-of-video-game-controversies.
“A Toxic Culture: Studying Gaming’s Jerks.” The Toxic Meritocracy of Video Games: Why Gaming Culture Is the Worst, by Christopher A. Paul, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis; London, 2018, pp. 63–90. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctt2204rbz.5.
Adachi, Paul J. C. and Teena Willoughby. “Psychology of Violence The Effect of Video Game
Competition and Violence on Aggressive Behavior : Which Characteristic Has the
Greatest Influence ?” (2011).
Bruce D. Bartholow, Brad J. Bushman, Marc A. Sestir, Chronic violent video game exposure and
desensitization to violence: Behavioral and event-related brain potential data, Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 42, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 532-539, ISSN
0022-1031, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.08.006. Euteneuer, Jacob. “Defining Games, Designing Identity, and Developing Toxicity: Future Trends
in Game Studies.” New Media & Society, vol. 21, no. 3, 2018, pp. 786–790., doi:10.1177/1461444818809716.
Lee 11
Fox, J and Tang, W. Y.. (2016), Men's harassment behavior in online video games: Personality
traits and game factors. Aggr. Behav., 42: 513-521. doi:10.1002/ab.21646 Fox, J., & Tang, W. Y. (2017). Women’s experiences with general and sexual harassment in
online video games: Rumination, organizational responsiveness, withdrawal, and coping
strategies. New Media & Society, 19(8), 1290–1307.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816635778
Greitemeyer, Tobias, and Dirk O. Mügge. “Video Games Do Affect Social Outcomes: A
Meta-Analytic Review of the Effects of Violent and Prosocial Video Game Play.”
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 40, no. 5, May 2014, pp. 578–589,
doi:10.1177/0146167213520459.
Moss, Richard. “Headshot: A Visual History of First-Person Shooters.” Ars Technica, 14 Feb. 2016,
arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/02/headshot-a-visual-history-of-first-person-shooters/.
O'leary, Amy. “In Virtual Play, Sex Harassment Is All Too Real.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 2 Aug. 2012,
www.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/us/sexual-harassment-in-online-gaming-stirs-anger.html?
pagewanted=all.
Trump, Donald (realDonaldTrump). “Video game violence & glorification must be stopped—it
is creating monsters!.” 17 December, 2012 4:09 P.M. Tweet.