Você está na página 1de 6

Unit 6: LO3 Report

CAMERON CRUICKSHANK

Research On Video Games & Impact


on Audiences- Task 1
In task one I looked at 3 different reports all linking to violence in video games, and in this
research I found some very good information. One report stated that that they have proved that
games actually can have a good impact on teenagers to do with skills such as creativity and
problem solving skills. This was a very different report to the two other reports I looked at
whished stated that both violent video games make a impact on their attitudes, which makes
them more aggressive, research also showed that half of teenagers play violent video games and
usually for around 1 3 hours of gaming on Violent video games. I think I can draw good
conclusions from this to see how audiences respond to playing violent video games, in some
cases people can actually benefit from playing video games, which they can learn and take new
skills into the real life, but theories such as the Hyper dermic Needle theory do not fully allow
this to happen as Games are seen as a major influence on Teenagers, as much as there are bad
reports on video games of accusations on death events, the game is soon fast to be blamed and
believed to of been a replicated event of that game. Maybe in the right manner we can look to
games more and use games as a virtual tool to improve our skills take take this into reality.

Call of Duty Questionnaire Task 2


In this task we were given the task of looking into a violent video game I chose to do Call of Duty.
My aim was to find out the responses of teenagers who play Call of Duty between he ages of 1618. I asked open and closed questions such as what feeling do you have when you play Call of
Duty and what do you mainly play Call of Duty for? By doing this questionnaire I wanted to
collect good qualitive and quantitive data and get a good insight to how gamers who play Call of
duty feel when they play this game and what aspects of the game they like, dislike, and
important things in the game which makes them like it so much. I asked 11 questions in word
format.

Questionaire Results Task 3


I gathered some very good results with my questionnaire and this gave more of a insight to how
people respond to violent video games, in my case, Call of Duty, everyone who plays call of duty
is male according to my questionnaire and 64% of them said that they play call of duty a lot, so
has this made any effect on their behaviour? Every single one said no, call of duty does not
effect their behaviour at all. So when it comes to the hyper dermic needle theory, Violent video
games are apparently really bad according to the mass media, that they believe everything on
the game, say if call of duty showed Russians as being bad, some people would then think they
are all bad people. but I found in my survey that they do not feel effected by call of duty at all,
so I was interested to know how they feel after game? 25% of people said they feel sense of
achievement and another 25% of people said they feel annoyed. 50% said that they feel angry
after playing. This was interesting because it shows they do not feel effected by this game, but
they half of the people feel angry after they played this game? So can we relate violence to
video games and are we a actual passive audience? Results here seem to say no but in my
opinion at points we may be a passive audience and this game after a while might actually
effects our attitudes in a slight

Focus Group Task 4


With the focus group task, this was a great opportunity to really ask people find out what they think
to violence in video games and get some valid opinions and feedback. I found the majority opinion
was that violence in video games can be a problem, but only for the wrong people. Such as
upbringing and doesnt know what's wrong and what's right, some valid points came up with that
that person playing the game might actually have a problem and therefore shouldnt be playing the
game which doesnt support the idea of Uses & Gratifications theory and hyperdermic needle theory
which both suggest overall the video games can effect our behaviour due to the violent nature and
content in the game, makes it seem acceptable and give certain people bad reputations. The main
topic of conversation was about a event which saw a 13 year old shoot his mother 2 hours after
playing GTA for a length of time, it was then accused straight away that GTA was to blame for this,
there was some points that they dont think this was the reason he killed his mother due to being a
passive audience context in the game may of pushed him towards that direction. Another topic that
we mentioned was the mass media pointing there fingers towards Video Games, feedback suggested
that games are used as a tool to blame things on and that the media are just finding something to
blow up, and sell lots of papers and get a lot of attention which can then dragged out for a long time.
Is this the case? I think there is a true point here that games are used as a scape goat and a tool for
the media to use because they want to cover up more things and pass the blame onto a virtual game.

Conlcusion
Overall I found out some very good information about how people respond to video games and
different situations. Firstly I do understand why people may think there is a relevance to violent
video games and the gamer, I do think there could be a link as my own research showed that
50% of people feel annoyed of playing this game and this could create a effect on our behaviour.
But also there good things to be learned from video games and its something I think we could
exploit, we can use the fact that video games are virtual and we can use it for certain skill in
certain areas such as creativity, spatial awareness, awareness of angles and we can take this into
the real world. I think the Hyperdermic needle theory does play a big part in suggesting that
certain specific people are bad, so which then with a passive audience, are more likely to
replicate events that have happened, but it is just as much to do moral panic and up brining, we
cannot prove anything. There are flaws in both theories that everything we see on our screens
when playing a game is the right thing because not everyone sees it like this, it all links in
together and comes down to the mental state of the person playing the game, if they are
mentally stable, then they are not mentally fit to play the game.