Are video games to blame for school shootings? |

Are video games to blame for school shootings?

Aaron Aupperlee
FILE - In this June 13, 2013 file photo, Alex Beckers watches a presentation on the video game 'Destiny' at the Activision Blizzard Booth during the Electronic Entertainment Expo in Los Angeles. The recent success of 'Watch Dogs' and 'Titanfall' is paving the way for several new video games that don't contain numbers in their titles to be hyped at next week's Electronic Entertainment Expo, the gaming industry's annual trade show held on June 10-12, 2014, in Los Angeles. With anticipation mounting for original games like “Destiny,” “The Order: 1886” and “Sunset Overdrive,” have game makers finally discovered the cure for sequelitis? (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, file)
With celebrity gamers like JuJu Smith-Shuster and Drake at the controls, 'Fortnite' is the hottest video game around.
Miami Herald
An upcoming video game that simulates school shootings and slated for a June release is being called a 'disgrace' by the families of students who were killed in the tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High three months ago.

The gun is never the solution.

At least not in the video game, “I Expect You To Die.”

The virtual reality game from Pittsburgh-based Schell Games may sound like a violent game, but it’s not, said CEO Jesse Schell.

It’s a James Bond-esque, escape room, puzzle-solving game where players find themselves trapped in deadly situations and have to figure a way out.

Sometimes, guns appear in the game as potential solutions.

But, spoiler alert:

“They are not the solution to your problem,” Schell said of guns in the game. “And if you use them, they will end up creating more problems for you.”

Blame is again being directed at violent video games in the aftermath of another school shooting. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick last week said that violence in video games have desensitized children to violence in the real world. Patrick was speaking just days after a teenager killed 10, eight students and two teachers, at a high school in Santa Fe, Texas.

It’s a popular refrain in the chorus of mass shootings. Blame violent video games, movies and music.

President Donald Trump invited gaming executives and critics to the White House after the February shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. The president opened the meeting with a montage of scenes from video games.

“This is violent, isn’t it?” Trump asked.

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, blamed video games — and the media and President Obama’s budget — for violence in 2012. And in 1982, then U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop said during a speech at University of Pittsburgh’s Western Psychiatric Institute that video games, like the popular Missile Command, could be to blame for violence.

“Everything is zap the enemy,” Koop said, according to reports from the time. “There’s nothing constructive in the game.”

The American Psychological Association in 2015 stated that violent video games are linked to aggression but that there wasn’t enough evidence to suggest violence in video games causes criminal behavior. Roger Klein, a psychology professor at University of Pittsburgh’s School of Education, said violence in video games is a complicated issue. He includes a section on violence in video games each year in his media psychology course.

Klein said discussion has shifted from whether all violent video games cause violent behavior to how the games contribute and effect the behavior of individuals. People’s biological make up, their upbringing, their need for attention and their exposure to video games could all determine the reaction to violence in video games and whether someone commits acts of violence in the real world, Klein said.

“Unfortunately, I do leave my students with a pessimistic conclusion. I’m not sure this is a solvable problem,” Klein said. “We don’t know how to predict it. We don’t know how to prevent it. We don’t even know how much exposure is bad.”

Klein said his students are typically split 50/50. Half of them see violence in video games as a serious issue. The other half thinks it is overblown.

Schell teaches at Carnegie Mellon University’s Entertainment Technology Center and said he finds that most of his students haven’t given much thought to violence in video games.

“It is so normalized in our culture, that most of them haven’t even thought that it could have effects,” Schell said. “Right now, our culture — television movies and games — largely sends the message that running around and shooting people with assault rifles is normal, healthy behavior.”

Schell said that needs to change. He doesn’t see a connection solely between violent video games and mass shootings. If violent video games produced violent people, then rampant school shootings should be problems in countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia and others that play the same video games. But Schell’s company doesn’t glorify gun violence in its games.

“Traditional media already does enough to glorify that,” Schell said. “I’d rather be part of the solution and not the problem.”

The company helped Disney and Lucasfilms create lightsaber battles for Star Wars: Jedi Challenges, but Schell doesn’t worry too much about sword fighting.

Games like the massively popular Fortnite do worry Schell. Parents may think the game is OK for their kids because it’s cartoon-like.

“But at the same time, everyone is running around shooting people with assault rifles,” Schell said. “When you make it cartoony like that, it makes me very uncomfortable.”

Aaron Aupperlee is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at [email protected], 412-336-8448 or via Twitter @tinynotebook.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.