ladyofastolat | Ban this sick filth!

Yesterday, when I drove to town after far too many hours playing Burnout (i.e. racing at 220 miles an hour through city streets, scenery whizzing past me in a blur) I found I had to concentrate rather more on driving than normal. 40 mph felt slow, in a way it doesn't normally, and I felt as if I hardly had to turn the wheel at all to get round corners (as opposed to skidding round 90 degree bends at 150 mph.) Also, in the evening, after I'd stopped playing, I found I was less able to concentrate on print than normal. My eyes had become accustomed to an image that was whizzing by fast, and my brain had become accustomed to making split-second reactions.

I found this somewhat worrying. Playing on the Xbox for too long seemed to have turned me into an attention-deficient boy racer.

A few weeks ago, I read some new article that claimed that people who play racing games tend to be less safe drivers, therefore (the article claimed) "playing racing games turns people into dangerous drivers." I was rather scathing when I read it, since it didn't seem to consider the fact that boy-racer types are probably a whole lot more likely to play such games in the first place than sedate grannies. Rather than A leading to B, B may well lead to A.

A lot of the "computer games are evil and should be banned" brigade lose all credibility in my eyes for working from a flawed premise. They assume that games = for children, therefore if a game is about shooting people, its sole aim is to corrupt 8 year old boys into glorifying shooting. They totally miss the point that games, like films, are rated by age. If an 8 year old boy is getting corrupted by playing an 18-rated game, then it's the parents' fault for letting him get his hands on it. I know of parents who would never dream of letting their 7 year old watch an 18-rated film, but see nothing wrong with getting them 18-rated games. I've even heard parents shouting at staff in HMV and Blockbuster when they point out the 18 rating on the game they want to buy/borrow for their seven year old son.

Children have less ability than adults to distinguish fiction from reality. It is arguable that a 7 year old boy who spends his days shooting people on his Playstation might get confused and think it's okay in reality. (Though no-one seems to want to ban Tom and Jerry, and, interestingly, I once added up the body count in "family movie" Raiders of the Lost Ark, and found it higher than in Lethal Weapon, and with less focus on consequences.)

Plus, playing games is (usually) a solo activity. A child who spends whole days playing on his Playstation is missing out on social interaction (though the same could be said of reading books) and verbal development. I have read studies that claim that too much exposure to fast-moving images (and this includes TV, not just games) can have a detrimental effect on a child's mental development. (However, as with every such study, I have also read the opposite.) A tense, fast-moving game requires lots of concentration, and there is a lot of frustration when things go wrong. (I know many games are not like this, but 8 year old boys are more likely to play racing and shooting games, than play strategy games.) It's not likely to produce quiet, restful, fluffy thoughts just before bedtime.

However, adults are not children. They are generally assumed to be able to make adult judgements about things, and realise for themselves that games are just that – just games. Every now and then, the media goes into a frenzy when some killer is found to be a fan of "violent computer games", thus proving that computer games cause people to become crazed killers. (Strangely, they never say that he was very fond of baked beans, therefore the beans made him do it.) However, it seems probable that he was predisposed to murderous rampage, anyway. Maybe that's why he liked the games. Maybe the games had nothing to do with it. Attacking the games seems like a knee-jerk reaction – rather like trying to ban swords/pen-knives/cork-screws/toe-nail clippers/whatever else the latest high profile murderer has used.

People might personally consider that a game that involves shooting people isn't very tasteful and isn't their idea of entertainment, but that doesn't mean it should be banned. If it is, at least be consistent and extend the attack to films and books. People seem to be a whole lot more fond of bashing violent games than bashing violent movies, even though the violence in a live-action film is so much more realistic than anything in a game. Presumably this is because the people who campaign have all watched films, but have never played a computer game. It's always easier to attack the thing you don't understand. And they don't understand. Of all the unusual hobbies I have, playing computer games is the one people at work can least comprehend. ("But why? I grew out of games thirty years ago.")

Which, really, is why I was rather disturbed to find that I, a sensible adult, was finding it harder to drive sensibly yesterday, and was finding it less able to concentrate. I seem to be proving all those campaigners right.