Gamers Prefer Challenge Over Violence

image: Yay_Videogame_Violence_by_jetaron A study conducted by the University of Rochester has concluded that challenges and "meaningful opportunities to interact and work together" are more important to videogame enthusiasts than violence.

While their results seem to fall well within the realm of the obvious, the data provides interesting talking points for fans of our particular hobby. Researchers worked with virtual environment think tank Immersyve, Inc. to conduct a pair of surveys with 2,670 "frequent game players," and carried out four experiments involving over 300 University of Rochester undergraduates.

In an interview with the Canadian Press concerning the study and its findings, lead author Andrew Przybylski notes that fans of titles like Halo 3 and Team Fortress 2 gravitate towards those particular titles in order to have "their psychological needs met," referring to the "experience of autonomy and competence in gameplay."

In one experiment, modifications were made to the popular first person shooter Half-Life 2. One version of the game saw players equipped with a shotgun, featured amplified levels of violence, and forced players to hunt down an adversary. The other featured psychic abilities, and players were "essentially playing a game of tag." If an opponent was hit with the psychic power, they would float into the air and evaporate.

After playing, participants were asked questions regarding their enjoyment of the experience, and whether or not they would return to the labs to play either of the versions again. The responses indicated that the a player's opinion of the experience, on average, wasn't affected by modifying the levels of violence.

Interestingly, even the 5% of participants who self-identified as having a preference for violent games did not rate the more violent game as being more enjoyable.

The study appears in the recently released February issue of the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, but a free abstract of the report summarizes their research findings.


Blood and gore don't make video games more enjoyable: study http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/01/16/research-gamers-love-challenge-not-gore
Comments
42
wanted to make it a poll but no permission :(
I wish the things that I never knew.
Would be interesting if someone made a really awesome non-violent game!
World of Goo :P
Parent
really nice one!
Parent
Sports games?
Parent
I said awesome!
Parent
ET Paintball or ET Stick Soldiers :D
Parent
ET Powerball ^^

Awesome mod.
Parent
portal is almost violentless :p, only where those turrets and rocket launcher starts firing at you.
Parent
so true, but so difficult to explain to parrents :P
no shit
I think violence should be packed with realism to some degree... Thats why Carmageddon was fun. You could go and kill people on the streets, crash cars, things that are possible in real life when driving.
every GTA released had an article associated with it whining about violence...
Parent
I don't care what some conservator guys tell about that game. It's not just the violence that makes that game cool, but all the other stuff that can be done in that virtual world, banned or not banned by law.
Parent
evilzombie for crossfire admin!

<3
just regurgitated news bud ;)
Parent
well you always do it on a nice time when im bored so i have smth to read!
Parent
A fact known since ages. Just look at warsow - cartoon network-like graphics, no blood at all and still enjoyable as hell.
Were you high when you wrote that comment?
Parent
when isn't he high?
Parent
Nice post! Every gamer alive breathes a sigh of “duuuuuuuuuur” – but studies like this are important in putting the point across. Zealot’d parents against X have a greater influence ‘n knowledge in manipulating the system – sane minded people need something to shoot back with…

Apathy leads to oppression :)
what sense does it make to test it with two different play modes?

for example quake: in quake3 enemies evaporate in a bloody cloud when directly hit with rocket launcher or railgun. in quake live they removed the gore and enemies dissolve in some kind of golden fairy dust.

given the choice I would pick the bloody one.
Yes... That proves my point. In a game that is called a first person shooter, where players are ment to have guns and kill eachother, the realism is pretty important.
Parent
quake live sucks!
Parent
They did not test a play mode with gore and without only. The one without gore had physical tasks and was more creative. The players liked the challenging over the massacre gameplay. That's the point.
Parent
you got it right! :)
Parent
i like violence :(
This study was obviously sponsored by EA Games.
sof 1 is what i consider a good measure of violence. hl2 doesnt have any violence in my mind. just shooting guns into models which stop moving after taking a few bloodless hits isnt violence. its like saying that when you go to a shooting range and shoot into targets youre being violent.
i loved shooting their legs off in sof 1!
Parent
i love dead rising on xbox!
this is what i know for long time ^^
anyway its good, that its public fact now ^^
PERSONALLY... I PREFER VIOLENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i thought youd prefere gaypr0n :<
Parent
killing isn't fun if it's too easy, there has to be a challenge

some times you are thinking "damn why can't he just die right now" but only a few minutes after that you start thinking "how can I give him the most painfull dead" there is the challenge, more fun! :D

challenge + voilence = mu mu mu multikillll!
postal 2 stp is good because its violent, no other reason.
Back to top