Quote Originally Posted by Yves View Post
There are about 30 recent medical journals that contest your statement. While videogames are not linked to violence directly (it is highly unlikely that games cause violent behavior) there is an outstanding correlation that teens and males in their mid-20's to early-30's will emulate the behaviors of characters. This is why a large number of men are so susceptible to marketing - much moreso than women.

If you are in university take a look at your library database for some really interesting reads.
Its just the first thing people jump on when someone murders someone "Oh they played GT3 in the early 2000s it must have been from that" people are always looking for someone to blame, also the people everyone say it affects most is children, because they see something and think its ok to do it. If it was people in thier mid 20s to early 30s why do games have an age rating of 18? When its marketed at this "high risk group" surely it would be more logical to pass law that this high risk group cannot play them.

Also if its medical journals it will be from a small sample, 10k ppl most, out of the 6 billion people on earth small sample is not proof.

The reason they say its the mid 20s to early 30s is because these are people that have played games their whole life, and taking into account the time 10 years ago when they had a bottle of cider underage, not what they do now, I play WKC does this mean imma try to transform into a kight to kill rats? No (and I am 22 almost at this "high risk group".