(Image courtesy of cottonbro studio on Pexels)
Ever since the inception of arcade machines, video games have been a contentious talking point in regards to its impact on the psyche of (mostly) children.
From its violence impacting children, to being framed as the cause of school shootings, it’s been the subject of plenty of controversy, there’s no shortage of them.
Of course, with any media industry, the video game industry is riddled with controversy itself, however, that is a different story for another day. What I wish to discuss is another way video games impact people.
With media, especially a piece of media that can gain mass interest, whether by word of mouth or playing the game itself, it will begin developing a bit of an audience, a cult following, if you will.
Maybe even… a fandom.
Fandom culture is a bit of a different case compared to those who casually consume their media. One can interact with the media, whilst not being in the fandom, so to speak. You can play the game, but not consume fan art of the game, or engage with discussions on online form pages, much less call yourself a gamer.
Fandom culture is also interesting because of the reputation it has. Of course, every fandom is going to have a vocal minority of those who spread toxicity, but in regards to video games, it’s a strange beast.
Video games have had a reputation of being outlets for people to fester violence, or grow violent urges or tendencies. Similar stories have stemmed from fandom culture as well. However, video games can’t ever escape the “violent” label in regards to its impact on all those who play them, especially children.
This isn’t to say that children should be playing violent video games, because they shouldn’t. That’s why the ESRB is a thing, to prevent children from playing “adult” video games.
So, where exactly does this point come from? Why has it consistently stood the test of time? Does it even have some credibility to it?
Yes, and no.
Fandom, specifically internet fandom has quite an interesting reputation, depending on the circles those on the internet frequent.
Fandoms, specifically those from media geared towards child audiences, have a reputation for being quite toxic and infamous in nature. Meanwhile, fandoms with media with mature audiences in mind are more relaxed, with little to no incidents in comparison.
Of course, there are exceptions to every rule. However, this is not only based on generalization, but also my own personal experiences with fandom as well.
However, can, and should we, blame these incidents on the fandom or the game itself? Where is the line in all of this? What is it about these “childish” games that draw in such a toxic adult fanbase?
Well, I’d say we start with how this rhetoric even grew into prominence. Which would be the release of 1976’s “Death Race” into the arcade scene.
The reason? You ran people over. It was the whole crux of the game. You’d run people over, and get points. That was it.
A simple game for sure, but this would be the catalyst for many controversies to come. As for the correlation of video games and violence, that would emerge when home video games, and especially PC gaming, started to grow, and a certain incident happened in 1999.
It started with the release of an arcade classic, an infamous lawsuit, but the straw that broke the camel’s back was the shooting of Columbine High School.
Because the perpetrators of the shooting were reportedly interested in violent video games, especially with the likes of “Doom,” the correlation between violence and video games has stuck with the medium, better than it did years prior.
Unfortunately, it hasn’t even died down in the modern day. The most recent report as of the writing of this article has come from Newsweek.
However, with every attempt to frame video games as vehicles for violence, there’s always new articles and statements countering their arguments. No matter the time, the 1990s or halfway into 2025, the cycle will always find a way to repeat itself, only with ever so slight changes.
One would think that with how persistent this argument is, there would be some merit behind it. The truth of the matter is, it’s that it doesn’t.
There is no way to accurately determine a child’s anger, let alone anyone’s anger after they play a video game.
The way these arguments are framed are as if a child plays a game of Doom or Postal, and they immediately turn into violent monsters the more they play it. Not only does it make no sense, but also makes things comically easy to prove.
Studies upon studies upon studies have been made counterarguing how violent video games don’t make children violent, but rather aggressive. Big difference.
What is also worth mentioning is how most of these articles talk almost exclusively about the impact it has on children, despite the fact that, statistically, all the mass shootings tied to these arguments were mostly done by adults, not children.
This also isn’t to mention the fact that these controversial video games that are shockingly violent and suggestive have ratings for a reason (ESRB), to disclose the content that is in it. Meaning, the children either are growing up in an environment where consuming violent and suggestive content isn’t a big deal, or are consuming the content from outside sources, like an older sibling or even a friend.
As for the controversial video games themselves, there is no shortage of them, even in the modern day. The cult classic “Grand Theft Auto” is a common pick for the most controversial video game, but there are some that are outright banned in several countries for their content, such as the “Manhunt” series (which was also made by the same people behind GTA, Rockstar Games), and even the “Postal” franchise, made by Running With Scissors studio.
These games are infamous for their graphic violence and suggestive themes, sometimes even getting banned in several countries, so, the fandoms these games harbor must be just as crass, right?
Not exactly.
See, this is where I get a little more personal in this article. I’ve been a part of fandom for years. Ever since I’ve had access to the internet.
I’ve drawn fan art of my favorite cartoons and posted them to Pinterest for other fans to comment. I’ve been on Tumblr, in communities and liking theories for shows and talking fandom culture. I’ve been to conventions and cosplayed while talking to other fans since elementary school.
Safe to say, I know fandom. However, the internet is also scary. I’m aware of that.
I know that creeps are everywhere, that certain circles online aren’t always the safest, but that doesn’t mean the entire internet at large is unsafe either.
Now, how does this all tie back to violent and controversial video games?
Well, I’ve seen nothing but positivity from some of these communities. I say “some” because, admittedly, I’ve yet to play most of the games listed in this article.
But the one I have played? Postal. The top-down shooter game from 1997, with the crass and infamous sequels, especially Postal 2.
Postal is a franchise I’m relatively new to, having only played the first game. However, that was my gateway into the fandom of it.
Compared to some other fandoms I’ve seen, some even with more child focused audiences like “Sonic” or “Animal Crossing,” Postal’s community is relatively relaxed. Strangely so, in my opinion, especially knowing the original game.
What I mean is, that there is barely any in-fighting or controversy from members in that fandom.
There are countless incidents that happen in fandom that can taint their reputation. Places like Tumblr and Youtube have cataloged them extensively, as there is no shortage of them.
Yet Postal never makes it to these lists. Heck, none of these “violent video games” that are constantly used for fear mongering make it to these lists either.
However, I think I might have a reason as to why. Bear with me, though, it’s gonna be a lot.
To anyone that isn’t in fandom, think of it like high school. Like, a stereotypical high school, something you’d see in a sitcom.
You get your popular fandoms, people who are fans of a current popular thing. Then you get your weird kids, those who are fans of more obscure media. You get your sports fans, your musical theatre fans, so on and so forth.
Fandoms are like high school cliques, and everyone thinks that the others are weird. So, they all kinda mutually judge each other. In-fighting happens in these cliques, controversy sparks, rumors spiral. On-lookers and various other outsiders who don’t necessarily fit into any of these cliques are now discouraged from joining them because they’re “toxic.”
Engaging with media can be scary, especially to outsiders. Maybe you love a game, or TV show, but everyone around you is either telling you that it’s “violent” and “a terrible influence,” or telling you that “the fandom is so toxic” without actually taking an honest look at the full picture.
Sure, communities can be a little much to some, even toxic. I’ve been in some toxic fandoms before. However, that can’t be an excuse to judge a community like it’s a hivemind.
Going back to the case of “violent video games” and how “bad they are for children,” there is nothing to the argument. Yet, it always finds a way back into the general zeitgeist.
Video games don’t cause violence, nor do the communities for these games.
Impressions can last a lifetime, sure, but being a fan of a video game doesn’t, and shouldn’t equate to being violent and crazy.
