Researchers had gamers play violent video games so that they could analyze the correlation between violent video games and their effects. The researchers concluded that most of the participants were unaffected by the violence displayed in the video games (Fournis). The violence in video games may seem realistic, but it is fictional and was meant for entertainment purposes. The researchers were surprised to find that several gamers experienced a decline in anger (Fournis). These findings should not come as a surprise because the games were not meant to provoke real life criminal acts. It is unlikely that a video game will help a criminal realize that they want to commit a crime because evidence shows a negative relation between real life crime and violent video games (Fournis). First person shooters illustrate a large amount of violence that is meant for mature users. Video game companies follow strict policies and have to rate their games according to the content that is …show more content…
The aggression researchers came to the conclusion that “violent video game play is a causal risk factor for aggressive behavior” (Anderson). Violent video games may have been said to have a small relation to aggression and this does not prove that aggression takes the form of crime or violence. The researchers also believe that playing a violent video game for about 20 minutes can lead a person to be desensitized of violence in real life (Fournis). Any video game can cause frustration and make the user aggravated, but this does not mean the user will take out his frustration on society. Healthy individuals can determine the difference between a digital world and the real world. Gamers are not realistically involved in video games to the point in which they will be confused about reality. Violent movies are more likely to influence violent acts than violent video games. Video game researchers have found that video game violence is less influential than violence in a movie or on television