This is a different look at violence in video games.

Violent video games are not a cause of violence in society, but violence in the world is a fertile source of "inspiration" for a huge proportion of video games, and the existence of violence in the world is a psychological or emotional reference point for the gamer; they understand violence because they live in a time of violence (though perhaps not directly in their own lives).

Take the list of games that make up 2009's GOTY lists. All the games up for contention for overall GOTY are based on the existence of a violent world, or rather consumers being familiar with the concept of being in a violent world: Batman AA, Uncharted 2, MW2, Demon's Souls, Dragon Age: Origins, Assassin's Creed 2. Then there is the second tier of games that are top of genre or platform: Ratchet & Clank, GTA: Chinatown Wars, Madworld, Street Fighter IV, L4D2 and many others, including my personal favourite game thus far this generation: Valkyria Chronicles.

There are a lot of games that do not rely on violent conflict and crime. There are the many and varied racers, the sports games, many of the platformers, puzzle games, quiz games, singing games, fitness games, so it's not like videogaming is only a seething mass of violence. But the point is that the industry as a whole is reliant on violent games as a significant and vital source of revenue.

Now I'm like every beauty pageant contestant in history, I want world peace. And I hope one day it will be achieved (though perhaps not in my lifetime). I'm an optimist and I think it will happen, I just don't know when. But for the purposes of this discussion let's not debate whether a world at peace is possible, let's assume the world is at peace. What does that look like (in a few sentences) and what does that mean for videogaming?

In the most basic of terms a world at peace means the elimination of conflict and crime. So no wars, no crime, no domestic violence, no child abuse, no rape, no bullying at school, to football hooligans, no terrorism, no drunken street brawls on a saturday night...etc. Or at least the frequency is so diminished that for 99.9% of the world they've never seen or heard of these things. This means violence, conflict, war, crime, abuse, terrorism etc are simply not part of the public consciousness. People can't relate to these things except what they read in the history books about how barbaric humanity used to be.

In that world do you think FPS games would sell? Do you think beat'em up games would sell? Do you think the 2D fighting game would sell? Do you think any game that essentially requires some awareness or consciousness of conflict and violence would hold any appeal to people for whom violence towards others is a totally foreign (and thereby abhorrent) concept? Given world history would still provide those who read and study it with a sense of what a violent society is like, does this provide an outlet for video games centrered around, or at least making use of violent gameplay? I doubt it would.

Can a videogaming mega-industry exists under these conditions? What will it look like? What types of games will people play?

Given I think a world at peace approximating what I describe above will happen violence in video games will die out. Not because anyone makes a law against them or that draconian censorship is introduced, but simply that people living in a world at peace will stop having any interest in them. Under those conditions will the video game industry evlove and retain people's interest without using violence, or will it atrophy away to virtual nothingness from the loss, a mere curiosity and amateur pastime?

The same question can be asked of every popular entertainment industry, but in this instance I'm asking about video games.

Violent video games reflect a need in people for the expression of violence. I think it works well on expressing the need here rather than in an actual real-world setting.

People would not buy violent video games, or watch eagerly news reporting violence on tv, be interested in wars, etc., if there is no need within. I don't think that these lead to violence, rather they are correlated and tend to go together.

Game titles like Call of Duty: World at War would become more shocking and thus more appealing

If there were no violence in the world but people hadn't changed, violent videogames (and other forms of entertainment) would be even more popular. Our violent tendencies would have to have somewhere to go, and violence has always been the most satisfying (though not the best) best way to solve a problem or a conflict. That would not go away so easily.

If, on the other hand, humans changed and the instinct for violence completely disappeared, then the purpose of those violent games would disappear, and we would be left with Brain Training, Puzzle games and such. The gaming industry would not be where it is today, that's for sure.

There are two plausible (and not exclusive) scenarios (probably more in fact):

1 - a move to classic 'pure' games more like Mario with no realistic violence or conflict or a strong focus on fantasy settings with heavily stylized conflict

2 - acceptance of more violent videogames as an output from aggression, etc. - although in your argument it could be the case that humanity is at a point where there is no need for that output

Either way videogames, books, etc. would do just fine. I suppose, as haxxiy is correct, you could see the strange scenario where violent games become like contraband or even illegal but highly desirable to certain people.

I believe the overly violent games such as, God of War, Gears of War, killzone series, ALL call of duty games and the like should not exist, its only purpose is raw violence with no positive meaning behind them what-so-ever.

atleast in games like mario, little big planet, or hell even wii-sports, you benefit from it.

Or for greater example... JRPG's, most JRPG's have a waterfall of emotions put into it, and it makes the players give a damn, think of them as interactive books, the JRPG genre and hell to some extent even MMORPG's and WRPG's have really great stories to them.

In conclusion, a peaceful mind makes a peaceful man.

How do you benefit from playing Mario in any way that you do not benefit from playing the violent games you mentioned?

It all comes down to the gameplay, I don't believe it has much to with awareness of violence in the world. I've always had zero real-world awareness of jumping on mushrooms and bashing blocks to look for magic coins, but it hasn't stopped Super Mario Bros appealing to me.

quite a few benefits actually. it keeps kids like my little brother happy and to shut up when he gets to hyper, also come on who doesn't like jumping on turtles then using there shells as surf boards?

lol, really though, games like Mario and LBP really brings the family together, creating stronger bonds, mario is just an example, just like LBP, however i don't think a family would get closer by head shotting someone in MW2, unless there quite a disturbed bunch.

Modern Warfare 2 doesn't really have local multiplayer, and males seem to tend to like violence more, so you are not all that likely to play with your mother. But that's about the only thing that's different. The same values that can be found in Mario can be found in Modern Warfare, if you strip away the accessibility and broader appeal of the mario games. The benefit you get from the product is basically the same. Entertainment and friendship through game.