Grad conference to address Finding Common Ground | via Indiana University Media School

The Media School at Indiana University graciously featured some of my research that I’ll be presenting at the school’s graduate student conference on April 7th. I’ll be presenting during the Video Game Studies panel from 9:30 to 10:20 a.m. in Franklin Hall 312 along with fellow graduate students Alex Mirowski (Informatics) and Ken Rosenberg (Media School).

The Media School wrote:

Jess Tompkins, a third-year doctoral student at the school, will present her video game research, which is a textual analysis of fan fiction based on the popular game Call of Duty, a first-person shooter game in which the players are soldiers at war.

The game, Tompkins explained, is extremely male oriented and depicts a very specific type of persona known as “military masculine.”

“Fan fiction is a pretty active subculture, and it negotiates ways that contrast the main stream ideas imposed in the game, particularly around gender,” she said. “Authors insert female characters or create romantic relationships between two current male characters to get their own enjoyment out of the games.”

Tompkins took about 40 pieces of Call of Duty fan fiction and, using social psychological theories, examined the stories and wrote an analysis. Her work is set to be published as a chapter in a new book, Call of Duty Essay Collection.

I would like to kindly correct some inaccuracies given that I was not provided a draft to copy-edit prior to this piece’s publication. The specific concept is “military masculinity” (not military masculine), and while my research, in general, applies social-psychological theories, this particular analysis was largely informed by Stuart Hall’s notion of encoding and decoding as applied to media production and audiences. 🙂

I look forward to sharing this project at the conference!

Source: Grad conference to address Finding Common Ground | Indiana University Media School

There’s a Soldier in All of Us? Gender in Call of Duty’s Live Action Trailers

It’s said in life only three things are guaranteed: death, taxes, and a new Call of Duty (CoD) release each year. The imminent arrival of each subsequent installment of the juggernaut first-person shooter franchise is heralded by entertaining live action trailers featuring fantasy gunplay and celebrity endorsements. These short but bombastic videos capture the high-octane gameplay that gamers have, for better or worse, come to associate with CoD games.

Yet the advertising of CoD in live action trailers arguably represents the systematic gender-biases present in video game marketing at large, especially for genres that assume an overwhelmingly male audience, as often the case for first-person shooter games. Even prior to the development of the live action trailers, masculine themes that marginalize women and homosexual men were emphasized in other CoD promotional videos. Let’s not forget the time Infinity Ward released a YouTube video in 2009 that disparaged the use of random grenade throws in the game’s online mode as a phony public service announcement sponsored by a ficticious organization called Fight Against Grenade Spam, or FAGS. While the video was quickly removed for its insensitive language, official promotional videos with homophobic undertones clearly stigmatize minorities from the CoD online community.

15091-399365-mw3jpg-noscalePerfect soldiers? “The Vet and The n00b” specifically hails a male demographic.

Activision, the publisher of the CoD franchise, has consistently advertised new releases for a predominately male demographic at the expense of female representation. I genuinely applaud the original live action CoD trailer for Black Ops (2010) for featuring a diverse range of male and female actors engaging in fantasy gunplay. The trailer showcases a diversity of body types and ethnicities equally kicking ass in an absurd abstraction of both authentic reality and actual video gameplay. Recent live action trailers, however, are noticeably (and unfortunately) less egalitarian. Modern Warfare 3’s (2012) live action trailer started the trend in “The Vet & The n00b” which starred Sam Worthington and Jonah Hill in the respective roles of the “veteran” and “noob.” Their relationship, in which the veteran trains the novice player/soldier in CoD tactics and weaponry, values skilled performance as a masculine ideal.

15091-399365-meganfoxcallofdutyjpg-noscaleMegan Fox’s brief appearance in “Epic Night Out” might be boiled down to eye candy.

Indeed, men are typically active subjects in the narratives of the live action trailers while women are subjected to a male gaze that frames females as objects to be gazed upon. Actress Megan Fox was briefly featured in a CoD: Ghosts (2013) live action trailer titled “Epic Night Out.” While Fox is depicted as a tough, competent, and fiercely independent a male character blatantly flirts with her, emphasizing her role as a mere object for male pleasure. The men exit the scene after the male character’s unsuccessful attempt at chatting her up and she’s quickly forgotten about.

15091-399365-codawpng-noscaleEmily Ratajkowski in “Discover Your Power” is selling sexiness – not CoD. 

Roughly a year later, the CoD: Advanced Warfare (2014) live action trailer positioned a male viewership to “Discover Your Power” from the first-person perspective. While the actor’s face is never seen the hairy arms are noticeably masculine when the actor runs and guns across an advanced battlefield of the future. In the same video, the heterosexual male gaze is catered by the quick appearance of model Emily Ratajkowski, clad in tiny shorts and a belly shirt, after the character-viewer temporarily blacks out. The scene is used for humor when it turns out that the sexy visage is actually a slobbering goat – in other words, the trailer’s only female representation is actually a hallucination. In the world of Advanced Warfare’s trailer, power is the exclusive domain of men.

15091-399365-codblops3png-noscaleCara Delevingne’s role in “Seize Glory” is an improvement on the formula.

Fortunately, the trend of objectifying women in CoD trailers is shifting, if somewhat gradually. Actress and model Cara Delevingne ultimately dominates the subject of the narrative, a male character named Kevin, in the CoD: Black Ops III (2015) trailer “Seize Glory” but only within the video’s final seconds.Some women viewers may certainly enjoy strong heroines like the ones portrayed by Delevingne and Fox. Indeed, they are framed as tough, badass, and capable of keeping up with the men (Ratajkowski’s sexualized appearance more the exception than the rule). Yet it remains that these advertisements offer a variety of masculinities on display – black, white, and overweight – while a particular type of woman, who is beautiful and conforms to a thin ideal, is given enough time and space in the trailers to please a heterosexual male audience, first and foremost.

15091-399365-codghostspng-noscaleMale victims of CODnapping receive access to games, big comfy chairs, and beverage service in “CODnapped.” Women are framed as potential obstacles to accessing these privileges. 

A trailer selling downloadable content for Ghosts, titled “CODnapped” (a play on CoD and kidnapping), is the most egregious example of CoD as exclusively a “man’s world.” The trailer depicts a fantasy scenario in which several men are relieved of their everyday burdens by a clandestine military group who abscond them from the likes of attending a business dinner and shopping with a wife and baby. The objective of CODnapping is that these men might have uninterrupted time to play CoD: Ghosts away from their families and girlfriends. In this world, a variety of masculinities are interpellated as subjects while women are not even considered a group who might want to be “CODnapped” from their own mundane existence. Surely the women featured in the video – the female student driver, the wife and mother of a toddler, the girlfriend fussing over her appearance – might also need a relief from their daily pressures?

This November’s release of Infinite Warfare (2016) introduced a new live action trailer titled “Screw It, Let’s Go to Space.” While initially showcasing a number of diverse characters prior to the combat scenes, once the actual fighting erupts women appear far less frequently than men in the one minute and forty-six second trailer. The trailer is a welcome departure from objectifying women yet does little to increase female visibility compared to past commercials.

15091-399365-codiwpng-noscaleOne of two prominent women soldiers who appear in Infinite Warfare’s “Screw It, Let’s Go to Space.”

So, why is this important – why scrutinze gender portrayals in CoD commercials? Especially given the fact that many gamers no longer take seriously CoD as more than just a cash cow? Representation in any medium is always important given that as humans we naturally identify with similar others. And given the contentious status of women in online gaming communities, where harrassment and hostility is not uncommon, would it really harm the franchise to acknowledge women players more broadly, to represent women in ways that disrupt stereotypes? To consider the female demographic as more than just an afterthought? These trailers started strong with Black Ops, dipped to an all-time low with Advanced Warfare, and addressed previous wrongs in Infinite Warfare’s recent commercial – but there’s still room for improvement. For CoD to diversify the range of representation within the live action trailers would go a long way towards conceptualizing CoD as a game for the “solider in all of us.”

Note: Gender and Call of Duty is currently a topic I am developing and wrestling with for a book chapter on the series. This discussion was originally going to appear in condensed form in the book chapter, which is actually more specifically about gender in the Modern Warfare games and associated fandom, but due to word-count limitations and a desire to have this conversation more broadly, I’ve decided to share this piece in blog format. And a disclaimer: I acknowledge that I am by no means an expert on the Call of Duty series at large. I’ve only played Black Ops, Modern Warfare 1-3, and Ghosts.
Originally posted on Destructoid.

Bros Before Tangos? Narrative & Parasocial Friendships in Military Shooters

[Spoiler Warning: This post contains major spoilers for Star Wars: Republic Commando and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2]

What’s a Parasocial Friendship?

A good story and compelling characters can provide players with a sense of friendship and belonging within a gameworld. Parasocial interaction explains that audience members may experience one-sided relationships with mediated characters. In other words, spend enough time with a fictional character in book, movie, or video game, and you might just start to think of them as a friend. I’m of the position this effect contributes to media enjoyment; in my case, I’ve found that parasocial relationships with game characters can go a long way to differentiate an otherwise generic game.

With the interactive nature of videogames, the medium is particularly successful at inculcating such feelings. Perhaps one need only reference the “Garrus Vakarian is my Space Boyfriend” t-shirt to gauge the level of attachment some players may experience with fictional romantic pursuits in the Mass Effect series of roleplaying games. But what about games where character roleplay isn’t an option? Or for games that emphasize combat over narrative? Can parasocial friendships with characters make an otherwise generic military-themed shooter more meaningful?

star_wars_republic_commando_wallDon’t let the space-marine armor fool ya, there’s a lot to like about Delta Squad.

In video games, such relationships are likely encouraged when a player-character shares a close bond with one or more characters. Military shooters often exhibit themes of professionalism, duty, and camaraderie between the player-character and their allies. These relationships, paired with gameplay that emphasize interdependency rather than independency in the military squad, go a long way towards encouraging parasocial friendships and empathy towards game characters. Importantly, this bond has implications for plot twists that disrupt the empowering fantasy of the traditional, first-person military shooter game. I discuss in the context of Star Wars: Republic Commando and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.

mw-group#SquadGoals. The only Call of Duty cast that made me care about the plot are the Modern Warfare playable and non-playable characters.

Star Wars: Republic Commando

Star Wars: Republic Commando (2005; RC) is a squad-based first-person shooter (FPS), and probably the first FPS that I ever played and actually enjoyed. Admittedly, this gamer was already a diehard Star Wars enthusiast and sympathetic towards the clones prior to playing the game, but the excellent characterizations of the individual soldiers distinguish RC as particularly suited for ‘virtual’ friendship.

When the player assumes the role of Boss, the leader of Delta Squad, they give commands to his clone brothers Scorch, Sev, and Fixer on the battlefield. The player can position each member strategically to combat the enemies as a force. In my experience, RC is far more challenging when this feature is ignored as the mechanic emphasizes the role of the squad over the lone warrior. Importantly, when members of the squad go down for the count, the player can use a healing command to pull them back from the brink of death. Likewise, the squadmates can resuscitate the player-as-Boss, which enhances the interdependency of the squad. These game mechanics, which are fairly standard for squad-based shooters (Spec Ops: The Line also comes to mind), are paired with excellent dialogue between Delta Squad – usually incorporating humor to balance out the game’s rather grim tone – and emphasize the bonds among them.

commandosDelta Squad kickin’ some droid butt. Photoshop by me, render by n3rdskillz.

Boss: [player in need of healing from squad] Need help, commandos…
Scorch: All right, but if I get shot in the back, I’m blaming you.

Sev: Damn, I don’t believe it!
Scorch: What’s wrong, Sev?
Sev: I’ve lost count of my kills!

Scorch: [Sev shoots a corpse excessively] Sev, did that corpse give you a nasty look?
Sev: Rule 17…
Scorch: We know, always make sure they’re dead.

Good mechanics and characterizations help make RC, or what could have been a generic FPS set in the Star Wars universe, stand out. As a player, I was invested in protecting my squad, not just to win, but because the gameplay and characterizations facilitated a relationship with Scorch, Sev, and Fixer. And I don’t think I’m the only one, either. In a ‘Let’s Play’ video of the game on YouTube, a gamer tells Scorch to “hold on buddy” during a heal and makes other statements to the squad amidst a particularly difficult assault. While commentary is standard for ‘Let’s Play’ videos, the one-way dialogue directed at a game character indicates a parasocial experience.

The character bonds are intensified by plot twists that disrupt the power fantasy of the FPS and emphasize the vulnerability of life (virtual or not). The expectation for squadmate healing and the “we’re better than the enemy we’re fighting against” bravado is painfully disrupted in RC’s finale. Just when you, the player-as-Boss, expects a beautifully executed victory, Sev goes missing in action. Boss, stricken and devoted, attempts to disobey a military order from the Jedi generals to search for Sev.

Boss: I don’t care if they [the orders] came from Master Yoda himself!
Clone Advisor: As a matter of fact, they did, solider! Now get your squad out of there.

Unfortunately, shortly after this exchange – even though the player-as-Boss might start running back to Sev’s position – the gameplay abruptly ends and a cutscene plays of the forced evacuation of the commandos. It’s frustrating as a player who starts to genuinely care about your squad and the fate of your missing brother, and the loss of Sev packs an emotional punch in the otherwise tidy ending. My concern for Sev lingered after gameplay and part of me will always pine for the RC sequel to address his whereabouts.

15091-390212-rcendjpg-noscale.jpgRC’s point-of-view ending forces the player to directly confront Sev’s absence. 

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

Modern Warfare 2‘s (2009; MW2) story is easily dismissed as a jingoistic military jaunt but it’s a big-dumb FPS shooter where the characters are generally likeable and the missions intensify the squad interdependency. Although you play as several characters over the course of the narrative, I argue that the most memorable missions in MW2 involve playing as Gary “Roach” Sanderson of Task Force 141, partially attributed to potential parasocial feelings for the player-character’s allies.

At first glance, your superiors Captain John “Soap” MacTavish and Lieutenant Simon “Ghost” Riley look like one-dimensional masculine archetypes: a buff dude with a mohawk and another dude who is so badass he obscures his face with a skull mask and sunglasses. But there is a good amount of dialogue peppered throughout MW2’s levels that facilities an understanding of the bond between these characters that the player might also experience. It probably helps that Soap and Ghost are wonderfully voiced by Kevin McKidd and Craig Fairbrass, respectively, who always convincingly convey the drama of MW2’s story (and damn if their Scottish and English accents aren’t bloody amazing). As an aside, solid voice actor performances certainly enhance believability.

mw2-soap-ghostCaptain “Soap” MacTavish and Ghost, the badass Brits. Photoshop by me, renders by BHD595 & 74540.

Although the gameplay of MW2 is not nearly as active as RC, in which you play the squad leader issuing orders, your mission objectives are integrated into a cooperative framework. The below exchange is just one example of the teamwork exhibited in the Task Force 141 missions. If you’ve played the game, compare how the dynamics change when you’re in the role of Private James Ramirez of the US Army Rangers, constantly following the orders of Sergeant Foley. The dialogue of those levels spawned an entire meme, after all (Ramirez, Do Everything!). Foley isn’t so much a friend as he is an announcer of game objectives.

Captain MacTavish: This is it! We go in, grab Prisoner 627, and get out! Check your corners! Let’s go! [Mactavish, Ghost, Roach and Task Force 141 enter a control room and engage the hostiles positioned there.]
Ghost: That’s the control room up ahead! I can use it to find the prisoner! I’ll tap into their system and look for the prisoner! It’s gonna take some time!
Captain MacTavish: Copy that! Roach, we’re on cell duty! Follow me!
[Ghost hacks into the control systems. MacTavish, Roach, and the rest of the team go down into the first level and engage hostiles while looking for the prisoner.]
Ghost: Alright, I’m patched in. I’m tracking your progress on the security cameras. [Ghost continues to provide remote support to the team as the others search for the prisoner.]

Not unlike the disappointment of losing Sev in RC, an unfortunate twist in MW2’s campaign disrupts the power fantasy at the same time it cinches a connection with a game character. In a harrowing mission to retrieve intel at a terrorist safe house in the level “Loose Ends,” the player is bombarded with waves of enemies. When the extraction team arrives heralded by the overseeing General Shepherd, the player-as-Roach must flee from another round of approaching gunmen and mortar fire, only to temporarily blackout after a near-hit by a projectile.

A cutscene interrupts the gameplay, the camera revealing that you-as-Roach are being saved by your lieutenant, who frantically tells you to “hang in there.” Gameplay resumes and you’re able to return the enemy fire for a brief moment as Ghost literally drags your avatar to apparent safety. Another cutscene displaces gameplay, as you see through the eyes of your wounded avatar as they approach the landing zone. Only the relief is quickly replaced by shock and horror as General Shepherd shoots Roach at point blank range, followed by the man who just risked his own life to save your avatar.

mw2_ghost_s_death_by_jailboticus-d6uzm4v.gifSix years ago I first played the game, and it still hurts to watch…

While this moment is one of the most infamous in Call of Duty history in terms of frustrating plot twists, the near seamless blend of point-of-view cutscene into gameplay that concludes with another point-of-view cutscene, as you see the final moments of your dying avatar from first-person perspective, is powerful in terms of narrative impact and produces an affective response in players. Just try to find a YouTube video of this scene that doesn’t include a “nnooo! ghost and roach are still alive!!!11” comment; those feels are real. Additionally, taking revenge later on Shepherd as MacTavish is particularly satisfying.

When I reflect upon these experiences of virtual valor in military shooters, there’s also a salient sense of belonging when the characters are convincing and well written. The parasocial bonds encouraged by memorable characterizations and engaging gameplay complement and reinforce the strong narrative impacts of RC and MW2. The unexpected disruptions of power fantasies, traditionally embedded into FPS games, are enhanced by feelings which mark the loss of characters like Sev and Ghost as  meaningful. While these stories may seemingly offer little of value in providing deep insights on the moral and ethical implications of warfare, I think they’re rather successful at illustrating the painful costs and sacrifices of service (even at the expense of absurd plot twists).

The analysis offered here clearly glosses over some of the problematic themes embedded into these narratives. Surely one could argue military shooters – even in the Sci-Fi realm of Star Wars – glorify war, support the military industrial complex, and sanitize violence. But that’s another discussion entirely. My analysis here assumes that games are played for entertainment and are usually interpreted as such by rational humans, and that along the way, it might be possible to consider parasocial friendships in games as something that enhance storytelling, even within usually formulaic genres.

Originally posted to Destructoid community blog [minor edits were made to this version], where some good convos were had in the comments.

Children, Call of Duty, and Lack of Parental Involvement

After reading Jonathan Holmes’ (via Destructoid.com) blog post in which he thoroughly analyzed why the Call of Duty franchise appeals so strongly to the younger demographic (children under the age of 12), I had to acknowledge that I agreed with many of Mr. Holmes’ points. The series is effectively “cool” among 6 to 12 year olds due to the addictive simplicity and competitive nature of the game play, which is only strengthen by it’s incredible flash, flare, and good ol’ fashioned American military whoop ass mentality (which in particular caters to young boys who may idolize family members in the army/military, GI Joe, or the military lifestyle in general).

What I found somewhat lacking in the article, however, was a discussion on whether or not this is a problem. Should we (gamers, the general public, parents with young children, etc.) be concerned over the fact that young children have access to Call of Duty and become engrossed, obsessed, and enthralled by these titles?

I for one, to a degree, think so. Not only does Call of Duty glorify combat to the degree that a child may not understand, but any addiction for young children is not healthy, especially when parents notice and try to remove the source. The result is often defiance, anger, and an explosion of “I hate yous!” I would like to state that I do not find Call of Duty offensive and that I am actually something of a fan of the series myself, but I do believe overexposure to a child could be detrimental and have negative consequences as mentioned above.

My First Hand Experience
I worked at a local GameStop this past holiday season, and of course, I sold a TON of copies of Call of Duty: Black Ops (also, worked the midnight release, which was just plain INSANE). At my particular GameStop, we always carded anyone who looked under 30 for ID since my boss didn’t want to receive any negative consequences for selling an M rated game to a minor (it’s the law, apparently). And if anyone purchased an M rated title we always had to make certain that the consumer was aware of that just to be certain that they were okay with the rating, just in case they were actually purchasing the game for a minor.

During the month of November, I lost count of the number of mothers who came into the store to pick up Black Ops. With their young son standing quietly at their side, grinning ear to ear, I would always give them my spiel before they made their transactions final: “Just so that you’re aware, this game is rated M for mature for containing blood and gore, violence, and strong language.” Most of these moms would shake off the sentence before I even completed it. “Yes, yes, I’m aware– but my son really wants it,” they would interrupt with an air of submission, as if they had no other choice but to purchase the game. Handing the game over often resulted in the child smiling or exclaiming “yes!” with intense excitement and a sense of thrill. This scenario repeated itself on an almost daily basis for several weeks after the game’s release. Closer to Christmas most “moms” would pick up games for presents, shopping solo, though always responding in a similar manner.

I’m not going to say that this is solely a “mom” or parent problem, but it certainly plays a substantial part as to how Call of Duty became so popular among children in the first place: providing accessibility.

I know a boy, about 7 years old, that I had babysat regularly from the age of 2 to 5. Periodically I still go to this boy’s baseball games or babysit him and his older sister on occasion. At the age of 7, he’s already turned into something of an avid gamer. I may have had a bit on influence on him, I gave my old PS1 to him and his sister when he was about 4, but only handed over age-appropriate titles along with it, including Spyro and Crash Bandicoot. A year or so later his mom bought him a PS2 and loads of games, exposing him to games various genres and ratings. Presently, the family owns a Wii and 360 with Kinect as well. The last time I went to babysit him about a couple months ago, his mom was expressing how she was concerned about some of his gaming habits. She told me explicitly that he wasn’t allowed to play a game called, you guessed it, Call of Duty, and was concerned about how “mean” he could get when she tried to take certain games away from him. That night, I wasn’t just babysitting him, but two of his friends. I walked over to find all three of them huddled around the Wii playing none other then CoD World at War. “Umm… ma’am, you do know that they’re playing Call of Duty right now, right?” The mother gasped exasperatedly, “That’s Call of Duty?”

Needless to say, I was somewhat dumbfounded by her ignorance. If you don’t want your son playing a particular game, shouldn’t you be more informed about it? In order to alleviate this issue, I would like to share some possible solutions to the lack of communication facing parents and their children who play games such as Call of Duty.

Be Informed
Parents/guardians/supervisors should take the time to become informed about WHAT their children are playing. Take the time to watch trailers and gameplay footage on youtube. Each parent raises their children differently and has different standards for what is and what is not acceptable for their children. Some find Call of Duty offensive, while others say “it’s just a game!” In either case, just be aware of what your child is playing, and if you choose not to let them own a copy, explain your reasons rationally and calmly. Parents often try to dumb things down for their children, but the reality is, you can talk to them like adults.

Be A Part Of Their Hobby
If you think your child is mature enough to play a CoD title, get involved with them. Take turns swapping the controller every half-hour or so, and play along. Observe their gaming habits first hand. If you find that you’re not happy with how your child responds to the game (bad language or violent reactions to killing or being killed), find a solution to curbing these responses. Explain how getting mad does not bring about any actual solution, and that they’re able to get the bad guys “next time.”

It Is Just A Game
While a child’s actions in a game like Call of Duty may not reflect behavior in the real world, make sure that your child understands the implications of taking another person’s life. Explain to them that in real war, people actually die. They are no “saves” or “check points.” Once you’ve been shot, you don’t come back. It’s grim to contemplate, but any child should not take the idea lightly. It may seem silly and parents might think this is a “no brainer,” but there’s no reason why the concept should not be reiterated. There have been too many cases in the news where a child has shot either a parent or friend either by mistake or out of anger and were labeled as active gamers. Call of Duty is a game, but killing certainly is not. In war, it’s either kill or be killed, but Call of Duty “glamorizes” the military life style and almost romanticizes modern warfare. Explain to them that real war is far more grim, brutal, and just plain terrifying. If anything, a child playing Call of Duty should be imbued with a sense of respect for those who do sacrifice their lives in real life to keep the world a safer place.

Strike A Balance
If you find your child might be using Call of Duty to unleash pent up anger or frustrations, turn that energy into something your child can benefit from. Encourage them to take up a martial art, or turn their love for military shooters into a hobby that allows them to enjoy the outdoors, burn calories, and feed their need to compete: take them to play paint ball or airsoft. While not the most cheapest of hobbies, both will satisfy your child’s interest but do so in a manner that encourages team work and camaraderie.

Call of Duty is not going anywhere anytime soon. It’s a blockbuster behemoth of a franchise that practically over saturates the market and gains exposure to every consumer through online, TV, and in-store advertising. The current generation is essentially growing up on this franchise, and I was only just made aware of how popular the series was among minors until I worked as a GameStop employee firsthand. I will openly admit that I do not believe that games or Call of Duty in and of itself is necessarily bad, evil, or corrupting anyone, even children. I do believe, however, the over-exposure and lack of balance between gaming and other activities is where issues (bad behavior, lack of interest in school, increased tantrums e.g. “but I wanna play more!”) stem from.

Hopefully, the above advice will encourage parents to be more involved with child gamers in general and enervate some of the negative behavior and feelings associated with children playing Call of Duty games.