In the past, YouTube has been pretty clear on how it views video game violence of any level: If those pixels are red, gushing and violent in nature, you can expect a hefty slap of age restriction gatekeeping to hit your video because someone needs to think of the children. That’s all about to change, as a new policy enforcement update will see some distinctions being made between proper violence and “scripted or simulated violence” present in video games.

US president Donald Trump met with games industry executives and some of the most vocal critics in the land to discuss the fictional link between video games and violence. So how did the meeting start? With Trump pressing play on a sizzle reel of video game bloodshed.

Why ban violent video games then, when they could be used to actually help people? I’m not talking about recycling copies of Rogue Warrior into Kevlar vests for kids when they arrive at school, but rather the idea that Rhode Island Representative Robert Nardolillo III has for imposing a small sin tax on the material and then using the funds to to set up programs that address the mental health root causes of troubled individuals.

Another mainstream journalist has rallied against violent videogames in a debate - without getting anybody on the other side of the debate.

Violent games are in the news once again, and this time, Mother Russia is considering a ban on the controversial titles.

Violent Games desensitise you to real life violence - but they may also numb physical pain.

A number of primary school teachers have called for "stringent legislation" to combat the "negative effects some computer games are having on the very young".

The man who paved the way for the home console isn't too happy with the current state of modern video games.