If I thought games were inherently "destructive," or that there was any sort of correlation to real-world violence in avid gaming, I wouldn't do this job, writing about the possibilities that interactive media and gaming offer us to create "art" and innovate on the human concept of "play." But all too often, especially as realism improves with technology, and the adjective "visceral"- you know, human blood and guts-is increasingly desirable in game descriptions, and this to me is starting to seem like a celebration of the ugliest parts of humanity.

People are psyched to see a launch trailer of bullet-addled and blood-drenched soldiers, aiming for one another's heads because the graphics look really sick, bro. For some elusive, "visceral" reason-call it a gut reaction-this makes me wildly uncomfortable. I understand that play has simulated armed conflict since we were children (Cops & Robbers, Cowboys & Indians) and this is just an extension of that. Perhaps it's even a way to process and participate in the human condition in an ongoing environment of global war. But it just doesn't seem like a fun "game" to me, and that's really what it comes down to.

Leigh Alexander is news director at Gamasutra and author of the Sexy Videogameland weblog. Her work deals primarily with the business and culture surrounding games and gamers, and her columns and reviews have appeared in Kotaku, the Los Angeles Times, Slate, Variety, and other publications.

This article originally appeared on GamePro.com as