Topic: Kids and violent videogames

NFreak, you just perfectly summed up the stupidity of some adults these days. Thank you.And you heard that from a kid. I'm not immature, I don't call people 'gay' all the time, and while I think that I'm mature enough to play games like Halo, I do think there should be limits.

haha, i remember when i got GTA San Andreas with my mom when i was 12 and when we got to the register and the guy at the registered said " Ma'am, this game is rated M for Sex, Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Use of Drugs, and Strong Language" all while a little boy was standing right behind us, think how awkward that was.

But i still got the game and i am not a violent person. I think parents should wait until they're child is mature enough. If your child still believes in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, NO.

At 12, you were still a "little boy". Clearly your parents made the choice to purchase that game for you and they were comfortable with that, but there is no way that I would allow my kids to play that game at your (then) age. With that being said, i had a next-door neighbor who allowed his 4 (maybe 5)-year old son to "play" GTA.

I'd rather have kids be gradually de-censored (like the ratings system is supposed to do)

Under 5: eC, Nick Jr., no movies
5-8: G movies, TVY or TVG, E games
9-12: PG movies, TVPG, E10 games
13-16: PG-13 movies, TV14, T games
17-20: NC-17 or R movies, M games, TVMA
21-older: anything

@Blaketoberfest I think you're completely right. I think those kinds of kids/teens/whatever you want to call us shouldn't be allowed to play mature games, whereas more mature teen gamers should be allowed to play more adult games. I'm not saying I should be allowed to play GTA (although I have played it and I really enjoy it), but I do feel that am not the type of person who should be treated as a child.

GAMES
eC- developmental for learning skills
E- family fun
E10- older kids, family fun
T- more action and realism, but not horribly violent or graphic
M- graphic and violent, even obscene, with more emphasis on artistic value than actual fun
AO- porn

MOVIES
G- family fun, but many are kiddie
PG- older kids, but still family fun
PG-13- more action and violence, but not graphic
NC-17- graphic, obscene, mature themes, etc
M- about like NC-17
X- porn

TELEVISION
TVY/G- kiddie/family
TVY7/PG- older kids, but still family fun
TV14- action and violence, but nothing graphic or obscene
TVMA- graphic and obscene
ADULT- porn

@StarFox Thanks for posting that, I appreciate it. However, I disagree where it says that M rated games put "more emphasis on artistic value than actual fun". Not all M rated games are that way.

I remember playing GTA 3 on my brother's PS2 when I was like 8 or 9.
Was fun as heck. Got GTA Vice City too and I was in love with it.
I was also watching films like The Terminator,Rambo,Predator,Die Hard,Aliens at a young age too.

And honestly,it has not affect me in the slightest.
Just affects different people I guess but it had no effect on me whatsoever.

I'd actually be more weary about kids playing online video-games regardless of age limits.
For obvious reasons and of course the whole trash talking and racist comments they spout out on the mic's.

I'll say one thing, I have seen family playing GTA when i was younger (5 or 6) and thought, wow, hope this never happens.

I thought I was pretty mature when I was 13 too. I wasn't. You're not.

Maturity is more than refraining from the use of 'gay' in every day vocabulary. The simple fact that you used something so small is proof in the pudding.

No one thinks 'this game affected me' - can we please try and not use anecdotal evidence as 'proof' that the ratings system is wrong? There is no way you can be objective with these things. Especially when, in certain cases on this forum, it's very likely that gaming has been a negative influence on their formulative years, whether they think so or not.

Although this is anecdotal, my day-to-day life does bring me into contact with 13, 14 year olds regularly. As a sports teacher, I teach some kids that age. I can assure you I have not met a single one that could be considered 'adult maturity.'

Until I meet one I will continue to believe that the ratings system should be treated as law.

sorry waltz... i do agree with most of your argument, but if anecdotal evidence can't be proof that the rating system is 'wrong', then it also can't be proof that it's 'right'. :3

This is one of those things.
I wouldn't want my kid playing through the "No Russian" level of Modern Warfare 2, but then again, I played endless amounts of Mortal Kombat, the original GTA, Goldeneye, and any other violent games I could get my hands on as a kid. I think the important thing is to NOT PUT THE VIOLENT GAMES ON A PEDESTAL. Telling you're kids, "you can't play those games because you're not old enough" is just ensuring that they'll find a way to play them. It's better to communicate with your kid and let them know that some games contain depictions of violence and other unacceptable behaviors, but THEY'RE JUST GAMES. As long their little brains understand the difference between fantasy and reality, they should be fine to play whatever games. There's always gonna be that friend who gets to play whatever they want, and your kid will find a way to play "naughty" games, WE ALL DID. The rating systems are good and fine. I've been in a Gamestop and seen a dad buy Saints Row 2 for his kid AFTER the chick working there told him it contained drugs, sex, prostitution, language and violence. If he wants to go ahead after getting the lowdown, that's his choice, the rating system has done it's job.

Oh for sure - don't take my anecdotal evidence as any kind of proof - I was just explaining my sentiment.

So we should also do away with the age of consent and age limits for driving, drinking and smoking, because that's putting all those things on a pedestal?

It's better to communicate with your kid and let them know that some games contain depictions of violence and other unacceptable behaviors, but THEY'RE JUST GAMES.

A stern talk is not going to magically enlighten a child. The process of bringing a child up to be a responsible member of society takes years - which is incidently why we have those restrictions on what children can access.

As long their little brains understand the difference between fantasy and reality, they should be fine to play whatever games.

That can't. That's the problem.

There's always gonna be that friend who gets to play whatever they want, and your kid will find a way to play "naughty" games, WE ALL DID. The rating systems are good and fine. I've been in a Gamestop and seen a dad buy Saints Row 2 for his kid AFTER the chick working there told him it contained drugs, sex, prostitution, language and violence. If he wants to go ahead after getting the lowdown, that's his choice, the rating system has done it's job.

Well no, this is why the rating system needs to become law. A cinema that allows a child in to see an R rated film, even with parental supervision, can be fined a lot of money. It should be the same with the games industry - the problem is, it's not regulated enough.

I read that as 'don't just tell them 'you can't because you're not old enough, give them reasonable-sounding reasons' -- like 'sorry honey, but you're just not big enough to reach the pedals and the steering wheel at the same time', y'know? or 'but, sweetheart, you don't want to pickle your liver or turn your lungs black, do you?', lol.

haha. I guess so. But it's a little hard to explain to a 13 year old child "we are concerned that being exposed to certain materials will affect you in a negative manner, inhibiting your ability to become healthy and contributing members of society."

That's why, I guess we go with a "you're not old enough," tact, instead.

@lockelocke: "WE ALL DID," eh? That's not true. I didn't play my first M-rated game until I was 17, and I honestly had no desire to play one before then. Even now (at 21), I mostly play T's and below with the occasional M. Amazingly, not everyone in the entire freaking world grows up obsessed with arbitrarily contrived notions of proving their own maturity. We're not all public schooled, after all.
_{Crass generalization, obviously. Point was that I attribute my developing tastes over the years to a good home life, "life" here including both recreation and school.}

ANYhoo...I disagree that we need the law to step in and take charge of the rating system simply because fewer than 10% of children under 17 are able to buy M-rated games on their own ANYWAY. They get them through their parents. Laws regarding theaters don't prevent parents bringing their kids (here, anyway), and the laws currently being debated in America won't do a damn thing to keep mature games out of kids' hands.

First of all, little kids shouldn't be playing the kinds of games up for debate in the first place. That aside, video games do not cause anyone to have violent tendencies. Violent media just makes the individual's tendencies more evident; it doesn't teach people to carry out any specific behaviors, unless it's specifically designed to do so, or, if the person has no other influences on their life other than violent games, they have no other choice than to believe that's how life is. To me--blaming video games, or any form of media for that matter--is just a cop-out, and blatant ignorance. The people who argue against violent video games know little to nothing about the games they so avidly rally against. I'm not talking about seeing an advert in a store kiosk or watching your kids play Call of Duty. Until you actually play through one of these games, your opinion is not valid. Most, if not all of these controversial games aren't simply about killing others. If you play through any of them you will notice a distinction of right and wrong, and consequences for your actions, even among the antiheroes and baddies. Through the violence, the game intrinsically teaches morals, because it isn't made for the purpose of procreating violence. I won't argue that children should not play these types of games, because it is during an important developmental stage during which they learn morals by observing others' actions. Even in their case, however, if they have a strong group of role models from which they can learn, these games are not going to cause any sort of harm, as long as they are taught to discern what is right. I played Doom and Mortal Kombat obsessively as a kid (two of the games which prompted the inception of the ESRB rating system) but I have never felt the urge to blow someone's head off with a shotgun. People argue that the games of today are somehow more realistic, and, as such, it is harder to distinguish between reality, but that is a misconception among people who have never played games. Only now, when graphics are no longer pixels and sprites, are people noticing the realism, but back when it was only 4-bit, 8-bit, or 16-bit, that was enough to engulf gamers in worlds every bit as real as those portrayed today, because that was the best graphics of the time. The bottom line is, it comes down to parents to decide what is right for your kids; don't blame game companies for making violent games because you don't know how to raise your kid not to be a moron. Kids aren't allowed to buy M-rated games until they're 17 for a reason.

None of us should be playing violent games, really.

You've got intriguing view of "artistic value" there, Star Fox.