Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Changing this won't do a darned thing to the videogame industry. As stated before, parents usually buy the games for their kids and in fact I never take money from a kids' hands when an M rated game is being purchased. That's right, I make the parent take the money from the kid and then hand it to me so that way the parent is fully responsible for the purchase of that game.

The thing with the ESRB is that it can be misleading. Last Christmas holiday a dad was buying a game for his 3 kids(17-9ish). That game was Fallout 3 and the cashier next to me told him that it was rated M. He said "Well, it can't be worse than Halo.", after I intervened and told him that he was really wrong he called the boss(his wifey) and left the store without the game.

I've seen gamestop employees recommend M rated games for kids and that kind of sickens me, but then again gamestop has low standards for actually caring about what happens after the game leaves the store.

Its a one way street with a sidewalk. The street being parental ignorance of the content of a game, and the sidewalk being stores that promote the sale of M rated games for minors.

The proposal won't "ban" anything. It's to regulate the purchases and to hold stores/parents more accountable for what they expose their children to

Again, are you sure you're reading the news? Or the law in question? It only pertains to retail distributors, not parents (or online distributors). And most games that would meet its descriptions are already not available for retail sale.

Again, where the hell are you monkeys getting this "banning" crap from?

Where all monkey's do. From the state trying to prevent the sale of a certain kind of material to a certain group of individuals? That's called Ban. It's actually the definition of ban.

Let's have no more name-calling, even if it is good-natured. It will just pull us off-topic. Thanks!

I'm not sure the example of buying alcohol for underage is appropriate (though it might be). An adult can take a minor to see a rated R movie and it isn't illegal. It depends on the language of the law. Most of the policies for stores are that a minor can't by the game without a guardian or parent. I don't think they will go the porn route as much as the movie route. Unless, of course it is a porn game, which of course are already covered by obscenity laws. Mostly.

Ah! My favourite subject! I'll say now:

=LEGALLY I ONLY KNOW HOW IT STANDS IN THE UK=

For this, I'll use everyone's Favourite scapegoat GTA and Rockstar.

So, the general consensus held by the public is that:

Me + Violent Video Game = Violent Me.

Now I'd buy that, except:
Why Aren't I Professional Footballer (Both 'Soccer' and American Football)
Why Aren't I A GT Driver?
Why Aren't I Off Fighting Hordes of Zombies on Mars?
etc, etc.

Now thats not exactly a strong argument, I'll admit.

Intrestingly when talk occurs of "Evidence and research", Let me tell you this, as someone who studied this area speciifically:

NO Research has ever, EVER, Proven a link between Violence in video games, to violent behaviour in people/ children. In fact Research has Proven there is no link!

The only people who will "Be violent because of a video game" are people who are easily impressionable, and could become violent from a film, book ("catcher in the rye" Anyone?) or even music!

Most of the time the finger points to videogames simply because its an easy target. Take for example the common story with GTA (I'll admit this is somewhat spun)

"Child shoots parents after playing GTA"

Now obviously, GTA is to blame, its clear not worth asking:
"How did child get gun"
"Why did parent let child play game"
These are stupid questions according to Jack Thompson.

Yes I apologize now for that rant which went all over the place and now has a lot of people scratching their head going "Whaa?"

[/RANT]

Also (UK wise) the only Certificates which are legally binding to sales Are BBFC.
PEGI and ESRB are not (e.g. the original Red Alert for the PSX/1 has a PEGI of 18+, but as it has no BBFC Certificate, theres no age restriction)

Kilkrazy wrote:

GalacticDefender wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't approve of selling violent games to children.

It is pretty conclusively proven that children do not have the same cognitive and moral development as adults.

Consequently they are not always able to distinguish between fiction and truth, and may not be able to process moral concepts to the same degree.

In this case I can accept the idea that children can be adversely affected by violent games.

I thought the poll referred to adults, though. I don't believe that adults are affected by games unless they are weak-minded.

What age children are you talking about here? Any kid over 9 (even under in most cases) knows that Movies/video games aren't real and you can't go blast people with shotguns and rocket launchers on their spare time.

I was talking not just about cognitive development (and remember that many children still believe in Santa Claus at the age of 10) but also about moral or ethical development. There are very few societies which hold children to be fully morally developed at the age of 10.

Many countries including the USA have either a voluntary or legally based system which broadly divides the age categories as 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+, give or take a year.

These life stages correspond with broadly held views about other aspects of development and the taking on of adult roles and responsibility, such as the ability to form contracts, have sex, vote, and be criminally responsible.

Is the playing of video games completely different to these other types of responsibility?

What? Santa isn't real?!

Yes, actually. the playing of video games is COMPLETELY different from these other types of responsibility. All of those things happen in real life. A video game is not real (Seriously, was were you actually trying to make a point there? I literally thought you were joking when I first read this.). Kids have been playing war for pretty much ever, doing it on a tv screen is not much different. A video game is just a game. I'm not saying 10 year olds should be playing fallout 3, but I don't think much damage would come from playing Halo or Call of Duty: Gak ops or Modern Warfail 2 every once in a while.

Call of Duty: Gak ops or Modern Warfail 2 every once in a while.

Wow i want those games they sound good [/sarcasm]

Imo this is kind of stupid, wont say why i think this as im tired.

All im sayin is easily influenced people who probly dont have anybody to love them get violent over "games".

In all honesty I feel that blaming video games for violent behavior is akin to blaming cigarette lighters for arson.

Those with violent tendencies may be draw to violent video games,but that certainly doesn't prove that the games encourage violent tendencies.

Playing a game is a stress release valve. Playing games STOPS people from going on gun crazy shootouts.

I know people who get really set off by video games. It's not that the video games are the problem. Their frustrated violence is a part of their nature. it just so happens losing in games brings that out!
Oh but if you're talking about shooter games... I guess I have to tell you the same thing. they only bring out tendencies that were already existent!

Mukkin'About wrote:I know people who get really set off by video games. It's not that the video games are the problem. Their frustrated violence is a part of their nature. it just so happens losing in games brings that out!
Oh but if you're talking about shooter games... I guess I have to tell you the same thing. they only bring out tendencies that were already existent!

Would you rather those tendencies be brought out by them grabbing a gun and shooting at REAL people?

A game is a means to escape real life and enter a fantasy world (and I don't mean orcs and wizards). A fantasy world where you can work out your frustrations, one where you aren't judged by who you are but what you can do. Video games are better than real life. And then you get done with the game, and those violent urges are spent-- on the game's denizens, not on people IRL.

Modern psychological research supports this conclusion.

You could say the same thing about any activity. If a person is prone to violent outbursts, then losing a game of pingpong could set them off, but you will never hear anyone blaming pingpong or basketball, of football, or soccer for causing violence. Anyone who goes out on a shooting rampage was already messed up in the head. Parents just want to blame something other than themselves for ruining people's lives, as it really falls to the parents to protect their children from influences that would be harmful to their child.

It is my opinion that 99% of problems with our youth, are caused by the failures of their parents.

KingKodo wrote:
It is my opinion that 99% of problems with our youth, are caused by the failures of their parents.

Hear Hear!

Parents are to blame.

As no one has been inclined to comment on one simple factoid, Target and a few other select retailers Nation Wide WILL NOT SELL MSRB 18+ rated games to anyone without a legal ID showing they are over 18, OR if a guardian is with them that can also provide said ID.

This means, omg, can it be true?!
PARENTS HAVE TO PARENT THEIR CHILDREN!!!

Stop listening to this psycho babble about "not interfering with your childs life", that's bullsh**!!! You're a parent do your freaking job or stop having unprotected sex and bringing little psycho's into this world that you're not able to handle, manage or be a responsible parent to.

Stop blaming other people/things for your inability to be a good parent. Take the remote away, cut the internet time, enforce moral rules and ethics, and protect your children and slowly introduce them to new concepts when they time is right. Monitor your children, that's part of your job.

*sigh* But who listens to sound reason? When it's far easier to blame something/someone else instead of taking responsibility for your own actions.

And we wonder why kids don't take responsibility...you're setting the example Mom & Dad, good job, you lose a golden star sticker for sucking.

*NOTE: References to Mom and Dad are of no direct correlation to anyone in this forum or my own parents. In fact, my parents beat me and punished me when I was a child and I thank them for that. I am a player of violent video games and I'm thankful for their ability to relieve my stress at the end of the day so I don't punch someone in the face in the real world. Thank you game developers you are my anti-lawsuit-jail time-butt raping choice.

~Cheers!

Fexor wrote:Parents are to blame.

As no one has been inclined to comment on one simple factoid, Target and a few other select retailers Nation Wide WILL NOT SELL MSRB 18+ rated games to anyone without a legal ID showing they are over 18, OR if a guardian is with them that can also provide said ID.

This means, omg, can it be true?!
PARENTS HAVE TO PARENT THEIR CHILDREN!!!

Stop listening to this psycho babble about "not interfering with your childs life", that's bullsh**!!! You're a parent do your freaking job or stop having unprotected sex and bringing little psycho's into this world that you're not able to handle, manage or be a responsible parent to.

Stop blaming other people/things for your inability to be a good parent. Take the remote away, cut the internet time, enforce moral rules and ethics, and protect your children and slowly introduce them to new concepts when they time is right. Monitor your children, that's part of your job.

*sigh* But who listens to sound reason? When it's far easier to blame something/someone else instead of taking responsibility for your own actions.

And we wonder why kids don't take responsibility...you're setting the example Mom & Dad, good job, you lose a golden star sticker for sucking.

*NOTE: References to Mom and Dad are of no direct correlation to anyone in this forum or my own parents. In fact, my parents beat me and punished me when I was a child and I thank them for that. I am a player of violent video games and I'm thankful for their ability to relieve my stress at the end of the day so I don't punch someone in the face in the real world. Thank you game developers you are my anti-lawsuit-jail time-butt raping choice.

~Cheers!

Monster Rain wrote:

Thanks? heh, sorry guess I got a little carried away.

And to make light of my more serious rant a picture to laugh at, enjoy!



www.vgcats.com (incase you want to read more and laugh your face off)

Oh, that slow clap was highly complimentary.

It was the only way I could show how very much I agreed with you.

Oh ok then, great! *bows*

Thank you for the compliment.



Six Dakka salute!

GalacticDefender wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

GalacticDefender wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't approve of selling violent games to children.

It is pretty conclusively proven that children do not have the same cognitive and moral development as adults.

Consequently they are not always able to distinguish between fiction and truth, and may not be able to process moral concepts to the same degree.

In this case I can accept the idea that children can be adversely affected by violent games.

I thought the poll referred to adults, though. I don't believe that adults are affected by games unless they are weak-minded.

What age children are you talking about here? Any kid over 9 (even under in most cases) knows that Movies/video games aren't real and you can't go blast people with shotguns and rocket launchers on their spare time.

I was talking not just about cognitive development (and remember that many children still believe in Santa Claus at the age of 10) but also about moral or ethical development. There are very few societies which hold children to be fully morally developed at the age of 10.

Many countries including the USA have either a voluntary or legally based system which broadly divides the age categories as 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+, give or take a year.

These life stages correspond with broadly held views about other aspects of development and the taking on of adult roles and responsibility, such as the ability to form contracts, have sex, vote, and be criminally responsible.

Is the playing of video games completely different to these other types of responsibility?

What? Santa isn't real?!

Yes, actually. the playing of video games is COMPLETELY different from these other types of responsibility. All of those things happen in real life. A video game is not real (Seriously, was were you actually trying to make a point there? I literally thought you were joking when I first read this.). Kids have been playing war for pretty much ever, doing it on a tv screen is not much different. A video game is just a game. I'm not saying 10 year olds should be playing fallout 3, but I don't think much damage would come from playing Halo or Call of Duty: Gak ops or Modern Warfail 2 every once in a while.

One result of cognitive development is the ability to distinguish between various types of fantasies or fictions, and reality.

Are you suggesting that children have the same capability to do this as adults?

If so, do you have any evidence?

The parents should of course take responsibility for their children and their wellbeing. But some of this stuff is pretty fethed up to being with.

Morazzini cited a court description of "Postal II," in which the player goes on a rampage of slaughtering police and unarmed civilians. "Girls attacked with a shovel will beg for mercy; the player can be merciless and decapitate them," he wrote.

I mean, who gets a kick out of that sort of game?

I think violent video games can have a negative effect socially in young children, if they're introduced in a poor manner. Sure, 6 year olds can play violent games, but hopefully the parents ensure that the kid(s) are mature enough for it. Really, the parents need to gauge the maturity level, and it's not like an immature kid playing Call of Duty will kill anybody, but he'll probably grow up thinking cussing people out is cool. So, essentially, I'm not against selling them, but just make sure you keep some form of control over the kids.

IE, it's not the game, it's the parent.

You think kids playing with guns and swords out in the backyard's teaching them much better? Heh.

Not...entirely, but it's a tad less, gory I suppose. Sure, they're imagining it but, imagining and seeing something are two different things.

Melissia wrote:You think kids playing with guns and swords out in the backyard's teaching them much better? Heh.

The thing is, and I really hate to agree with you , is that kids have been playing at shooting each other for a lot longer than there have been video games.

I really couldn't count the number of times I killed or was killed by my friends playing War and Cowboys and Indians and god knows what else. The argument can be made that seeing the blood and stuff like that makes it more realistic and therefore desensitizing and I don't know enough about child psychology to speak to that...

I do know that a lot of the old Fairy Tales are pretty violent and sketchy, and the imagination can conjure up images that are better than the best graphics engine. The Witch in Hansel and Gretel being baked alive is a good and gruesome example, as well as the actions and ultimate fate of the Big Bad Wolf in Little Red Riding Hood in some of the less PG versions of the story.

Read the plot synopsis of this story if you want to be really creeped out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allerleirauh

EvilTim wrote:

KingKodo wrote:
It is my opinion that 99% of problems with our youth, are caused by the failures of their parents.

Hear Hear!

I think I disagree with this. Kids are more free-thinking than a lot of people believe. I know several people who are COMPLETELY different than their parents. Like, for instance, I have one friend who's parents are a bunch of trailer trash ultra right wing redneck people, and he's a liberal guy who plays eldar, has good grades, and hates rednecks. I think kids deserve more responsibility for their own mistakes, as well. If some kid goes and vandalizes something, it's not the parent's fault, it's the kid's fault dammit! Sure, a parent can raise a kid well, but it's still the kid's choice wether he wants to be a college bound do-gooder or a prison bound hoodlum.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:

GalacticDefender wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

GalacticDefender wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't approve of selling violent games to children.

It is pretty conclusively proven that children do not have the same cognitive and moral development as adults.

Consequently they are not always able to distinguish between fiction and truth, and may not be able to process moral concepts to the same degree.

In this case I can accept the idea that children can be adversely affected by violent games.

I thought the poll referred to adults, though. I don't believe that adults are affected by games unless they are weak-minded.

What age children are you talking about here? Any kid over 9 (even under in most cases) knows that Movies/video games aren't real and you can't go blast people with shotguns and rocket launchers on their spare time.

I was talking not just about cognitive development (and remember that many children still believe in Santa Claus at the age of 10) but also about moral or ethical development. There are very few societies which hold children to be fully morally developed at the age of 10.

Many countries including the USA have either a voluntary or legally based system which broadly divides the age categories as 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+, give or take a year.

These life stages correspond with broadly held views about other aspects of development and the taking on of adult roles and responsibility, such as the ability to form contracts, have sex, vote, and be criminally responsible.

Is the playing of video games completely different to these other types of responsibility?

What? Santa isn't real?!

Yes, actually. the playing of video games is COMPLETELY different from these other types of responsibility. All of those things happen in real life. A video game is not real (Seriously, was were you actually trying to make a point there? I literally thought you were joking when I first read this.). Kids have been playing war for pretty much ever, doing it on a tv screen is not much different. A video game is just a game. I'm not saying 10 year olds should be playing fallout 3, but I don't think much damage would come from playing Halo or Call of Duty: Gak ops or Modern Warfail 2 every once in a while.

One result of cognitive development is the ability to distinguish between various types of fantasies or fictions, and reality.

Are you suggesting that children have the same capability to do this as adults?

If so, do you have any evidence?

When I was like 4 I knew that stuff like star wars was fake, and I'm pretty sure every other kid that has an IQ above 70 does. Someone knows that what is happening on a computer screen is fake. Especially if it is very fantastical or something like that. And Kids (even very young ones) can distinguish from right and wrong so much better than people give them credit for. Blaming Video Games for violence in people is just stupid. I don't see people complaining about violent movies, do you? What is the big frikking difference? Kids don't really have much of a problem distinguishing fact from fiction, and I think the worst video games can do for a kid is discourage physical activity. Every kid out there (except people who are already born totally insane) knows that they can't go out blowing people away. Or else there would be a lot more stories in the news about 10 year olds killing their parents and what not. (Which happens OCCASIONALY, but is almost always an accident). And you might attribute this to how hard it is for a little kid to get a firearm, but I live in Arkansas where rednecks leave guns out on the kitchen counter. I doubt there has been a single case where video games alone were what caused a crime.

Man what a load of .

im an aus gamer and im 16. i have miner brain damage and asperges. have been playing games like gta, cod, moh, and killzone for the past 4 years.
But with this iv never hert any one in my life on perpes(i once steped on my frinds head in a race when he feel over)
but acording to hafe the reports i should be a massmerder

like come on how much of a head are the pepole saying this

fall0fdark wrote:Man what a load of .

im an aus gamer and im 16. i have miner brain damage and asperges. have been playing games like gta, cod, moh, and killzone for the past 4 years.
But with this iv never hert any one in my life on perpes(i once steped on my frinds head in a race when he feel over)
but acording to hafe the reports i should be a massmerder

like come on how much of a head are the pepole saying this

Here's your evidence right here, Killcrazy.

Violent video games don't affect anyone any more than playing war with sticks does. Well, people might get hurt less in video games.

Oh, their egos get hurt.

I don't think KillKrazy is saying that children who play videogames like GTA, COD etc are going to be mass murderers and criminals. I think what he's saying is that violent video games may affect moral development in children.

Everything effects moral development in children, from what food you eat to what games you play to how you treat your spouse to... EVERYTHING.