They are guidelines and nothing more. They serve the purpose of allowing for a parent or consumer to make a more informed purchase decision.
Age Ratings: Guidelines or Must-follow rules?
- Thread starter Joshua112321
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think it really depends, a 3 year old should not be playing GOW for obvious reasons. But it's not so much the age that matters, but the maturity of the person, two very different things.
Yes, but we can't really measure Maturity since it varies from person to person, so we go with Age and make an educated guess on how mature that age group as a whole is. Which is next best thing.SL33TBL1ND said:
You don't understand the laws that games need to follow? or you mean to say the laws are wrong because you are a special type of minor?
We all get to that point when we hear people say "when you are older, you will understand"
Just because you think you can talk your way out of any older humans excuses on the matter, doesn't make you righteous or more mature than your age.
I know you won't believe me when I say, 'you will understand in 15 years'..... but don't count yourself out by saying your young ideas are unique. We all have been there, and we all wish we knew then, what we know now.
Relax, when you can be independent you only will have your own actions and decisions to worry about!
Then when you hit the quarter century club, you will begin to see what more people have been trying to say for a long time.
It's not anyone's fault for being a young kid, don't feel bad because people judge you, we all judge everything.
It's how we deal with our judgments that really matters.
When you are 31 years old, you will fell/think differently.
We all get to that point when we hear people say "when you are older, you will understand"
Just because you think you can talk your way out of any older humans excuses on the matter, doesn't make you righteous or more mature than your age.
I know you won't believe me when I say, 'you will understand in 15 years'..... but don't count yourself out by saying your young ideas are unique. We all have been there, and we all wish we knew then, what we know now.
Relax, when you can be independent you only will have your own actions and decisions to worry about!
Then when you hit the quarter century club, you will begin to see what more people have been trying to say for a long time.
It's not anyone's fault for being a young kid, don't feel bad because people judge you, we all judge everything.
It's how we deal with our judgments that really matters.
When you are 31 years old, you will fell/think differently.
some of the classifications imposed by the ESRB, PEGI, OFLC, and USK are a guide line, the rest are legal requirements.
I agree, but I'm just saying that that would be the ideal scenario. I think something better than just generalising as we do now would be altering parents minds so they are gamers so they can make an informed choice on the games their children buy. But again, this is unrealistic... sigh. Reality sucks.maddawg IAJI said:
ive been playing M rated since i got my first proper console (xbox)...but then again i live in australia where a tick on either of these questions means M rated:
-blood
-swearing
im surprised australia has more than 1 G/PG rated game...which is named 'snuggle bunnies: the puzzle game of putting coloured blocks into shapes. now with no sharp corners'...
dont criticise the name, no one's hired me for this, i dont get payed and i may have to come up with other ways of rephrasing that
-blood
-swearing
im surprised australia has more than 1 G/PG rated game...which is named 'snuggle bunnies: the puzzle game of putting coloured blocks into shapes. now with no sharp corners'...
dont criticise the name, no one's hired me for this, i dont get payed and i may have to come up with other ways of rephrasing that
Good point, I think I might go do some of that now so I can banish these negative thoughts.maddawg IAJI said:
I think for somethings its guidelines and some its rule.
Strip Club = Rule
Games = Guideline depending on the individual
anywhere where its up to debate.
Strip Club = Rule
Games = Guideline depending on the individual
anywhere where its up to debate.
I think age ratings are a guideline. otherwise i would never had been able to see alien and play doom when i was nine and i wouldn't want to miss that (didn't hurt me in any way).
One thing i notice when i am reading this thread is that people think pronographic material needs a rating. I never understood this. I firmly believe that seeing a nipple is not in any way harmfull for a kid. Seeing sex is not harmful. Sex and the naked body are both natural things.
I believe that sex and nudity has to be left out of the rating system. (hell most 12 year old boys have already seen alot of sex on the internet or have at least gotten there hands on a playboy, and this has been hapening for years)
If i am wrong. Will someone please explain to me why nudity and sex is bad for a kid.
One thing i notice when i am reading this thread is that people think pronographic material needs a rating. I never understood this. I firmly believe that seeing a nipple is not in any way harmfull for a kid. Seeing sex is not harmful. Sex and the naked body are both natural things.
I believe that sex and nudity has to be left out of the rating system. (hell most 12 year old boys have already seen alot of sex on the internet or have at least gotten there hands on a playboy, and this has been hapening for years)
If i am wrong. Will someone please explain to me why nudity and sex is bad for a kid.
If you stay around the 'Scapist, you should know that somewhere around 10-30 percent of the users here are female. Not trying to criticize or anything; just it can come as a surprise to people.Joshua112321 said:
I don't know if he edited his post or something, but it looks to me like he has an on-topic argument here. Also, if you hit the quote button on the lower-right, you'll get a nice quote box, and said user will be sent a message that you have alluded to their post.Joshua112321 said:@Therumancer
... I have actually had enough of you for today... seriously if you are only going to quote peoples comments and talk about their flaws, then you should probably leave, unless you feel like actually saying something on topic that is
Personally, my perceptions of ratings is a bit of a complicated matter. In the general matter of censorship, I believe they should be considered in the same manner as movie ratings.
When it comes to protecting the minds of the youth, 'n what not, its not about, "Oh, Halo will make my child want to kill things, with its guns and explosions!!!" as much as it is about the sorts of behaviors that form around a lot of more "mature" video games, as well as the fact that mature content really does effect children.
In general parenting guidelines 'n what not, children aren't "supposed" to be exposed to any sort of screen or display until three years of age, and limited to no more than a few sparing hours a week until age six. Is this going to happen? Probably not. [small](Am I saying that its right? No, I'm not saying that either. But this idea is definitely there. And yes, I do read domestic women magazines, watch Oprah, and enjoy Martha Stewart's shows. I have a secret, domestic women side that is, as it turns out, not mutually exclusive to my being a gamer. But that's another story.)[/small] But the reason behind this ideology is apparent enough- sitting in front of some sort of display just isn't what we're genetically designed to do. Keeping developing kids away from something so entrancing means that they're more likely to be doing things that develop motor skills, socialization abilities and the like. Keeping screens away from young kids is also an attempt to keep such things as less significant to the child as possible as they are beginning to form their first habits. Throughout childhood, I strongly hope a parent not only limits their child, but teaches them to limit themselves when gaming- no matter the genre or rating, a game can be detrimental if it takes over someone's life.
On a related note, video games have become more and more immersive and emotionally engaging. Not in the sense of "I am the character!" but in the same way other media, like books or film, can reach their audience. And like any medium, the severity of the content does effect the viewer/reader/player. Video games are particularly tough in this context with children, because with, say the movie 300, you're getting gritty, excessively violent Spartan fighting. With God of War, one gets both gritty, excessively violent Spartan fighting delivered along side a universal and genuinely respectable gameplay experience. This makes it a challenge for me to recommend games at times, simply because some platforms, like the 360, simply lack a large library of quality games that are child appropriate.
Now, I don't mind maybe a few jokes that are going to sail over the heads of children, like the many seen in the Animaniacs, but I strongly dislike when children are trying to enjoy something age appropriate, like a TV show or good gameplay mechanics, only to find that mature themes are an unavoidable part of them. What a kid is really emotionally ready for varies from person to person, and this is where the parent comes in. Someone may not find a straightforward consequence for, say, watching Dogville before they're able to emotionally perceive of it, but it may trivialize the very serious matters involved in said media. Thus, you wind up with a lotta kids who can't even begin to fathom say, war or true depression, and can wind up ridiculing victims or vying for pity from others at the slightest of social prompts. Sure, they weren't ruined by the media that exposed them to such matters, but they certainly weren't emotionally ready to handle such themes.
Same goes with sexual matters. Its good to educate kids on how their bodies function so that they can watch for any signs of health complications, but its tough enough already to sort out such feelings, social implications, and physical impulses without 1000 unrealistic precedences from the media on what it's supposed to be.
Still, I'm not about censorship or parental control. I agree completely with my mother's movie philosophy- if my mother says, "you're probably not ready for it yet," she doesn't mean, "You're chicken to handle what it has," she means, "You'll get more out of it at a future stage in life." Children shouldn't be sheltered from things like death, abuse, or sex- they should be given the facts pretty early on, and taught the nuiances as they become more receptive to the matters. Ratings aren't must-follow rules, but video games are only forms of entertainment. Your child just needs to deal with not having Call of Duty or Mass Effect if you think your kid is emotionally unable to treat the content of the game's events with respect.
The ratings are irrelevant. I have never seen more than the most minimal, short-term (and by short, I mean, about a day at most, and usually more like twenty minutes) success at stopping anyone from viewing and participating in the most heinous of content.
Which is why I really don't care. Kids can go watch bondage porn whenever they want and play Grand Theft Auto: Baby Splatter Edition on the internet and at their friends' house. And I guarantee that getting smacked once the face by an alcoholic parent, which happens way more often than most people care to admit, is more damaging than a thousand headshots in Halo or any number of deep throat videos.
Which is why I really don't care. Kids can go watch bondage porn whenever they want and play Grand Theft Auto: Baby Splatter Edition on the internet and at their friends' house. And I guarantee that getting smacked once the face by an alcoholic parent, which happens way more often than most people care to admit, is more damaging than a thousand headshots in Halo or any number of deep throat videos.
Guidelines in my opinion. Different children mature at different rates, and I've seen quite a few children who were more mature then some of the adults I've met. Humans come in so many different flavors that it is impossible to sum them all up using only age as your variable. That said, it is still a good guideline and I would recomend people to adhere to it. Still, common sense is king.
In the UK, age ratings are the law. Although whether anyone gives a damn once you've left the shop is another question entirely. Ultimately, it boils down to "you wouldn't want to show your kids an 18 movie, yet you're fine with giving them an 18 game?"
Considering i played Duke Nukem 3D when i was still in Elementary School, so about 6-10 or so, im probably biased that Age Ratings should be Guidelines. When i was a Kid i could actually make a difference between Reality and Fiction, of course certain Horror Movies scared me anyway and i was checking under my Bed for a while and all that stuff, but honestly all Kids have been there for SOME Reason or another, not just the Media, be that Movie, Game or Book they have seen, played or read.
While it is true that Games are becoming far more realistic i still believe that a Person can make a difference about what is happening in the Game and what is possible in Reality. The Problem is also Context, if you show your Kid, or any Kid for that Matter, a certain Topic from only one Point of View, then their Idea of what it is is biased. For example, to understand what the difference its between shooting Pixels all day and shooting real People. Real People die, they get hurt, they experience Pain, those Pixels dont, they do not really exist. A Child that knows what Pain is and im not suggesting you shoot your little Brother or something, will ever really inflict it upon another Person because they know that its not fun.
But again thats also Context, if the Child percieves Violence as a Problem Solver by itself then you should straighten the little Bugger out fairly quick.
Again, the best way, and i will stand by that, is that ANY Parent plays at least a Portion or the entirety of the Game before letting their Kid get their Hands on it, if that isnt possible then at least check now and then on the Contents your Kid is seeing in the Game. If it gets really out of Hand, then stop your Kid from playing. And again im not saying you should take it away by the slightest hint of Blood, Blood is in Essence better than having no Blood. A Child, when shooting that Pixel, knows that the Violent Action has a Reaction, that Guy/Monster got hurt, is bleeding and dies from it. In their Brain they can now equate that bleeding means serious Injury. Removing something like Blood, which is a Indicator of a Action having a actual Impact is therefore stupid.
Lets put it this Way, in Germany we have TV Companies that show Anime or other Media imported from Japan or other Countries. Now those Shows are more or less targetted towards a younger Audience starting at about 13 Years of Age. Of course even younger Children can also watch it. Most of those Media, specifically Anime is cut in extreme Forms. For example Blood is cut entirely or replaced by "Sweat". Now, the Child will watch this and while those Characters are fighting there, throwing god knows what stuff at each other, all that happens is that they breathe a bit heavier and "sweat" alot. They dont get injured, this can suggest to the Child that Violence has no real Impact or Effect. That you can punch someone and it would do nothing to them. Doesnt mean i want everyone to make any Gory Moment in a Game or elsewhere as realistic as possible, but it shouldnt be cut out entirely or distorted to such a Degree that we are practically bubble-wrapping Children from Reality by Definition.
Also..im sleepy, so this Post may not make much Sense, but i hope it does on some Level.
While it is true that Games are becoming far more realistic i still believe that a Person can make a difference about what is happening in the Game and what is possible in Reality. The Problem is also Context, if you show your Kid, or any Kid for that Matter, a certain Topic from only one Point of View, then their Idea of what it is is biased. For example, to understand what the difference its between shooting Pixels all day and shooting real People. Real People die, they get hurt, they experience Pain, those Pixels dont, they do not really exist. A Child that knows what Pain is and im not suggesting you shoot your little Brother or something, will ever really inflict it upon another Person because they know that its not fun.
But again thats also Context, if the Child percieves Violence as a Problem Solver by itself then you should straighten the little Bugger out fairly quick.
Again, the best way, and i will stand by that, is that ANY Parent plays at least a Portion or the entirety of the Game before letting their Kid get their Hands on it, if that isnt possible then at least check now and then on the Contents your Kid is seeing in the Game. If it gets really out of Hand, then stop your Kid from playing. And again im not saying you should take it away by the slightest hint of Blood, Blood is in Essence better than having no Blood. A Child, when shooting that Pixel, knows that the Violent Action has a Reaction, that Guy/Monster got hurt, is bleeding and dies from it. In their Brain they can now equate that bleeding means serious Injury. Removing something like Blood, which is a Indicator of a Action having a actual Impact is therefore stupid.
Lets put it this Way, in Germany we have TV Companies that show Anime or other Media imported from Japan or other Countries. Now those Shows are more or less targetted towards a younger Audience starting at about 13 Years of Age. Of course even younger Children can also watch it. Most of those Media, specifically Anime is cut in extreme Forms. For example Blood is cut entirely or replaced by "Sweat". Now, the Child will watch this and while those Characters are fighting there, throwing god knows what stuff at each other, all that happens is that they breathe a bit heavier and "sweat" alot. They dont get injured, this can suggest to the Child that Violence has no real Impact or Effect. That you can punch someone and it would do nothing to them. Doesnt mean i want everyone to make any Gory Moment in a Game or elsewhere as realistic as possible, but it shouldnt be cut out entirely or distorted to such a Degree that we are practically bubble-wrapping Children from Reality by Definition.
Also..im sleepy, so this Post may not make much Sense, but i hope it does on some Level.
I see it as guidelines.
I mean, I used to play the first GTA game when I was, what, ten? And I turned out fine!
*Twitches over parent's corpses*
I mean, I used to play the first GTA game when I was, what, ten? And I turned out fine!
*Twitches over parent's corpses*