Poll: How strict will you be with your kids' gameplay?

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Since I don't have children and I desperately don't want them, it's kind of a moot point, but... I've always thought game ratings are arbitrary and essentially meaningless, regardless of whether it's PEGI, ESRB or national ratings.

Do you actually know what arbitrary means? You are very wrong here. Games ratings are as far from arbitrary as one can get.

Developers submit finished games for consideration by a classification board, who play it in depth and judge it by various criteria. Those criteria are not in any way arbitrary. They were discussed, likely at length, and decided on by a large group of people, not just a single voice. Those consistent criteria form the basis of the ratings system which is then applied to games. Every part of their process is open and can be examined by the public.

You may pay them no attention, but they're intended for parents to make informed choices, and for stores to ensure inappropriate games don't end up in the hands of children. When people use the word arbitrary to describe something entirely deliberate, calculated, planned and ratified it makes me think they have no clue or valid opinion on a subject.

 

[krazykidd]

I'll let them play whatever . I will explain to them beforehand that it's just a game and not to take it seriously nor do any of the stunts in real life . But baby steps man . My childs first game won't be CoD or something of the like . He has to graduate through games . Start with harmless platformers, move up to adventure , then jrpgs , then fighting games , then action , then shooters . I highly believe gaming can help a childs education / thinking / reflexes and hand eye coordination .

By the time he is 13 he will ( like me ) be able to play what he wants . Plus i'm the one buying the games , so i have direct control of what games are in the house . And i'm not afraid to tell him no like most parents these days .

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

I want my kids to experience a normal childhood social experience. That means limited game time and lots of clubs, sports, etc. I want a geek kid, but not at the expense of social growth.

I am terrible at being social. I had my first real friend (friends you visit outside of school) when I was a junior in high school. I was 18 years old... Now I have problems talking to people offline. I don't want that to happen to my kids.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

They shall only play text adventures, graphic adventure games released from 1989-1998 and anything outside of those boundaries I need to approve personally. No console games.

 

[viranimus]

I AM highly strict with the gaming habits of kids in my care. Now that does not mean I am limiting them to ratings, and what types of content they are allowed, although I use logical judgement to formulate that.

No I am talking about habits as a larger picture. Time played, behavior while playing, effects on life outside of gaming, content, the whole picture and in that sense I am a highly strict parent.

My underlying rule is, its a video game, it is entertainment, with such it is incredibly low on the list of priorities. Respect comes before, Responsibility comes before, proper behavior comes before... essentially ANYTHING comes before video games. Attempt to shirk anything for video games and it will be taken away without hesitation, discussion or argument. Does not matter if you are in a clan match. Does not matter if your guild is raiding something for your uber gear. Real life ALWAYS comes before virtual existence, Period.

In short.. The only thing video games should do is fill the void when there is absolutely nothing better or more important to do.

 

[BarbaricGoose]

I love how all the poll options are cut off. You know what it reminds me o--


But seriously, I'm pretty liberal. I don't let 'em play online, but they can play whatever they want, barring a few exceptions. It's the games that present blood, gore & mature themes in a realistic manor that I tend to say no to. Wouldn't let 'em anywhere near Heavy Rain or Max Payne 3.

They're mature for their age. Yeah, they get that from me. I'm pretty amazing. I'm only half man, you know. (And half amazing.) Damn, I'm funny.

 

[Auberon]

(Very) liberal, assuming I end up having kids at all. Stuff like Torment is too nuanced and philosophical for some 7-year-old, open-world tends to be overwhelming for absolute newcomers and CoD/MW 18 will be just mindless, pointless shooters. Up the ante from something like Mario as they'd age to complex gameplay/strategy/plot/themes so they don't miss the deeper stuff.

ESRB could be possible guideline, if the current standards weren't so twisted around "sex is bad, violence is good".

 

[Kalikin]

Since I don't have children and I desperately don't want them, it's kind of a moot point, but... I've always thought game ratings are arbitrary and essentially meaningless, regardless of whether it's PEGI, ESRB or national ratings.

Do you actually know what arbitrary means? You are very wrong here. Games ratings are as far from arbitrary as one can get.

Developers submit finished games for consideration by a classification board, who play it in depth and judge it by various criteria. Those criteria are not in any way arbitrary. They were discussed, likely at length, and decided on by a large group of people, not just a single voice. Those consistent criteria form the basis of the ratings system which is then applied to games. Every part of their process is open and can be examined by the public.

You may pay them no attention, but they're intended for parents to make informed choices, and for stores to ensure inappropriate games don't end up in the hands of children. When people use the word arbitrary to describe something entirely deliberate, calculated, planned and ratified it makes me think they have no clue or valid opinion on a subject.

Yes, I'm aware of what the word means, and I know what classification boards do. And at least in the case of the ESRB you're wrong in that they don't actually play the game. It's up to the developer in that case to state what's in it, including what THEY deem to be the most extreme cases, and then send in a DVD recording of gameplay showing that to be rated. I obviously don't know the exact procedure of every single national classifications board, but I would be surprised if they played a video game "in depth" to come to a conclusion. Also, the "large group of people" is listed as "at least three" on the ESRB website, albeit with a moderation process for each rating.

But that's only tangential to the point I wanted to make. I used the term 'arbitrary' because these ratings tend to equate the depiction of something onscreen devoid of wider context with suitability for certain audiences, which I believe to be a wholly arbitrary link. I won't argue that they are mostly consistent about the application of their ratings, though I do have to wonder how Valkyrie Profile 2 earns a 16+ from PEGI, while Shin Megami Tensei 3 only gets a 12+ (which is the same for Kingdom Hearts 2 and Okami), and where the line between "realistic-looking violence" and "Non-realistic violence" is, since despite being very similar to SMT3 in that regard. SMT: Digital Devil Saga gets a 16+...

 

[killemore]

Fairly liberal. My son sat on my lap when he was a toddler while I played games like Fallout 3 and Modern Warfare. He has been growing with an understanding that even though he can hear it or see it in a game, he shouldn't behave like that. He knows he will get disciplined for language or inappropriate behavior. And the punishments are harsh enough to convince him it's not worth the trouble repeating anything inapropriate.

 

[Jamieson 90]

To be honest I'd be more worried about them playing games inside too much, I mean I do want my future hypothetical children to play sports and go outside too, you know a bit of variety? As for the games themselves I'd probably be a bit strict but not that bad, probably play through games that are significantly rated above their age first before deciding on whether they can play them, but wouldn't care so much if it were only by a year or two.

As for M rated game or 18's, well it would really depend on the content as I see violence and possibly drug use as worse than nudity and sex, so a game could be rated M just for that alone and not be that violent, so it really depends on my kids maturity level and what the game contains.

 

[Gone Rampant]

Like a lot of other people have said, I don't want kids (Blame my asexuality), but if I had kids, I'd present a deal with them: Since I'd be needed to play the game, following the purchase, I'd play it first, then give it back to him and, depending on what happens (I mean, I'm not gonna let him buy Witcher 2 or anything), I'll let him play or make her (Gender diversity for the win!) give the game back.

Also, I'd be watching their game time- no online gamign until I go to bed unless you're loud.

 

[evilneko]

If I had kids...

I'd make them play games from MY day! Screw the content, I don't care! Play old games! No new games until they appreciate the classics! RAWR! GET OFF MAH LAWN!

 

[Tdoodle]

If I have any doubt about it I'll play it first, and if I deem it OK they can go for it. So I guess that's moderate?

 

[Nouw]

I would gently ease them into more heavy games as he or she becomes used to them. I was given a sucker-punch into the world of violet videogames when watching the intro cinematic for Dawn of Warark Crusade and that was the first and last time I felt a little shaken by videogame violence. I'm fine but my children may not be and I'm not going to take that risk.