Would you let YOUR kids play?

[Jenova65]

But that wasn't the same poster so the point is moot to the poster you quoted, iyswim? Since SavingPrincess stated the age at 8-12 (which I also imagine would be a judgement call on the individual) or they would just have said 8 (or 12) as a benchmark. I know about the age 8-12 btw as a parent to 3 kids between the ages of 18 years (eldest) and almost a year (youngest, obviously) And having many friends who have children

I grok that; but it seemed to me (and apparently it is so, judging by the quoted poster's stated range), a difference between the quoted poster by SP and SP's age range.

Our youngest is in that magical 8-12 range. And when she was 8, it would've been likely a no. Now, at 11, it's more likely to be a yes, because she's stunningly more mature now.

In which case you agree with SavingPrincess then! You would make a judgement call based on her maturity. I am backing away now as this looks like becoming a quibble fest and I don't do those

 

[JEBWrench]

But that wasn't the same poster so the point is moot to the poster you quoted, iyswim? Since SavingPrincess stated the age at 8-12 (which I also imagine would be a judgement call on the individual) or they would just have said 8 (or 12) as a benchmark. I know about the age 8-12 btw as a parent to 3 kids between the ages of 18 years (eldest) and almost a year (youngest, obviously) And having many friends who have children

I grok that; but it seemed to me (and apparently it is so, judging by the quoted poster's stated range), a difference between the quoted poster by SP and SP's age range.

Our youngest is in that magical 8-12 range. And when she was 8, it would've been likely a no. Now, at 11, it's more likely to be a yes, because she's stunningly more mature now.

In which case you agree with SavingPrincess then! You would make a judgement call based on her maturity. I am backing away now as this looks like becoming a quibble fest and I don't do those

I didn't think we were disagreeing per se. I don't view it as a quibble at all.

 

[Jenova65]

But that wasn't the same poster so the point is moot to the poster you quoted, iyswim? Since SavingPrincess stated the age at 8-12 (which I also imagine would be a judgement call on the individual) or they would just have said 8 (or 12) as a benchmark. I know about the age 8-12 btw as a parent to 3 kids between the ages of 18 years (eldest) and almost a year (youngest, obviously) And having many friends who have children

I grok that; but it seemed to me (and apparently it is so, judging by the quoted poster's stated range), a difference between the quoted poster by SP and SP's age range.

Our youngest is in that magical 8-12 range. And when she was 8, it would've been likely a no. Now, at 11, it's more likely to be a yes, because she's stunningly more mature now.

The escapist took about 5 minutes to show my post to me there, apologies for the double post!

 

[Jenova65]

But that wasn't the same poster so the point is moot to the poster you quoted, iyswim? Since SavingPrincess stated the age at 8-12 (which I also imagine would be a judgement call on the individual) or they would just have said 8 (or 12) as a benchmark. I know about the age 8-12 btw as a parent to 3 kids between the ages of 18 years (eldest) and almost a year (youngest, obviously) And having many friends who have children

I grok that; but it seemed to me (and apparently it is so, judging by the quoted poster's stated range), a difference between the quoted poster by SP and SP's age range.

Our youngest is in that magical 8-12 range. And when she was 8, it would've been likely a no. Now, at 11, it's more likely to be a yes, because she's stunningly more mature now.

In which case you agree with SavingPrincess then! You would make a judgement call based on her maturity. I am backing away now as this looks like becoming a quibble fest and I don't do those

I didn't think we were disagreeing per se. I don't view it as a quibble at all.

I put a smiley there for a reason (would a winky face have been better?)

 

[Slythernite]

T when they're a teen, M whenever I'm sure they're not going to become murdering psychopaths.

 

[teutonicman]

Depends on the game, like you said probably 5 minutes of research would let me know if it is appropriate. Most RPGs with some kind of love side quest, I wouldn't want them to play until atleast the early teens. Come to think of it once the kid is in the early teens, he (assuming) can go to town, unless it's titled "Bum Rape Master 9000" or something like that.

 

[KAPTAINmORGANnWo4life]

I would only allow Mature-rated media of value. Not crap like Turok and Gears of War, but things that are either good-quality stories like The Elder Scrolls or Mass Effect, or pure catharsis, over-the-top, cartoons with bombs like Mercenaries and Red Faction: Guerrilla.

If it has substance, or a glorious lack thereof, it's fine by me.

Oh, and nothing chock-full of rhetoric or preaching. No "Ethnic Cleansing" for
1stMate-nWo4life

 

[Mirrored Jigsaw]

Depends on the maturity of the child. If I have a kid that is ten and knows right from wrong, then I wouldn't mind letting them play the majority of the games mentioned above.

I'm specifically upset by the inclusion of Mass Effect on the list. I don't care if you don't want to explain why Shepard's fucking the ladies; that's your job. Maybe not when they're eight, but eventually, it's your responsibility to tell them what sex is, and you can't exactly wait until they're thirteen.

My parents were entirely cryptic about what sex was, so eventually, the information found me on its own. I was essentially sexually taken advantage of (not raped) when I was around twelve, and I don't exactly think that would have happened had my parents been responsible adults and told me about it themselves.

You can't shelter your kids forever, and a game that maturely presents talking points like sex shouldn't be treated as if it's going to rot your kids' minds. If he is a mature kid, then you have a responsibility to treat him maturely.

 

[Jamous]

It really depends on what I thought of the game... I'd try and choose myself, rather than let the ratings system do it for me.

 

[The_Deleted]

My four year old has taken to the Playstation in a big way and I'd be more inclined to let him play something violent than full of bad language.
That said... I'd choose a God of War (He loves the GoWIII demo), over an Aliens Vs. Predator style shoot em up.
The violence in GoW is OTT, Fantasy violence, and who didn't love that as a kid? But I'd have problems with him using 'real world guns' in game as the violence is a lot more real and really not suitable. But fantasy stuff, within reason, I have no problem with.
He's a bright kid with a great imagination.

 

[Dimbo_Sama]

I'd let them play whatever, unless it was really fucking graphic. but like, GTA? sure, Fallout? of course.

Something that's pitched more over their heads like Planescape: Torment or Bioshock though... probably not.

 

[SavingPrincess]

Spoiler: SuperCut

(If you're wondering, I wouldn't want my kids to play Mass Effect when they're very young because I don't want to have to explain why shephard is 'wrestling' with the ladies.)

I still don't understand this mentality. I have to ask you directly.

First, are you a parent?

Second, why is learning about violence, and your children virtually shooting each other and others (ala Halo) okay, when learning about two characters who have feelings for each other making love is not?

I personally would much rather let my children let's say 8-12 play games with romantic themes (even if there is a little side-cleavage) than violent ones. I can explain to my child why people have sex, I cannot explain to them why they shoot at each other. When my kid grows up, I want them to have sex with someone, I don't want them to shoot someone. It all seems really logical to me.

I did a lengthy post [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.178178] about this subject that I encourage you to read and respond to.

First note I'm talking about young kids, like 5-8. I've seen far too many of them online in mature games they have NO business playing.

If my kid's too young, I'm not going to explain sex to them. End of story. I'm sure even with Mass Effect's mild sex scene, my kid (if they're young) would wonder what they were doing.
Now, honestly, the thing with Jack and Shephard in ME2 is not making love, in fact, you can't really argue that there's a love connection between Shephard and Jack, Jack just wants to fuck, put bluntly. If my kid's a bit older and asks about sex in Mass Effect, I'll talk about it.
In Halo, the child's not shooting people. You don't shoot people in Halo, you shoot aliens. Believe it or not, there is a difference. I'd rather my kid grow up shooting aliens than people. I know a few people who let their kids play alien shooting games when they're young, but not games like Modern Warfare.


If you're asking, no I'm not a parent, but I'm getting older and kids are becoming a real concept to me. I've been thinking about all aspects of raising my kids.
My boyfriend and I live together, but we notice differences in personalities based around video games.

Allow me to elaborate:
My mother restricted what kids of games I could play when I was young. Young being 5-10. After 10, if I could tell her about a game and she gave it a good look at and knew I was mature enough to handle it, she'd let me play.

My boyfriend's mother let video games be his babysitter when he was young, meaning he could play anything he wanted to. And he's noticed problems based around that. A lot of it being resentment to his mom for not looking after his well being.
-------


I will agree and have not said to the contrary, that some children can handle mature content. However, I believe it is the responsibility of the parent to moniter what their kids are watching, playing and reading.
If my kid is 11 and they want to play Mass Effect, then fine, if they can grasp what sex is and can understand that the man and woman in the game "love" each other, then fine.

I think a lot of people think I'm trying to be overly strict. But honestly, I pity parents who let their kids to play anything and wonder why their 7 year old curses like a sailor.

You also have to remember, shooting aliens vs. shooting people is a distinction that you are making in place of your child. I can tell that when I was little playing with my friends, sometimes they WERE aliens, or monsters, or Ninja Turtles... I would rather my children attempt to hug or kiss another kid at school than take a swing at them or mock shoot them. Neither situation is ideal, but if I had to go talk to their teacher, I'd rather it be because they like someone than want to hurt someone.

You're also assuming, as someone else pointed out, that you're child is going to navigate down the tricky dialogue pathway necessary to get Jack and Shepard to "do it." I played a female Shep in my play through and can honestly say, unless you're choosing the dialogue that shows you want the SAME thing as him, then you're not even gonna get close.

You also inadvertantly closed your own arguement. Look AT the demeanor of the kids playing Halo... that right there speaks volumes. Again, you're going to raise your own children, but your children might one day have to interact with mine, I'd much rather my children try to be "loving" to mine than violent. Parents are always going to have to deal with less than perfect situations, I'd rather the difficult situations not put them in physical harm if possible.

You say point blank:

If my kid's too young, I'm not going to explain sex to them. End of story.

I ask you to remove the "end of story" part and explain why not? How would you answer a question when they see a game like Halo for the first time and ask, "What are they doing to each other?" and the natural subsequent question, "Why?"

I guarantee you that is going to be a much more pleasant conversation if you're talking about sex.

 

[Lullabye]

Depends on the maturity of the child. If I have a kid that is ten and knows right from wrong, then I wouldn't mind letting them play the majority of the games mentioned above.

I'm specifically upset by the inclusion of Mass Effect on the list. I don't care if you don't want to explain why Shepard's fucking the ladies; that's your job. Maybe not when they're eight, but eventually, it's your responsibility to tell them what sex is, and you can't exactly wait until they're thirteen.

My parents were entirely cryptic about what sex was, so eventually, the information found me on its own. I was essentially sexually taken advantage of (not raped) when I was around twelve, and I don't exactly think that would have happened had my parents been responsible adults and told me about it themselves.

You can't shelter your kids forever, and a game that maturely presents talking points like sex shouldn't be treated as if it's going to rot your kids' minds. If he is a mature kid, then you have a responsibility to treat him maturely.

Ninja'd. See, I'm 18 and I still remember what it was like when I was a younger gamer. I was always praised as a "mature" kid, which in todays world isn't saying much, but I was more a philosopher at the age of 12 than I am now.(You know, thought about death and stuff, meaning of life blah blah blah)
I would argue the logic behind religion to myself, figure out why science was treated as fact when so often it is proven wrong(by more science). The one thing that sticks out in my mind though, through all this thinking I did as a young child, was videogames and the potential they showed. I, like many young boys, thought girls were "icky"(still do, the good ones a few and far) yet, I actually ended up enjoying the "romance" genre of media quite a bit, all because of videogames.
What does this all mean? Well, for one, that games are awesome(duh) but mainly, that we as children, were people the same as we are now. The only difference was that we were slightly more ignorant then than now(I hope). Let me tell you, I hated being ignorant as a child. Not knowing whats what and being made fun of because of it, especially by adults....ugh, just thinking about it makes me tremble with disgust. I wanted to know, I wished my mother had told me stuff earlier, not shielded me from the world and all that stuff. I really could handle barebacked facts as a child, like sex and such. Had they explained it to me, I would not have grown up into a serial rapist killing machine, I don't know why people think that way. Perhaps the fallacy comes from the act of distancing oneself from the ignorances of the past. Pretending we never had a childhood.......
wow, got off track there.
OT: Yeah, I'd let my kids play whatever they want, as long as I felt sure that they understood the many ideas, morals and points the games present them. I'm not raising my kids to be idiots, and I'm definitely not shielding them from life. It's not a monster after all.

 

[Cosplay Horatio]

I would let my kids play and make sure they play the age appropriate games and when they get old enough they can play but only when they finish homework or it's the weekend but only 2 hours of gameplay twice a weekend day.

 

[SilentBobsThoughts]

When I was 7- 11 I was obsessed with crash bandicoot and GTA 3, so it kinda evened its self out. But I hate it when parent stop there kids playing a game like halo or bloody Dark Void cos theres aliens and robots ect... For example, my friends dad sat and listened to all 1200+ songs on his mp3 player just in case there was any swearing on it.... He was 14.

 

[JTLW]

If I ever go insane enough to decide I want children... yeah I'd let them play them. I'd be there to watch them and make sure they understand fully that it's just a videogame.

When I was 8, I got GTA, Silent Hill, Resident Evil and stuff like that. Sure, it scared me a bit, but then I realised that it was just a disc in a plastic box. After which, no video ever scared me, or encouraged me to do horrible things, or abuse people online. Because it's a game. Nothing more.

Now, kids 5-8, I would let play online, but with no voice. Partly because at that age, they would get abused for sounding like they do, and there are massive dickheads on the internet.

12 and older? I'd let them do as they pleased. I'd make sure to watch them up until that age, and ensure they aren't gonna rage on the 'nets, then when I was sure they fully understood what it means to not be a dickhead, then they would have free access. If they became a raging, swearing adolescent on Xbox Live, then they would lose Live privileges unless I was there to monitor them, or until such time as they are ready to stop being a dickhead.

Come to think of it, I'd probably be a decent father. Too bad babies creep me out.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I'd let them play when I feel it's appropriate for them to play. Maybe even make them play only when I'm there, to explain a few things (like how venting in game by decapitating and slicing hundreds of people in half is perfectly acceptable, but doing so in real life is an abhorration, an abomination, and absolutely unacceptable, or the finer points of how to do a money-back scheme from a hooker, involving a car). It will also be a good lesson in sarcasm--how to use it properly, and when it's inappropriate (still can't think of a time). It would also be a great time to explain that one-liner catch phrases make you look like a prick.

 

[0HP]

I love games as an art medium and I would likewise want to expose my children to them as a part of cultural integration. Sadly, I would have to personally review every game that my children want to play. Why? Because the ESRB rating system itself is SCREWED.

Saying a game is "M" or "T" arbitrarily puts gateways on content. Now, there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but those gateways reflect a more deeply schizophrenic culture. When it comes to sex and violence, we don't know what to think. VanityGirl here is case in point:

A game like Halo 3, I would let them play (not online).

(If you're wondering, I wouldn't want my kids to play Mass Effect when they're very young because I don't want to have to explain why shephard is 'wrestling' with the ladies.)

Wait a second. You'd let your children roam around as a faceless man-with-gun who mercilessly commits what essentially amounts to genocide? You'd expose them to THIS kind of heroism; the over-blown, "hard core", ruggedly individual, macho, essentially sociopathic, Rambo hero stuff as opposed to... a pair of alien tits?

First of all, why is it that we hold sex in tighter reigns than violence? Isn't sex BETTER than violence, ethically speaking?

Second, why is it that "Halo" is regarded as being less violent, when really it's only more anonymous. I'd expose my kids to "Manhunt" before "Halo," given the option. Because, at the very least, they should have a sense that acts of violence are often messy, complicated, and gilt-ridden.

I'd let my kids play online as well. Maybe the droves of morons spurting the phrase "gay" would encourage them to adopt better, more intelligent ways of looking at the world. I should hope so, anyway.