The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
What is with censorship these days? The government still passes the law, which puts a little sticker on our videos and games, aimed at stopping people of a younger age watching or playing it. But are they outdated laws?
Lets take this down to a small-scale basis. How many of you people out there have watched a film that says "18" on it, when you are actually a little younger? And who here has played the great Perfect Dark at a younger age than 18? I'm sure a great deal of people have answered 'yes' to the above.
So I ask you, CAN these laws actually do anything? I have not witnessed many cases of police raiding houses to catch a 14 year old watching Alien! They do not seem to have any backing whatsoever, which I am not against! But honestly, am I going to see a film I like, and check to see if I'm too young first? No! And will I wait another four years to play the sensational Perfect Dark? Erm, no!
On a more serious note, recent reports seem to suggest that violent films make violent kids. Is this true? I doubt it. Who honestly will play a game like Perfect Dark, and decide to play it out in real life by grabbing a gun and killing everyone around? Who will watch a film like Gladiator and decide that they need to go round slicing people in two? I believe no one. If someone wants to rape someone they will. If they have a bloody mind, they may well commit murder, but I highly doubt it will ever be caused by video games or films.
So, what aspects are involved when classifying a film? well:-
"Sex Scenes"
Ok, I can understand young people not being allowed to watch scenes of this nature. But why should a film with a steamy sex scene in it be 18? I don't wish to be crude, but people can HAVE sex at 16, but aren't allowed to watch it until they are 18? A little strange? And there is also the case that pornographic material is readily available on the internet, for free. If a young person is denied watching a film because it has sex in it, they may just find another way to watch it anyway.
Also, people are shown 'sex education' before they leave the juniors. Just because of this, mild scenes of sex should carry only a 15, or maybe a new 16 (look at reasoning above) certificate.
"Bad language"
Ok, to start with, I can understand that young people. I.e. under 10's may not be allowed to hear this language. But, as I've argued many a time with my Mother, I was confronted with this bad language every day in year 5 onwards! I honestly don't think *children* should have to be restricted from hearing what they hear at school already! It's not as if there is this attitude "Some action hero on a film told a bad guy to "rot in hell you ****** **** ***" so I have to do it everyday" is there?
Some stronger language should receive a "13" certification, but most should be no more than a 12.
"Violence"
Right, here is a tester. Should younger children be allowed to watch violence? This is one case where I think They've nearly got it right. Some violence does warrant an 18. But a lot of violence that is given an 18 could easily be a 15 only. Its not as if a child will copy everything they see on TV or a game is it?
"Theme"
I can understand that a film about a psycho who kills everyone, even if the violence/language only warrants a 12, and there's no sex, it should receive a 15. Not because younger people will copy, but it may distress them, and they may be scared, thinking such things happen normally. But other films, i.e.. scary ones will rate themselves. If a small child is watching a scary film, and they don't enjoy it they will not watch it!
It's all about enjoyment. If a squeamish 18-year-old hates violence, they should not watch violent movies. If a mature 12 year old, who can handle violence watches one of the same movies, they will be OK.
But honestly, who can blame today’s films and games for violence and killing? Did the Vikings have violent films or video games? No, and they still bashed each others heads apart with metallic objects!
Today’s society if more influenced by history and the news. I’m not saying violence on the news CAUSES violence, but it is more likely to than games or films. Anyone mature will play a game or watch a film and realise it is not true, only fiction, whereas anyone not mature may see it as real. This probably still won’t cause violence!
I honestly think that the ratings systems are far too harsh, even after the latest 'easing up' of the classifications.
Perhaps instead of Uc, U, PG, 12, 15 and 18, we should have Children, teens, and adults. Or maybe a rating system which classifies films in classes i.e.. Very gory, and leaves the viewer to decide whether it is suitable.
Ratings on a whole should be split. The current ratings systems should stand in cinemas, and be less restricting. This is due to the simple fact that people don’t want to watch a steamy love scene with immature children making strange noises like ‘erghhhh’! However, I think video and DVD ratings should be abolished. It is not right for anyone apart from the person themselves what they should watch in their own home. Now, obviously, parents still have control over their children, so perhaps it is up to them, not the government to make restrictions on viewing. One last summary point is that I think ratings on TV films should go. Still keep watersheds though. No ’dirty’ movies or programs before 10, and no very bad gore until 9.
As for games, I believe any person over 12 should be entitled to purchase any game. Obviously, some sort of guidance must appear, but no lawful restrictions, And I doubt many people under 12 will walk into a shop on their own and buy Conkers bad Fur Day anyway!
One other possible idea for gaming ’censorship’ is two versions of a game. The one with the toned down violence, and the proper one! Under 14’s buy the toned down ones, everyone else the original. If ratings systems aren’t abolished, I think tat any game with a 15 rating or higher should be REQUIRED to have two versions. I don’t want to go too deep into the matter of games causing violence, but I think most of my film argument applies to them.
It is clear that our current ratings systems don't work, so even if they don't change, it is obvious that people will continue to watch/play whatever films or games they like!
Therefore, I think that ratings systems should be toned down (though this still wont stop people, it may calm down their parents a bit!) or completely abolished. Obviously, you don’t want to walk into a shop, buy a DVD and discover it is porn, so maybe some other form of rating should be introduced, just for guidance, like ‘very gory’ or ‘contains pornographic content’ etc.
Though I don’t believe anything will happen in the near future, I hope that one day ratings systems will be a little closer to my ideals. But by then, I’ll be allowed to buy them all anyway, so I can just laugh at the little people who still can’t!!
Thanks for reading, and I look forward to hearing your ideas!
Lets take this down to a small-scale basis. How many of you people out there have watched a film that says "18" on it, when you are actually a little younger? And who here has played the great Perfect Dark at a younger age than 18? I'm sure a great deal of people have answered 'yes' to the above.
So I ask you, CAN these laws actually do anything? I have not witnessed many cases of police raiding houses to catch a 14 year old watching Alien! They do not seem to have any backing whatsoever, which I am not against! But honestly, am I going to see a film I like, and check to see if I'm too young first? No! And will I wait another four years to play the sensational Perfect Dark? Erm, no!
On a more serious note, recent reports seem to suggest that violent films make violent kids. Is this true? I doubt it. Who honestly will play a game like Perfect Dark, and decide to play it out in real life by grabbing a gun and killing everyone around? Who will watch a film like Gladiator and decide that they need to go round slicing people in two? I believe no one. If someone wants to rape someone they will. If they have a bloody mind, they may well commit murder, but I highly doubt it will ever be caused by video games or films.
So, what aspects are involved when classifying a film? well:-
"Sex Scenes"
Ok, I can understand young people not being allowed to watch scenes of this nature. But why should a film with a steamy sex scene in it be 18? I don't wish to be crude, but people can HAVE sex at 16, but aren't allowed to watch it until they are 18? A little strange? And there is also the case that pornographic material is readily available on the internet, for free. If a young person is denied watching a film because it has sex in it, they may just find another way to watch it anyway.
Also, people are shown 'sex education' before they leave the juniors. Just because of this, mild scenes of sex should carry only a 15, or maybe a new 16 (look at reasoning above) certificate.
"Bad language"
Ok, to start with, I can understand that young people. I.e. under 10's may not be allowed to hear this language. But, as I've argued many a time with my Mother, I was confronted with this bad language every day in year 5 onwards! I honestly don't think *children* should have to be restricted from hearing what they hear at school already! It's not as if there is this attitude "Some action hero on a film told a bad guy to "rot in hell you ****** **** ***" so I have to do it everyday" is there?
Some stronger language should receive a "13" certification, but most should be no more than a 12.
"Violence"
Right, here is a tester. Should younger children be allowed to watch violence? This is one case where I think They've nearly got it right. Some violence does warrant an 18. But a lot of violence that is given an 18 could easily be a 15 only. Its not as if a child will copy everything they see on TV or a game is it?
"Theme"
I can understand that a film about a psycho who kills everyone, even if the violence/language only warrants a 12, and there's no sex, it should receive a 15. Not because younger people will copy, but it may distress them, and they may be scared, thinking such things happen normally. But other films, i.e.. scary ones will rate themselves. If a small child is watching a scary film, and they don't enjoy it they will not watch it!
It's all about enjoyment. If a squeamish 18-year-old hates violence, they should not watch violent movies. If a mature 12 year old, who can handle violence watches one of the same movies, they will be OK.
But honestly, who can blame today’s films and games for violence and killing? Did the Vikings have violent films or video games? No, and they still bashed each others heads apart with metallic objects!
Today’s society if more influenced by history and the news. I’m not saying violence on the news CAUSES violence, but it is more likely to than games or films. Anyone mature will play a game or watch a film and realise it is not true, only fiction, whereas anyone not mature may see it as real. This probably still won’t cause violence!
I honestly think that the ratings systems are far too harsh, even after the latest 'easing up' of the classifications.
Perhaps instead of Uc, U, PG, 12, 15 and 18, we should have Children, teens, and adults. Or maybe a rating system which classifies films in classes i.e.. Very gory, and leaves the viewer to decide whether it is suitable.
Ratings on a whole should be split. The current ratings systems should stand in cinemas, and be less restricting. This is due to the simple fact that people don’t want to watch a steamy love scene with immature children making strange noises like ‘erghhhh’! However, I think video and DVD ratings should be abolished. It is not right for anyone apart from the person themselves what they should watch in their own home. Now, obviously, parents still have control over their children, so perhaps it is up to them, not the government to make restrictions on viewing. One last summary point is that I think ratings on TV films should go. Still keep watersheds though. No ’dirty’ movies or programs before 10, and no very bad gore until 9.
As for games, I believe any person over 12 should be entitled to purchase any game. Obviously, some sort of guidance must appear, but no lawful restrictions, And I doubt many people under 12 will walk into a shop on their own and buy Conkers bad Fur Day anyway!
One other possible idea for gaming ’censorship’ is two versions of a game. The one with the toned down violence, and the proper one! Under 14’s buy the toned down ones, everyone else the original. If ratings systems aren’t abolished, I think tat any game with a 15 rating or higher should be REQUIRED to have two versions. I don’t want to go too deep into the matter of games causing violence, but I think most of my film argument applies to them.
It is clear that our current ratings systems don't work, so even if they don't change, it is obvious that people will continue to watch/play whatever films or games they like!
Therefore, I think that ratings systems should be toned down (though this still wont stop people, it may calm down their parents a bit!) or completely abolished. Obviously, you don’t want to walk into a shop, buy a DVD and discover it is porn, so maybe some other form of rating should be introduced, just for guidance, like ‘very gory’ or ‘contains pornographic content’ etc.
Though I don’t believe anything will happen in the near future, I hope that one day ratings systems will be a little closer to my ideals. But by then, I’ll be allowed to buy them all anyway, so I can just laugh at the little people who still can’t!!
Thanks for reading, and I look forward to hearing your ideas!
Page:
cookie monster wrote:
> Darkness_2K wrote:
> i have not witnessed many cases of police
> raiding houses to catch a 14 year
> old watching Alien!
They
> would never do this, because it is not illegal to watch the 18 rated
> films etc.. it is only illegal to buy them if you are under age.
There's no law against winning 18 certified films on FAD- well im sure there isn'y anyway!! he he.
> Darkness_2K wrote:
> i have not witnessed many cases of police
> raiding houses to catch a 14 year
> old watching Alien!
They
> would never do this, because it is not illegal to watch the 18 rated
> films etc.. it is only illegal to buy them if you are under age.
There's no law against winning 18 certified films on FAD- well im sure there isn'y anyway!! he he.
I got asked if I was over 18 when buying my SP ticket - and despite looking nothing like an 18 year old, all I had to do was say "Yes" to the question, "Are you over 18?" Simple stuff.
Or†ega wrote:
> I bought GTA(rated 18)when i was only 15. Also bought Perfect Dark
> when i was only 16. I'm still only 17 but i never ever get asked for
> Id anywhere.
It does depend where you go, but its still actually illegal, and thats what I think should change!
> I bought GTA(rated 18)when i was only 15. Also bought Perfect Dark
> when i was only 16. I'm still only 17 but i never ever get asked for
> Id anywhere.
It does depend where you go, but its still actually illegal, and thats what I think should change!
I bought GTA(rated 18)when i was only 15. Also bought Perfect Dark when i was only 16. I'm still only 17 but i never ever get asked for Id anywhere.
I did that for South Park, and... that's it. Shame on me for sticking to the law!
I am glad it didn't get classified 15 as I would have had to have paid another 1 70 to see it. Also I would have had to lie about my age again.
Apparently, Tomb Raider: The Movie had some scenes of Lara (aka Angelina Jolie) headbutting some monster cut out, because the BBFC would have made it a 15 instead of a 12. As Paul from Big Brother would say (hey, I've got 8 weeks off and I'm bored), "Mad".
Darkness_2K wrote:
> i have not witnessed many cases of police raiding houses to catch a 14 year
> old watching Alien!
They would never do this, because it is not illegal to watch the 18 rated films etc.. it is only illegal to buy them if you are under age.
> i have not witnessed many cases of police raiding houses to catch a 14 year
> old watching Alien!
They would never do this, because it is not illegal to watch the 18 rated films etc.. it is only illegal to buy them if you are under age.
Darkness_2K wrote:
> But what would happen if the law did get involved? How many people
> from here have been given games by SR which legally they are not old
> enough to have?
How much do you think I could sue SR for?!?!? :)
*******
You could sue them for everything!......about 10p then Darkness.
(;o|
> But what would happen if the law did get involved? How many people
> from here have been given games by SR which legally they are not old
> enough to have?
How much do you think I could sue SR for?!?!? :)
*******
You could sue them for everything!......about 10p then Darkness.
(;o|
But what would happen if the law did get involved? How many people from here have been given games by SR which legally they are not old enough to have?
How much do you think I could sue SR for?!?!? :)
How much do you think I could sue SR for?!?!? :)
Page: