The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I’ve been a gamer all my life, I can’t remember a time when I didn’t have a console nestling beside my TV and a controller planted firmly in my hands. What I can remember though, is a time when children would play the games intended for children, and adults would play something that suited them. Tell me…where did it all go wrong?
I work in a busy music/video/games shop and over the past few months I’ve become increasingly horrified at the games children bring to the counter. A child no older than 9 presented me with a copy of Onimusha 2. Now, I own this game and am aware of the level of blood, violence and demons contained within. I glanced at the box and realized that there was no BBFC certificate listed, just a pointless ELSPA age recommendation. Anyone who works in retail will know that this is not a legal rating and is merely there as a guideline, not enforceable. I had no choice in selling the game to the child.
Now I realize that there are worse games than Onimusha out there, in fact, that game in particular is mild in comparison to other titles on the market. There’s Vice City, the Getaway, the Resident Evil games, Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, BMX XXX, Mortal Kombat, etc, all arguably unsuitable for a particularly young child. However what links these games is an enforceable BBFC certificate, forbidding retailers to sell the product to underage children. That’s all well and good, but what of Onimusha, Devil May Cry, Dead or Alive (no prizes for guessing the unsuitability there!) and games such as that. Nothing too severe I know, but would you seriously hand a small child a copy of Dead or Alive so they can watch the animated breasts bounce, or Onimusha so they can carve up some demons?
Ok, you may think I’m being hysterical over this, but my point is, it’s not so much what our children are playing now, it’s what children in the future could be getting their hands on. Playing violent games is in some ways worse than handing them a copy of Reservoir Dogs. Why? In a film, you’re merely a spectator, witnessing the horror onscreen. In a game, you control the whole thing. You’re the perpetrator of the violence. It’s interactive. Surely that has got to be more dangerous.
One thing I’ve noticed too, is that parents are more likely to buy an 18 game for an underage child than they are to buy an 18 film. For some reason, parents don’t view the games as harmful and often buy them on behalf of their children if their children have already been refused sale. What choice do we have? We can’t refuse sales to the parents even though we know the game’s going straight into the hands of children. It’s quite a frightening situation and something needs to be done to make parents treat 18 games the same way they’d treat 18 films.
I know I’m going to get a barrage of answers protesting that games aren’t harmful to children and that I’m just being hysterical, but is there anyone out there who thinks games are becoming unnecessarily violent? Not for adult gamers who are old enough to establish the difference between a computer game and reality, but for children who are still developing. There’s a huge adult fanbase out there, but computer games have always been predominantly for kids, and a huge amount of gaming mags are read by them too. Anyone else see the danger?
I work in a busy music/video/games shop and over the past few months I’ve become increasingly horrified at the games children bring to the counter. A child no older than 9 presented me with a copy of Onimusha 2. Now, I own this game and am aware of the level of blood, violence and demons contained within. I glanced at the box and realized that there was no BBFC certificate listed, just a pointless ELSPA age recommendation. Anyone who works in retail will know that this is not a legal rating and is merely there as a guideline, not enforceable. I had no choice in selling the game to the child.
Now I realize that there are worse games than Onimusha out there, in fact, that game in particular is mild in comparison to other titles on the market. There’s Vice City, the Getaway, the Resident Evil games, Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, BMX XXX, Mortal Kombat, etc, all arguably unsuitable for a particularly young child. However what links these games is an enforceable BBFC certificate, forbidding retailers to sell the product to underage children. That’s all well and good, but what of Onimusha, Devil May Cry, Dead or Alive (no prizes for guessing the unsuitability there!) and games such as that. Nothing too severe I know, but would you seriously hand a small child a copy of Dead or Alive so they can watch the animated breasts bounce, or Onimusha so they can carve up some demons?
Ok, you may think I’m being hysterical over this, but my point is, it’s not so much what our children are playing now, it’s what children in the future could be getting their hands on. Playing violent games is in some ways worse than handing them a copy of Reservoir Dogs. Why? In a film, you’re merely a spectator, witnessing the horror onscreen. In a game, you control the whole thing. You’re the perpetrator of the violence. It’s interactive. Surely that has got to be more dangerous.
One thing I’ve noticed too, is that parents are more likely to buy an 18 game for an underage child than they are to buy an 18 film. For some reason, parents don’t view the games as harmful and often buy them on behalf of their children if their children have already been refused sale. What choice do we have? We can’t refuse sales to the parents even though we know the game’s going straight into the hands of children. It’s quite a frightening situation and something needs to be done to make parents treat 18 games the same way they’d treat 18 films.
I know I’m going to get a barrage of answers protesting that games aren’t harmful to children and that I’m just being hysterical, but is there anyone out there who thinks games are becoming unnecessarily violent? Not for adult gamers who are old enough to establish the difference between a computer game and reality, but for children who are still developing. There’s a huge adult fanbase out there, but computer games have always been predominantly for kids, and a huge amount of gaming mags are read by them too. Anyone else see the danger?
Page:
I’ve been a gamer all my life, I can’t remember a time when I didn’t have a console nestling beside my TV and a controller planted firmly in my hands. What I can remember though, is a time when children would play the games intended for children, and adults would play something that suited them. Tell me…where did it all go wrong?
I work in a busy music/video/games shop and over the past few months I’ve become increasingly horrified at the games children bring to the counter. A child no older than 9 presented me with a copy of Onimusha 2. Now, I own this game and am aware of the level of blood, violence and demons contained within. I glanced at the box and realized that there was no BBFC certificate listed, just a pointless ELSPA age recommendation. Anyone who works in retail will know that this is not a legal rating and is merely there as a guideline, not enforceable. I had no choice in selling the game to the child.
Now I realize that there are worse games than Onimusha out there, in fact, that game in particular is mild in comparison to other titles on the market. There’s Vice City, the Getaway, the Resident Evil games, Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, BMX XXX, Mortal Kombat, etc, all arguably unsuitable for a particularly young child. However what links these games is an enforceable BBFC certificate, forbidding retailers to sell the product to underage children. That’s all well and good, but what of Onimusha, Devil May Cry, Dead or Alive (no prizes for guessing the unsuitability there!) and games such as that. Nothing too severe I know, but would you seriously hand a small child a copy of Dead or Alive so they can watch the animated breasts bounce, or Onimusha so they can carve up some demons?
Ok, you may think I’m being hysterical over this, but my point is, it’s not so much what our children are playing now, it’s what children in the future could be getting their hands on. Playing violent games is in some ways worse than handing them a copy of Reservoir Dogs. Why? In a film, you’re merely a spectator, witnessing the horror onscreen. In a game, you control the whole thing. You’re the perpetrator of the violence. It’s interactive. Surely that has got to be more dangerous.
One thing I’ve noticed too, is that parents are more likely to buy an 18 game for an underage child than they are to buy an 18 film. For some reason, parents don’t view the games as harmful and often buy them on behalf of their children if their children have already been refused sale. What choice do we have? We can’t refuse sales to the parents even though we know the game’s going straight into the hands of children. It’s quite a frightening situation and something needs to be done to make parents treat 18 games the same way they’d treat 18 films.
I know I’m going to get a barrage of answers protesting that games aren’t harmful to children and that I’m just being hysterical, but is there anyone out there who thinks games are becoming unnecessarily violent? Not for adult gamers who are old enough to establish the difference between a computer game and reality, but for children who are still developing. There’s a huge adult fanbase out there, but computer games have always been predominantly for kids, and a huge amount of gaming mags are read by them too. Anyone else see the danger?
I work in a busy music/video/games shop and over the past few months I’ve become increasingly horrified at the games children bring to the counter. A child no older than 9 presented me with a copy of Onimusha 2. Now, I own this game and am aware of the level of blood, violence and demons contained within. I glanced at the box and realized that there was no BBFC certificate listed, just a pointless ELSPA age recommendation. Anyone who works in retail will know that this is not a legal rating and is merely there as a guideline, not enforceable. I had no choice in selling the game to the child.
Now I realize that there are worse games than Onimusha out there, in fact, that game in particular is mild in comparison to other titles on the market. There’s Vice City, the Getaway, the Resident Evil games, Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, BMX XXX, Mortal Kombat, etc, all arguably unsuitable for a particularly young child. However what links these games is an enforceable BBFC certificate, forbidding retailers to sell the product to underage children. That’s all well and good, but what of Onimusha, Devil May Cry, Dead or Alive (no prizes for guessing the unsuitability there!) and games such as that. Nothing too severe I know, but would you seriously hand a small child a copy of Dead or Alive so they can watch the animated breasts bounce, or Onimusha so they can carve up some demons?
Ok, you may think I’m being hysterical over this, but my point is, it’s not so much what our children are playing now, it’s what children in the future could be getting their hands on. Playing violent games is in some ways worse than handing them a copy of Reservoir Dogs. Why? In a film, you’re merely a spectator, witnessing the horror onscreen. In a game, you control the whole thing. You’re the perpetrator of the violence. It’s interactive. Surely that has got to be more dangerous.
One thing I’ve noticed too, is that parents are more likely to buy an 18 game for an underage child than they are to buy an 18 film. For some reason, parents don’t view the games as harmful and often buy them on behalf of their children if their children have already been refused sale. What choice do we have? We can’t refuse sales to the parents even though we know the game’s going straight into the hands of children. It’s quite a frightening situation and something needs to be done to make parents treat 18 games the same way they’d treat 18 films.
I know I’m going to get a barrage of answers protesting that games aren’t harmful to children and that I’m just being hysterical, but is there anyone out there who thinks games are becoming unnecessarily violent? Not for adult gamers who are old enough to establish the difference between a computer game and reality, but for children who are still developing. There’s a huge adult fanbase out there, but computer games have always been predominantly for kids, and a huge amount of gaming mags are read by them too. Anyone else see the danger?
I agree entirely with your point of view, but what you're forgetting is this:
"GTA is da best eva an gaemcuueb is for kiddehz and gurls. I liek to kiil peeps wiv da bacebull batt and run dem ova in carz".
I long for the day when certification can be enforced through retina identification via the television set.
"GTA is da best eva an gaemcuueb is for kiddehz and gurls. I liek to kiil peeps wiv da bacebull batt and run dem ova in carz".
I long for the day when certification can be enforced through retina identification via the television set.
I admit, after playing Goldeneye for a while i did imagine sniping people and the best tactical position for a good assassination.
IB, check my topic in the Sports forum and join up, please?
IB, check my topic in the Sports forum and join up, please?
First of all, let me congratulate you on an excellent first post...you've gone to proove not all JAT's are lame, live in trailer parks, and feed off of tins of spam.
I think games developers like films writers/directors are finding that there are less and less things to make them about...there are no new ideas out there. Every game you play is a remake of an older game but updated so much that the only thing left to do is to add more gore, or the odd flash of naked flesh. Yet it is these things that make you want the game more.
At the age alot of young kids are buying games, like for example the 9 year old you mention, it could be considered that it's partly down to peer presure or the wanting to look cooler than all their mates.
It's going to be interesting to see where games are in 10 years or so, just to see how much furhter the boundaries are going to be pushed.
I think games developers like films writers/directors are finding that there are less and less things to make them about...there are no new ideas out there. Every game you play is a remake of an older game but updated so much that the only thing left to do is to add more gore, or the odd flash of naked flesh. Yet it is these things that make you want the game more.
At the age alot of young kids are buying games, like for example the 9 year old you mention, it could be considered that it's partly down to peer presure or the wanting to look cooler than all their mates.
It's going to be interesting to see where games are in 10 years or so, just to see how much furhter the boundaries are going to be pushed.
Ahh..yes. I should give credit where credit is due. Congratulations on a great debut post and a potential GAD winner, perhaps?
It's true that developers are starting to run out of ideas and the result is usually a lame sequel just with added nakedness, innuendo or increasingly destructive weapons (think the difference between Resi Evil 2 + 3, bazooka anyone?). Even Silent Hill's hanging up its subtlety in exchange for enormous weaponry.
It's scary to think how much further they can go...how violent can games actually get?
And, how interactive?
It's scary to think how much further they can go...how violent can games actually get?
And, how interactive?
*smiles in fear* Not used to flattery but....thanks! I have actually been a member before, I think it was about 2 or 3 years...but you know, time goes so fast when you get to my age.
I'm sick and tired of all these violent games. I think the "Mark of Kri" is the latest by Sony (of course) to depict extreme violence in a game. Violence sells and people know it. Sex in games doesn't sell as well as violence - maybe because you can buy a porno rather than play a game for kicks. The makers of BMX XXX learnt this the hard way.
So, developers will increasingly make games more and more violent...except the developers who know that you don't need to have violence to make a good game. Humour works just as well, if not better.
So, developers will increasingly make games more and more violent...except the developers who know that you don't need to have violence to make a good game. Humour works just as well, if not better.
Unbeliever wrote:
> So, developers will increasingly make games more and more
> violent...except the developers who know that you don't need to have
> violence to make a good game. Humour works just as well, if not
> better.
I'd have to say i'd far more prefer to play a game that'll make me laugh rather than one where i spend 4 hours beating the living hell out of some poor defenseless granny on a sidewalk!
> So, developers will increasingly make games more and more
> violent...except the developers who know that you don't need to have
> violence to make a good game. Humour works just as well, if not
> better.
I'd have to say i'd far more prefer to play a game that'll make me laugh rather than one where i spend 4 hours beating the living hell out of some poor defenseless granny on a sidewalk!
The best sex games were those erotic text adventures. Left everything to the imagination.
What's that? No, I never played them at all...
*looks around nervously*
What's that? No, I never played them at all...
*looks around nervously*
Page: