Viewing Thread:
"I wonder if anyone feels the same"

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?

are you trying to spell beggar?

begger

Chiana wrote:
> Scruffy begger?

I meant what I said which is a filted word but I have made my own thread apologizing for it.

I sense unfairness, I had to change mine to 'beggar'

I don't live in the city of Durham, but the county of. I work in the city.

Scruffy begger? You'll have to be more specific.

Now are we talking enormous sweat-stained pits with a smell that could knock out a hippo.

Or 'the holes in my jeans are so big I got done for indecent exposure'

Or maybe bottle-blonde teenage Mum with a face like a bulldog licking **** off a nettle, demanding to know when the new DJ Sammy single's out.

Chiana wrote:
> True, but where I work laughing at customers gets you in piggy poo.
>
> Even if some of them (no joke) come shopping in their dressing gowns
> and slippers. Durham = retard capital of the UK

do you live in Durham?

Chiana wrote:
> Even if some of them (no joke) come shopping in their dressing gowns
> and slippers.

Saw some guy in sainsbury's wearing his swimming trunks once.
Was probably a dare or something, he didnt look much of a nutjob anyway.
True story.

Berserko wrote:
>> *shifty looking scruffy walks in shop*

well I be dammed it worked!
*gets paranoid*

Berserko wrote:
>> *shifty looking scruffy walks in shop*

well I be dammed it worked!
*gets paranold

Chiana wrote:
> Ah great pleasure can be gained from refusing sale to someone you
> 'don't like the look of'

*shifty looking scruffy walks in shop*

GET OUT TRAMP!!!