The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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 really have had enough. Time and time again it will happen and can we do anything about it? No! What am i talking about you may ask. Well my freinds, let me tell you that the subject in matter is that about Censorship and age limits.
The other day i walked into a games shop and asked them if they could tell me the release date of 'state of emergency'. After a very rude sigh from the assistant, he got out his schedule book and was ready to announce the date when he said "Hang on, This game is rated 18, therefore you have no reason to know the release date". I felt this was very very unproffesional and i didn't think he was allowed to judge people like that. After a few angry seconds i replied "My brother who is 18 would like to know". This time he told me the date (22nd feb) and i left, pretty annoyed.
The thing that angered me most about this though was not that he refused to tell me the date but simply because of the fact that a 15 year old kid can't purchase a game such as 'State of emergency'. Why should i be not allowed? Do they really think that i will pick up a glass bottle, smash someone over the head with it, and then run, just because i played it in a game? Don't think so. In fact you could call that insulting to me and my family. Making out i was brought up rough and am stupid enough to think glassing someone is clever. The whole idea of games is to enjoy something that is not otherwise possible in the real world, not to learn the best way of killing someone. Who do they think we are? A bunch of raving looneys?
Take this for an example. Your sitting in your room playing the 15 years rated 'Metal Gear Solid 2' when you think to yourself "It would be really good if i hurled myself of a bridge, crept onto a tanker ship, then started blasting the day lights out of about 50 terrorists." Its just not something you do! For a start this sort of situation isn't available to you and second you must be pretty dumb if you think you can play the part of Solid Snake in real life. Another game 'Quake 3' sees you fighting aliens and unhuman life forms on distant planets. Its rated 15 because of the violence. Why though? Do they think people under 15 will go off and fly to a place from outer space and start blasting aliens just because they saw something like this on a computer game?
The other day i borrowed FIFA 2002 off a mate. I got bored and thought "Hmmm....wonder how many players i can get sent off?" After a few minutes my Red card rampage had finished resulting in 2 Broken legs, a torn ligament, and a broken collar bone. All this happened on a game that is rated 'ok' for 3 year olds. So if this sort of violence is ok for 3 year olds then how come a 'Mature' 15 year old can't wintness something like GTA3?
There may be some 18 year olds thinking "Hah, I'm over 18, it's ok for me". Well your wrong. Several games have already been banned completely because of their content. These include PSOne's 'Thrill Kill' a four player fighting game which saw people ripping off limbs, killing people with scalpuls, and kicking people in the privates. Also banned was a game called 'Football Hooligans', a strategy game where you had to control a herd of raging hooligans trying to wreak havoc among a peaceful football match. Do they really think a game like this would encourage trouble at matches? Well i think the thugs you see on the news are too busy being morons in foreign countries rather than playing computer games!
As well as games being banned the computing world has also seen 'Game Taming'. Games such as GTA3 which are deemed to be 'too violent' have had to become less 'bad' in order to be allowed a release in the UK. This means that the game may become less fun or key parts get missed out. 'Twisted Metal: Black' losing it's 'Violent' but key FMV sequences is a good example of this. This move as many of the games owners know totally wrecked the story line.
And the reason 'State of emergency' has been put back? You can bet your life savings it's because Rockstar have been made to tame their game.
So this problem seems to be affecting us all. Something needs to be done. After all most the decent games seem to be over 15 age rated. Do we really want to be left with all cutesy platformers......I think not.
Thanks for reading.
NAT.
The other day i walked into a games shop and asked them if they could tell me the release date of 'state of emergency'. After a very rude sigh from the assistant, he got out his schedule book and was ready to announce the date when he said "Hang on, This game is rated 18, therefore you have no reason to know the release date". I felt this was very very unproffesional and i didn't think he was allowed to judge people like that. After a few angry seconds i replied "My brother who is 18 would like to know". This time he told me the date (22nd feb) and i left, pretty annoyed.
The thing that angered me most about this though was not that he refused to tell me the date but simply because of the fact that a 15 year old kid can't purchase a game such as 'State of emergency'. Why should i be not allowed? Do they really think that i will pick up a glass bottle, smash someone over the head with it, and then run, just because i played it in a game? Don't think so. In fact you could call that insulting to me and my family. Making out i was brought up rough and am stupid enough to think glassing someone is clever. The whole idea of games is to enjoy something that is not otherwise possible in the real world, not to learn the best way of killing someone. Who do they think we are? A bunch of raving looneys?
Take this for an example. Your sitting in your room playing the 15 years rated 'Metal Gear Solid 2' when you think to yourself "It would be really good if i hurled myself of a bridge, crept onto a tanker ship, then started blasting the day lights out of about 50 terrorists." Its just not something you do! For a start this sort of situation isn't available to you and second you must be pretty dumb if you think you can play the part of Solid Snake in real life. Another game 'Quake 3' sees you fighting aliens and unhuman life forms on distant planets. Its rated 15 because of the violence. Why though? Do they think people under 15 will go off and fly to a place from outer space and start blasting aliens just because they saw something like this on a computer game?
The other day i borrowed FIFA 2002 off a mate. I got bored and thought "Hmmm....wonder how many players i can get sent off?" After a few minutes my Red card rampage had finished resulting in 2 Broken legs, a torn ligament, and a broken collar bone. All this happened on a game that is rated 'ok' for 3 year olds. So if this sort of violence is ok for 3 year olds then how come a 'Mature' 15 year old can't wintness something like GTA3?
There may be some 18 year olds thinking "Hah, I'm over 18, it's ok for me". Well your wrong. Several games have already been banned completely because of their content. These include PSOne's 'Thrill Kill' a four player fighting game which saw people ripping off limbs, killing people with scalpuls, and kicking people in the privates. Also banned was a game called 'Football Hooligans', a strategy game where you had to control a herd of raging hooligans trying to wreak havoc among a peaceful football match. Do they really think a game like this would encourage trouble at matches? Well i think the thugs you see on the news are too busy being morons in foreign countries rather than playing computer games!
As well as games being banned the computing world has also seen 'Game Taming'. Games such as GTA3 which are deemed to be 'too violent' have had to become less 'bad' in order to be allowed a release in the UK. This means that the game may become less fun or key parts get missed out. 'Twisted Metal: Black' losing it's 'Violent' but key FMV sequences is a good example of this. This move as many of the games owners know totally wrecked the story line.
And the reason 'State of emergency' has been put back? You can bet your life savings it's because Rockstar have been made to tame their game.
So this problem seems to be affecting us all. Something needs to be done. After all most the decent games seem to be over 15 age rated. Do we really want to be left with all cutesy platformers......I think not.
Thanks for reading.
NAT.
Page:
I suppose your right......but i still think som people are too judgemental about some teenagers (In fact half the teenage population really pee me off so i can see why in some cases)
Natbuc wrote:
> I read all of your replies and and i agree with the majority of them. Mothball
> for example i understand you wouldn't want your kid seeing the sort of things
> that happen in GTA3 and others wouldn't and that is why the idea of parents
> deciding what they see is really the best way around it.
Another point one of
> u made was the one about there still should be ratings. I agree there should be
> ratings but i think that ELSPA style ones are the best as they allow you to see
> who the game is suitable for but doesn't restrict people from playing it.
>
Also, i know that i'm not gonna change much between know and the age of 18.
> There fore i think the highest ratings there should be should be a '15' rating
> coz then this would stop young kids seing the content of controversal games.
> After all the time where you really stop learning about 'the birds and the bees'
> is kind of around 14 and 15. Most kids should already have learned most the
> stuff about life by then.
Also a point i would like to make is the way games
> can teach you to be good. GTA3 for example can teach you that violence is bad
> and if you do it too much then you will get arrested. Its better than isolating
> a kid from violent things else they will never learn that violence is the sort
> of thing they should avoid.
Thats all for now.
NAT.
You seem to have your head screwed on Nat. However a lot of kids haven't even begun to understand anything about life stuff at 15. They just think they have. Thats my main point - its impossible for you to understand what you don't know until you know it!! I'll bet my treasured PS2 on the fact that while you will fundamentally be the same person in 3 - 4 years, you will look back to when you were 15 and realise that you still had a lot to learn....
> I read all of your replies and and i agree with the majority of them. Mothball
> for example i understand you wouldn't want your kid seeing the sort of things
> that happen in GTA3 and others wouldn't and that is why the idea of parents
> deciding what they see is really the best way around it.
Another point one of
> u made was the one about there still should be ratings. I agree there should be
> ratings but i think that ELSPA style ones are the best as they allow you to see
> who the game is suitable for but doesn't restrict people from playing it.
>
Also, i know that i'm not gonna change much between know and the age of 18.
> There fore i think the highest ratings there should be should be a '15' rating
> coz then this would stop young kids seing the content of controversal games.
> After all the time where you really stop learning about 'the birds and the bees'
> is kind of around 14 and 15. Most kids should already have learned most the
> stuff about life by then.
Also a point i would like to make is the way games
> can teach you to be good. GTA3 for example can teach you that violence is bad
> and if you do it too much then you will get arrested. Its better than isolating
> a kid from violent things else they will never learn that violence is the sort
> of thing they should avoid.
Thats all for now.
NAT.
You seem to have your head screwed on Nat. However a lot of kids haven't even begun to understand anything about life stuff at 15. They just think they have. Thats my main point - its impossible for you to understand what you don't know until you know it!! I'll bet my treasured PS2 on the fact that while you will fundamentally be the same person in 3 - 4 years, you will look back to when you were 15 and realise that you still had a lot to learn....
I read all of your replies and and i agree with the majority of them. Mothball for example i understand you wouldn't want your kid seeing the sort of things that happen in GTA3 and others wouldn't and that is why the idea of parents deciding what they see is really the best way around it.
Another point one of u made was the one about there still should be ratings. I agree there should be ratings but i think that ELSPA style ones are the best as they allow you to see who the game is suitable for but doesn't restrict people from playing it.
Also, i know that i'm not gonna change much between know and the age of 18. There fore i think the highest ratings there should be should be a '15' rating coz then this would stop young kids seing the content of controversal games. After all the time where you really stop learning about 'the birds and the bees' is kind of around 14 and 15. Most kids should already have learned most the stuff about life by then.
Also a point i would like to make is the way games can teach you to be good. GTA3 for example can teach you that violence is bad and if you do it too much then you will get arrested. Its better than isolating a kid from violent things else they will never learn that violence is the sort of thing they should avoid.
Thats all for now.
NAT.
Another point one of u made was the one about there still should be ratings. I agree there should be ratings but i think that ELSPA style ones are the best as they allow you to see who the game is suitable for but doesn't restrict people from playing it.
Also, i know that i'm not gonna change much between know and the age of 18. There fore i think the highest ratings there should be should be a '15' rating coz then this would stop young kids seing the content of controversal games. After all the time where you really stop learning about 'the birds and the bees' is kind of around 14 and 15. Most kids should already have learned most the stuff about life by then.
Also a point i would like to make is the way games can teach you to be good. GTA3 for example can teach you that violence is bad and if you do it too much then you will get arrested. Its better than isolating a kid from violent things else they will never learn that violence is the sort of thing they should avoid.
Thats all for now.
NAT.
most of you are missing my point, i agree i have played video games since i was 8 years old and i used to own the very first mortal kombat which was bad at the time. Its not just the sticker its the reasons behind it. Whilst you are under 18 your parents have the right of law to protect the games and films you watch, but after 18 they dont have the same influenece and by then you should know the rights and wrongs of life. At 18 you know not to shoot anyone or break the law but whilst you are young you dont know the meaning. I along with a lot of you would have asked questions and told your mom and dad about video games. Imagine saying to your mom "i shot a prostitute before driving off over some drug dealers robbing someone on the corner of a red light district whilst playing GTA3",or askin " what does a prostitute do" what do you think would happen to you, firstly i would have the game confiscated and then anything could happen. Now i know better and i dont ask such questions because i am old enough to know better! So its not the cirtificate its the reasons that entail it, thanks!
ssxpro wrote:
> alik wrote:
> ye but there are some sick kids in the world that are evil and
> do follow video
> games and movies,
Thats the problem though. If videos
> games are likely to influence you as a child, then I don`t see why they`ll
> suddenly stop influencing you when you become 18. Surely your less likely to
> change state (i.e. become sane or go insane) than you are to simply stay as you
> are for the rest of your life.
18 is just somewhere to draw the line....personally I'd like to see it upped to 21 for GTA3....
> alik wrote:
> ye but there are some sick kids in the world that are evil and
> do follow video
> games and movies,
Thats the problem though. If videos
> games are likely to influence you as a child, then I don`t see why they`ll
> suddenly stop influencing you when you become 18. Surely your less likely to
> change state (i.e. become sane or go insane) than you are to simply stay as you
> are for the rest of your life.
18 is just somewhere to draw the line....personally I'd like to see it upped to 21 for GTA3....
alik wrote:
> ye but there are some sick kids in the world that are evil and do follow video
> games and movies,
Thats the problem though. If videos games are likely to influence you as a child, then I don`t see why they`ll suddenly stop influencing you when you become 18. Surely your less likely to change state (i.e. become sane or go insane) than you are to simply stay as you are for the rest of your life.
> ye but there are some sick kids in the world that are evil and do follow video
> games and movies,
Thats the problem though. If videos games are likely to influence you as a child, then I don`t see why they`ll suddenly stop influencing you when you become 18. Surely your less likely to change state (i.e. become sane or go insane) than you are to simply stay as you are for the rest of your life.
alik wrote:
> ye but there are some sick kids in the world that are evil and do follow video
> games and movies, you hear about them on tv, the main case was james bulger
> where they followed what they had seen from the chucky doll films, it is a very
> sad and sickening thought that evil things can do such crimes, dont take it
> personal i get refused as well but my brother just goes dwon and then the guy
> behind the counter cant say anything because he is a chump! LOL
Just thought I would say who says over 18's who kill kids wont base their sadistic acts on children on films.
Oh what a sad world we live in.
Btw I think its pathetic how games get toned down for the uk after some films on the cinema nothing will shock us. Plus we just laugh at the people who take it seriously so over 18 violent games are the source of laughter all round. :)
> ye but there are some sick kids in the world that are evil and do follow video
> games and movies, you hear about them on tv, the main case was james bulger
> where they followed what they had seen from the chucky doll films, it is a very
> sad and sickening thought that evil things can do such crimes, dont take it
> personal i get refused as well but my brother just goes dwon and then the guy
> behind the counter cant say anything because he is a chump! LOL
Just thought I would say who says over 18's who kill kids wont base their sadistic acts on children on films.
Oh what a sad world we live in.
Btw I think its pathetic how games get toned down for the uk after some films on the cinema nothing will shock us. Plus we just laugh at the people who take it seriously so over 18 violent games are the source of laughter all round. :)
Firstly, I wouldn't want my kid playing GTA3/State of Emergency until he's reached intellectual maturity. I don't think anyone could argue that you are intellectually mature at 15. I know I wasn't. And how do I know that? Because I am now. With GTA3, when I am barricaded into a multistory car park picking off passers by with a sniper rifle, I not only know it's wrong but I feel it too. Some parts of GTA3 make me feel uneasy and unsure of what pleasure I am supposed to derive from an activity. The point here is that at 15 I would have just accepted the game as it is and not questioned what was going on and why?
Maybe a following joke would be relevant here:
(Why not) a 15-year-old guy talks to his dad about different stuff - life, (why not) game ratings, a whole lot of other things and afterwards goes to his room thinking "boy, is my dad stupid and old-fashioned" and decides to leave home.
10 years later he comes home and has a talk with his dad again - about life, game ratings, a whole lot of other things and afterwards he walks away thinking "whoa, my dad has become way smart during these years".
I hope you guys know what I mean. I don't think too many other things need to be said.
(Why not) a 15-year-old guy talks to his dad about different stuff - life, (why not) game ratings, a whole lot of other things and afterwards goes to his room thinking "boy, is my dad stupid and old-fashioned" and decides to leave home.
10 years later he comes home and has a talk with his dad again - about life, game ratings, a whole lot of other things and afterwards he walks away thinking "whoa, my dad has become way smart during these years".
I hope you guys know what I mean. I don't think too many other things need to be said.
I'm pro-ratings on games, but not censorship, just ratings.
There is some content in games, not necessarily violence, that under 15s shouldn't be exposed to. For example, in many 18+ games there is strong language, graphical violence, gore etc. Yes, 12 year olds swear and know all the words, but if they hadn't been exposed to strong language through media and probably their own parents, they wouldn't be using it in the first place.
In many 15+ games, there are attitudes shown by lead characters that many would see as 'cool', for example their attitude to women, when in today's modern society this kind of behaviour is frowned upon. But a 14 year old wouldn't know that, or be expected to know that. They could pick up bad habits.
Then there's the 12 rating, which is there for a very good reason. Young children need to feel that they are in a safe and happy environment in order to develop and grow into stable teenagers, hence the Teletubbies, hence no blood in pre-teen games, hence no violence, these things just shouldn't appear in a pre-teen's world if they are to be expected to remain happy.
Some may argue that it's already too late, children have been exposed to too much already and that any further attempts at censorship is useless. Take, for example, the events of September 11th. A group of kindergarten children were asked what they thought of the pictures of the planes crashing into the WTC that they'd seen on TV, and many of them replied that it 'looked cool' until it was explained to them that mommies and daddies were inside the same building at the time.
Mass media really has to take the blame for people, and especially children, becoming immune to events of this nature, allowing horrific imagery just to wash over them and through them without registering the fact because they've seen it all before. This blame could equally be laid upon parents for allowing their children to be exposed to these images, but in today's society where media is everywhere we turn, protecting our children is becoming harder and harder each day.
The games industry itself, whilst trying to entertain, is also trying to set an example by not only supporting the ratings system, but actively self policing itself with organisations like ELSPA to make sure that appropriate content is allowed into games for good reasons, not just for shock value.
So although the grass always looks greener on the other side, and forbidden fruits are very tempting, always bear in mind that the ratings are there not so that we can have a snigger at you, but because we're only trying to protect you.
There is some content in games, not necessarily violence, that under 15s shouldn't be exposed to. For example, in many 18+ games there is strong language, graphical violence, gore etc. Yes, 12 year olds swear and know all the words, but if they hadn't been exposed to strong language through media and probably their own parents, they wouldn't be using it in the first place.
In many 15+ games, there are attitudes shown by lead characters that many would see as 'cool', for example their attitude to women, when in today's modern society this kind of behaviour is frowned upon. But a 14 year old wouldn't know that, or be expected to know that. They could pick up bad habits.
Then there's the 12 rating, which is there for a very good reason. Young children need to feel that they are in a safe and happy environment in order to develop and grow into stable teenagers, hence the Teletubbies, hence no blood in pre-teen games, hence no violence, these things just shouldn't appear in a pre-teen's world if they are to be expected to remain happy.
Some may argue that it's already too late, children have been exposed to too much already and that any further attempts at censorship is useless. Take, for example, the events of September 11th. A group of kindergarten children were asked what they thought of the pictures of the planes crashing into the WTC that they'd seen on TV, and many of them replied that it 'looked cool' until it was explained to them that mommies and daddies were inside the same building at the time.
Mass media really has to take the blame for people, and especially children, becoming immune to events of this nature, allowing horrific imagery just to wash over them and through them without registering the fact because they've seen it all before. This blame could equally be laid upon parents for allowing their children to be exposed to these images, but in today's society where media is everywhere we turn, protecting our children is becoming harder and harder each day.
The games industry itself, whilst trying to entertain, is also trying to set an example by not only supporting the ratings system, but actively self policing itself with organisations like ELSPA to make sure that appropriate content is allowed into games for good reasons, not just for shock value.
So although the grass always looks greener on the other side, and forbidden fruits are very tempting, always bear in mind that the ratings are there not so that we can have a snigger at you, but because we're only trying to protect you.
Page: