did it hurt you? did youfeel mistreated by adult who took youto cinema?Venezia said:
as for climate in England -- i'd let them try. back at home -- no child would think so in that climate.
Kids and Violent Video Games...
- Thread starter Dadu2004
- Start date
Sorry, I was just being a complete numpty! I'd forgotten all about Infinite! That video reminds of the Myst series - v. cool!Xero said:
Well clearly our porn is better than yours because here we call it XXX (and it has nothing to do with Vin Diesel!)!!lol see that sounds funny to me, because here people refer to porn as "X-rated".
I suspect it might be. U is Universal, so it sounds like the same thing, doesn't it? Restricted - yeah that makes sense....until you discover it's pretty meaningless. Bonkers, if you ask me!
Oohh let me think? Ummmmm....no! My grandmother was a wonderful woman, who despite not wanting to see the film at all, patiently sat through it (without even snoring!) just so that her granddaughter could sigh over John Travolta (eek!)! The following week we were back watching old Silver Screen movies on Saturday afternoons (which I adored)!TabascoNatalie said:
To be honest, in that case, the barefoot thing was the least of his problems; the mother was also fond of restricting food for days on end, to 'punish' the boy, and was also incredibly violent and promiscuous. The boy was eventually removed from the family home, and the last I heard, was being cared for in a loving and stable environment. No idea what happened to his five siblings though.
I was about to say that she was just the kind of parent who would be incapable of making a judgement call on suitable games for children, but actually, I just don't think she would have cared... in which case, no amount of laws would make any difference.
What don't you see anything wrong with - the proposed law, or children playing violent videogames?superman said:
the problem I personally have with this kind of "law" is that I don't understand the logic of those game ratings. who is to decide how "appropriate" a game is, and how do they do it?
why, for example, an innocent sword-fighting game like "Ninja Gaiden" is 16+, but Pokemon, which implicates animal abuse, is 3+??? anyone can explain?
why, for example, an innocent sword-fighting game like "Ninja Gaiden" is 16+, but Pokemon, which implicates animal abuse, is 3+??? anyone can explain?
Because animals aren't as important as people. Personally I don't agree with that but it's how the ratings systems views things.TabascoNatalie said:
There are checklists which every publisher has to go through before a game can be released. These contain sections for each age rating, with something like 45 questions which need to be answered absolutely truthfully in order to determine the rating. Most of the games I dealt with were 3+ but occasionally I had to apply for older ratings, not because of the actual content, but because the system is so anally-retentive! For example, in one darts game I worked on, although the subject matter was 3+, because one of the sponsorship images had a packet of cigarettes on it, it had to have a 15+ (IIRC) rating. I also did one about a cartoon crash-test dummy, which had to be rated PEGI 7+/ESRB 10+ because essentially, there were bad guys being zapped (had they been animals, it would have got a 3+!)!
It's been three years since I was submitting games (to ESRB, PEGI, BBFC, USK, ACB) but I still remember how long it used to take, and the debates we used to have over whether bashing a zombie (for example) was classified as cartoon violence against a supernatural creature, or cartoon violence against a humanoid creature! It's a bit of a minefield but actually aside from a couple of things, it's not a bad system. And at the end of the day, it's a bit like the Pirate's Code - just guidelines (unless it carries an 18 or BBFC rating, in which case it ceases to be advisory and becomes regulatory).
in Ninja Gaiden there aren't people -- there are monsters. The game cartridge itself is German, and it says 12+. British packaging says 16+.Venezia said:
sounds like looking for earthworms in concrete.
IIRC there are definitely people in it who get hacked about, as well as monsters (certainly in NG2, NG Black)! In addition, there is at least one very scantily-clad female character, who is <I>almost</I> wearing a sexually provocative leather outfit. That would also get you a higher age rating.TabascoNatalie said:
So in the German version, is the gore turned off? USK is very particular about not having gore in games. For example, in Fallout: New Vegas, the German version has zero gore, so a lot of German people are buying the Austrian version, which is uncut (but still German language). Personally, I'm all for a bit of gore, so long as it's not gratuitous - wouldn't let youngsters play a gory game though.
You could say that!sounds like looking for earthworms in concrete.
I'm speaking of NG Dragon Sword for Nintendo DS. there's no gore. and if there are people -- they look the same as monsters (DS graphics aren't very strong). and yep, those female-monster caharcters... but... like a kid wouldn't see those in the streetVenezia said:
Oh well, you didn't say it was for the DS! I've not played that one but yeah, no gore sounds right for USK. Without seeing the game, I couldn't really comment on why it has the age-rating it does so I Googled it, and I reckon this would do it!TabascoNatalie said:I'm speaking of NG Dragon Sword for Nintendo DS. there's no gore. and if there are people -- they look the same as monsters (DS graphics aren't very strong). and yep, those female-monster caharcters... but... like a kid wouldn't see those in the street
probablyVenezia said:Oh well, you didn't say it was for the DS! I've not played that one but yeah, no gore sounds right for USK. Without seeing the game, I couldn't really comment on why it has the age-rating it does so I Googled it, and I reckon this would do it!
as for violence -- all action/adventure games involve some degree of violence. I already said about Pokemon -- it is plain violence and animal cruelty -- poison, burn, electrify, freeze, paralyze -- dozens of ways to hurt another creature. oh, but they aren't really animals -- they are monsters. Meowth isn't a cat, and Seel isn't a seal.
:mask:
after all... it's just games
what a big deal?It's always been like though, hasn't it? Remember Tom & Jerry? Uber violent! I also remember a big debate about it, and people were saying, "But it's only a cartoon".TabascoNatalie said:probably
as for violence -- all action/adventure games involve some degree of violence. I already said about Pokemon -- it is plain violence and animal cruelty -- poison, burn, electrify, freeze, paralyze -- dozens of ways to hurt another creature. oh, but they aren't really animals -- they are monsters. Meowth isn't a cat, and Seel isn't a seal.
:mask:
after all... it's just games
True enough.... sort of makes you wonder really, what kind of people we all are! Even bible stories contain violence!
I agree. I've never believed in wrapping kids up in cotton wool but neither have I thought it was OK to expose them to things like violent videogames (I think Tomb Raider was as bad as it got...and even then if we could avoid killing the animals, we would!), horror films etc. Childhood is short enough as it is, they should be able to enjoy it as kids, and not as mini-adults, IMO.superman said:
what's wrong with Tomb Raider? is it for adults? but i guess not many adults would be interested to play it (i'm still about Nintendo DS)
I remember that. There is a difference though between Pokemon and animal cruelty. When you hurt an animal, you can't take it to a vet and have it instantly healed or give it a healing potion. There is a difference between fantasy and reality. I was in 4th grade when Pokemon became a big thing among kids with the original 150 pokemon and knowing the difference between hurting a real animal and having a pokemon was not that hard to understand. Even among kids who were in 1st grade could grasp this concept. At least there isn't any blood and guts in it like some cartoons.TabascoNatalie said:probably
as for violence -- all action/adventure games involve some degree of violence. I already said about Pokemon -- it is plain violence and animal cruelty -- poison, burn, electrify, freeze, paralyze -- dozens of ways to hurt another creature. oh, but they aren't really animals -- they are monsters. Meowth isn't a cat, and Seel isn't a seal.
:mask:
after all... it's just games
Pokemon is 3+, far from the first grade
i know it is just a silly game. i don't mind my kid playing it. but then... i see that "Biker Mice from Mars" is 12+ -- something my kid shouldn't be playing yet? LOL! I think it is less violent than Pokemon
i know it is just a silly game. i don't mind my kid playing it. but then... i see that "Biker Mice from Mars" is 12+ -- something my kid shouldn't be playing yet? LOL! I think it is less violent than Pokemon
lol -eyeroll- Sometimes I wonder who they got out there doing those game and TV ratings. But I guess in Pokemon's defense, the game comes paired with a card game and a TV show and since I was a kid the TV show always promoted friendship, sportsmanship and kindness. Just a lot of moral lessons kids should know. This also can be said for some of the Pokemon games (especially the ones that came out when I was a kid).