Fun Stuff > CLIKC

Help Defend Video Games In The Supreme Court!

<< < (3/12) > >>

bicostp:
As long as there are parents who are ignorant of ESRB ratings (willfully or otherwise), do not even put titles into Google before running to the store, and will buy any of the latest games for their children "because they want it" and "because video games are for kids", all this proposed legislation will be for naught anyway.

Put the effort into informing the parents instead of making up asinine laws that will be difficult and expensive to enforce. It's their responsibility to monitor what media their kids can and cannot access, not the government's.

Emaline:
Yeah, I don't really see the point of this. The law, or opposing it. I worked in a video game store, we could not sell M games to minors. That's just how it is. If people want to buy them for their kids, I've got no problem with it, but I don't really think you should sell them to the kids. I'll let the parents decide what is and what isn't appropriate for their children.

Scandanavian War Machine:

--- Quote from: Spluff on 12 Aug 2010, 22:44 ---
--- Quote from: Scandanavian War Machine on 12 Aug 2010, 16:47 ---also, Arnold Schwarzeneger is an ex-body builder and actor and I am astounded that anyone lets him decide what to wear in the morning, let alone OUR FUCKING LAWS.
--- End quote ---

So anybody who is an actor or a body-builder is automatically considered unworthy of deciding something as minor as what to wear?

--- End quote ---

wow, this alternate universe where hyperbole and jokes don't exist sure is weird! *twilight zone music*

maxh:

--- Quote from: Emaline on 12 Aug 2010, 23:30 ---Yeah, I don't really see the point of this. The law, or opposing it. I worked in a video game store, we could not sell M games to minors. That's just how it is. If people want to buy them for their kids, I've got no problem with it, but I don't really think you should sell them to the kids. I'll let the parents decide what is and what isn't appropriate for their children.

--- End quote ---
Store policy would not allow it. It was not illegal.

Gemmwah:
That is true, store policy will not allow it because it's irresponsible to be selling games with such mature content to children. I am uncomfortable selling games with a 15 or 18 rating to kids who are clearly under that age limit even when their parents are stood beside them saying "Yeah it's fine, they've got all the other ones and all their friends are playing them..."

To me it just seems pointless to put an age/suitability rating on a game if it's not going to be listened to. Most games are rated 18 or M for a reason, and I believe the law should change, just as it is illegal to sell an 18 rated movie to a minor, or sell cigarettes, alcohol, knives or lighters to a minor. There are restrictions on so many items in order to protect children, and I think that there needs to be a law stating that hey, maybe these games aren't actually okay for your kids to be playing at age 10, and maybe you should think twice, and ask the opinion of others before you expose them to violent content.

I think it would be responsible of the video games industry to get behind this change in law. A lot of people who attack video games for being violent are saying that it is the fault of the retailers and games industry as a whole for putting this content out there for children to get hold of, and that we should be doing more to stop it. This change would put the responsibility directly on the parents and guardians of these kids, and would entirely shift the blame off the industry and retailers. The public would no longer be able to attack video games for being violent and readily available, but instead would have to put the blame onto the parents who are buying this stuff for minors.

It would make sense in my mind, at least, because what is the difference between say an 18 rated DVD and an 18 rated video game? From a retail perspective, I can't selll an 18 rated DVD to anyone who looks under 25 and can't prove they're over 18, or for anyone purchasing it on behalf of somebody who looks under 25 and can't prove they're over 18. On the other hand, although I can't directly sell a game to anyone who looks under 25 and can't prove they are over 18, I CAN sell it to somebody on their behalf, even if they are very obviously buying it for a  7 year old. That to me seems wrong, as the difference between passively watching an 18 rated movie and actively shooting civilians in the airport level of Modern Warfare 2 is quite enormous. That level even disturbed me a bit.


Basically kids go QQ more because honestly getting to 18 doesn't take that long and I am so sick of online multiplayer on XBL being flooded with ten year old kids who don't shut the hell up or play well.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page