Support NeoGAF

[Dragmire]

To the parents or prospective parents on NeoGAF: do you, or would you let your kids play violent games? Does it matter to you if the game is more realistic (like Grand Theft Auto or Call of Duty) or more over the top and cartoony like Madworld? I know I turned out fine playing stuff like Doom as a kid, but games are much more realistic nowadays. And something like Madworld may not be realistic, but I'd say it's far more violent than most games.

Some studies say that violent games cause violent behavior, and then other studies say there is no link. Do you think there is a link and where do you draw the line?

 

[Awntawn]

i'll be breeding my kids into pro atheletes. they won't want to play video games.

 

[Cow Mengde]

I grew up playing Contra on the NES. I don't think that game was violent at all, but apparently, people did indeed make a big piss about it at the time. I think MadWorld MIGHT be ok, but I don't know. I think how your kids turn out will depend on your ability as a parent, and not really the games.

 

[Like the hat?]

it will depend on the game and my childs mental functioning

edit: it also depends on the age.

say I had a ten year old. I would let them play say a Zelda game or something, but I wouldn't let them play Mad World or GTA.

 

[pakkit]

Cartoony violence is usually okay, but MadWorld is inappropriate on several levels. Children are exposed to violence daily, through TV, movies, YouTube (nowadays), and the elementary school playground. I would not let my (say 10 year old) child play anything with gore or language like the two examples you cited. Halo 3 would be allowed, since the violence is intergalactic, and the blood is very muted. No online, though.

However, as others are saying, it depends on the child, the situation, the game, and the level of maturity he/she has shown.

 

[Carlisle]

I grew up playing Contra on the NES. I don't think that game was violent at all, but apparently, people did indeed make a big piss about it at the time. I think MadWorld MIGHT be ok, but I don't know. I think how your kids turn out will depend on your ability as a parent, and not really the games.

This x 1000.

 

[FrostuTheNinja]

I grew up playing Contra on the NES. I don't think that game was violent at all, but apparently, people did indeed make a big piss about it at the time. I think MadWorld MIGHT be ok, but I don't know. I think how your kids turn out will depend on your ability as a parent, and not really the games.

Bingo.

I played campy violent games (Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, etc.) as a kid and I turned out just fine!

*Runs off to eat some babies*

 

[SturokBGD]

I think there's a lot of hilarious double standards with these things that no-one seems to notice.

My son (aged 9) discovered Midnight Club 3: Dub Edition on PS3, totally loves it.

I suggested he try Midnight Club LA on 360 because it's better. He says he hadn't tried it yet because it's rated "T" (MC3 is E10+ but I give him a free pass on E10+ games because I think it's a dumb rating). I gave my blessing for him to try it. He did, then went back to MC3 because he found it easier (even though it looks terrible compared to LA). My wife later that night pointed out that a character says "ass" in MCLA. I laughed, because of how terrible a thing it was to hear a mild swear word in a game about illegal street racing.

Anyway, it depends on the game. I don't really care about studies or what the neighbours kids say or anything like that. I just know myself what is and what isn't suitable for the child I've raised, anything anyone else says is irrelevant. If I wasn't capable of that... well, video games would be the least of our worries.

 

[Cow Mengde]

Cartoony violence is usually okay, but MadWorld is inappropriate on several levels.

You don't want our society to grow up to bunch a pussies, right?

Oh yeah, I had Mortal Kombat/Mortal Kombat 2 during Junior High. I think at that age, kids are actually more impressionable than younger kids, so to speak. Everyone played it cause it's cool back then. It wasn't because it was a great game. MK2 was pretty good IMO, but the series went down hill after that.

 

[Grayman]

I have no idea what video games will be like in 5 to 10 years. If I have kids sooner they will be punished for ruining my life.

 

[Gbeav]

I'm not a parent but it would depend on how mature he is with it at the time. But the shithead would have to play regular sports if he wants to play video games.

Nothing healthy about a video games only lifestyle.

 

[Dark Octave]

When I grew up I watched and played pretty much everything.

To this day I couldn't imagine myself cursing in front of my mother or other family members. My siblings don't do it either.

You see, even though I was allowed to watch whatever I wanted, I was TAUGHT by my PARENTS that it was bad for me to copy that type of behavior.

Actually, I was threatened with a thin but heavy piece of rubber my mom pulled from under the carpet, but you get the point.

 

[rex64]

Videogames ruined my life

I won't let my future kids touch those things

 

[pakkit]

You have to be more careful nowadays, however. DOOM wasn't going to scare most kids back in the day (okay, seeing your avatar slowly die was kind of freaky), but I wouldn't let my child touch DOOM3. As graphics get more photo-realistic, this becomes more of a pressing issue.

 

[Micromegas]

I am way more concerned about exposing my kids to the average chatter on Xbox Live than to the actual violence in said game.

For example:

The violence in Halo can be contextualized and explained.

The behavior of people in an average Halo game over Live can not.

 

[Vinci]

Depends on the age and the game. There's no one answer. Would I let a 7-year-old play GTA? Hell no. But that's not necessarily just due to the violence. Violence isn't the only factor in the decision.

 

[Cow Mengde]

I don't know. We had digitized actors for Mortal Kombat, Doom 3 is hardly what I'd call photo-realistic. Although the imagine quality is a lot better, while Mortal Kombat sprites are nowhere near SD resolution so some of the detail gets lost.

 

[hellclerk]

once my theoretical future children display an aptitude for compassion and that no game or other piece of media can effect it in real life on a practical level, that is when i will open any piece of media for their consumption. though to be honest, i don't expect them to reach this point easily, as it requires a certain level of maturity i've noted absent from adults i know.

 

[AstroLad]

Definitely yes. Graphics and storytelling have gotten to the point where games are able to convey the real outcomes of violence and the atrocities of war while still being fun.

If you had asked me ten years ago, I would have probably said no because back then games still took a very "cartoony" approach to even serious violence and storytelling was just rudimentary, so there weren't any valuable lessons being taught, and games were possibly creating a false image of what violence really is and what it does to people.

 

[rSpooky]

It is all relative, and as long as you parent your kids things will be ok
When my son was about 5/6 I had him play midnight club and all of a sudden we hear him giggle , he had found that he could corner civilians ans run them over.. and over and over again ..lol who needs GTA ..?
Now he is much older but up to about a year ago the only m rated game my son could only play was halo. Now(he is 13) we play gears and L4D together. He cannot play those online without me tho, and it ends up he never plays them at all without me. It is something we like doing together.( yay coop)
My other two kids are girls and much younger.. so it is different.


I divide my games in groups, stuff they can play without me, Stuff they can only play with me or mom in the room or when we play with, games they can only watch me play and games they cannot be near ( those games I buy less and less because i have no time to play them since they are always around ) , It all depends on the game too,blood and gore + language might warrant closer inspection and restrictions but lets say gears with content filter on works good for me . Horror /slaughter games are already a no. Shooters and fighter can be considered violent but i have no problem with those. My girls love to play street fighter with me .

It is really on a case by case basis.. One funny moment for me though was when I was playing cod4 and the helicopter/snipe scene happened. I had not realized that my daughter had walked into the room and sat behind me, I shoot the chopper down and I hear a load MWAAAAAAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA behind me :lol .. man she does haev a mean streak lol

 

[pakkit]

This is probably a leading reason that so many people are connected to the Nintendo brand name. Parents understand that Nintendo consoles have less hyper-graphic violent games than other consoles, even if they've never owned a console themselves. Furthermore, a lot of our first introductions to gaming (at least my generation of 18-21 year olds) came through Gameboys. It's Nintendo's universal mindset that has given it so many loyalists throughout the decades. As the Playstation brand continues to build, I'm sure we'll see more loyalty there, as I know a lot of kids first console last generation was the PS2, and not the Gamecube.

 

[Gbeav]

Definitely yes. Graphics and storytelling have gotten to the point where games are able to convey the real outcomes of violence and the atrocities of war while still being fun.

If you had asked me ten years ago, I would have probably said no because back then games still took a very "cartoony" approach to even serious violence and storytelling was just rudimentary.

I think of it as the opposite. The more realistic the games violence the worse off it is for younger kids.

An example is I would rather my 13 year old play TF2 than COD5

 

[Double D]

I have a 5 year old son, and right now all the games you are referencing, I'm not letting him play.

I don't mind him watching a bit here and there, but I won't turn him loose on anything like that for a few years. 'Violence' is kind of hard to categorize. I let him play Street Fighter 4 and he loves it. It's really no different than anything else he'd see by watching Cartoon Network.

Also, If something like Killzone 2 came out back then, it would have nearly the amount of 'fucks' and 'shits' scattered throughout the game. The fact that the atmosphere is just as mature as the core content is what's really making a difference between stuff these days and 'Doom', for example.

 

[jergrah]

I have 12 year old twin sons and they are not allowed to play MA games nor do I play those games in front of them.

Probably the most 'violent' games they play are fighting games like Soul Calibur IV, various Naruto titles and Smash Bros. The only online gaming they are allowed to play are those on the Wii (Mario Super Soccer/Smash Bros/Pokemon Battle Arena) and Club Penguin on the computer.

I probably wont make them wait until they are 17 to play MA games - but at the age of 12 they dont need to be playing Call of Duty, MadWorld or GTA. Fortunately for me, they have yet to be interested in any of those or even ask. When they do ask - Ill respond on a case by case basis. For example, I would probably let them play Halo 3 (offline only) if they wanted, which is a Mature title -- but there is not a chance in hell Id let them play GTA or House of the Dead:Overkill.

As someone mentioned above, at the end of the day its not the games they play, music they listen to or movies they see that will ultimately shape them -- its the parenting. But I do think those things all have impacts and some are too mature for a kid at a young age. For me, I just dont think my 12 year old kids need to play a game where the f-bomb is dropped over and over again, where violence is over the top and realistic or where they can listen to other people spouting cuss words and racial/sexual slurs that Ive never even heard of.

 

[Dark Octave]

I think of it as the opposite. The more realistic the games violence the worse off it is for younger kids.

An example is I would rather my 13 year old play TF2 than COD5

I was confused by his post and hoped he got it backwards by mistake.

 

[Sqorgar]

Some studies say that violent games cause violent behavior, and then other studies say there is no link. Do you think there is a link and where do you draw the line?

Not all studies are created equal. If a non-peer reviewed study pops up from an organization with the word "family" in the title, you can bet your sweet ass that the study exists to support an opinion. Remove all those studies and all you are left with is study after study proving that violent videogames have no link to violent behavior. As difficult as it is to prove a negative, they at least have nothing to gain from such results.

 

[HamPster PamPster]

I'd want them to play mature games but I don't want them to play violent games

If that makes any sense

Edit: I think the most important thing is to remain constant across media. I think it would send strange messages to say no to a M game while saying yes to an R movie - but thats just my opinion

 

[Adam Prime]

I think how your kids turn out will depend on your ability as a parent, and not really the games.

Obviously this statement is true and everyone should agree.

I think of it as the opposite. The more realistic the games violence the
worse off it is for younger kids.

An example is I would rather my 13 year old play TF2 than COD5

I agree with this. The more realistic violent video games - I would probably say no to a 13 year old playing. Something more cartoony like Timesplitters or something silly in that nature that might be rated M, I would probably be okay with. It all depends on the maturity if the child and how they are able to differentiate fantasy and reality.

One game that I can tell you right now is going to be a "no" is going to be games like Grand Theft Auto. Kids do not understand the "humor" and satire that happens in those games, and will not value the gameplay and story and immersion that adult gamers who do not "like" the violence could see the appeal in.

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

Nah. Violence, cuss words and boobies in any medium are not a problem at all in my opinion. I've seen it all (and then some ) when I was younger and I've turned out straight as an arrow (well maybe there's a few kinks =P).

My main thing against having my future children playing videogames is the fact that I want them adventuring in real life. Stand By Me style, Little Rascals style. My childhood style. I want them putting on their own plays and shit for me lol. I played videogames quite a bit from the ataris, NES, SNES, Genesis etc... but it wasn't until I got a playstation when I was in highschool that turned me into the gamer I've become. Hopefully my kids can appreciate life outside of videogames before puberty as I have. I'm more worried about the internet and cell phones than videogames though :lol.

 

[Cow Mengde]

Fire Emblem is mature, but it's not violent. I definitely wouldn't have to think twice about letting a kid play the game despite it being rated T for teen.

 

[Vinci]

Fire Emblem is mature, but it's not violent. I definitely wouldn't have to think twice about letting a kid play the game despite it being rated T for teen.

Yeah, FE games are cool. For one thing, death actually matters in them.

 

[Flyguy]

I was confused by his post and hoped he got it backwards by mistake.

It's AstroLad. Subtle hyperbole and sarcasm are the tools of his trade.

 

[DeBurgo]

I think how your kids turn out will depend on your ability as a parent, and not really the games.

I dunno I think games do have some effect, like I can definitely imagine a kid with behavior problems for who exposure to violent videogames would make worse. Like the way some kids obsess over some violent games these days kinda reminds me of how when I was a kid, a lot kids with behavior problems would obsess over lame 80s slasher movies out of reaction to a certain kind of lack of parenting or discipline.

I agree that how kids turn out depend on your ability as a parent, but sometimes you just shouldn't let kids do shit or watch shit, because they are not mature enough to handle it. That is not to say there aren't kids that are mature enough to handle a lot or all violent media (sometimes at ages as early as 5 or 6), but there are quite a few that simply aren't.

 

[Cow Mengde]

I dunno I think games do have some effect, like I can definitely imagine a kid with behavior problems for who exposure to violent videogames would make worse. Like the way some kids obsess over some violent games these days kinda reminds me of how when I was a kid, a lot kids with behavior problems would obsess over lame 80s slasher movies out of reaction to a certain kind of lack of parenting or discipline.

No, I mean if they go unsupervised, then yeah, of course. I don't mean hand your kids GTA and be done with it. I mean actually be involved and tell them what's right and wrong. even though I have NO CLUE what I was watching, I still have a pretty vivid memory of when my dad explained to me when an actor dies on TV, it's all fake.

I think we probably can deal with games better than our parents can. We were there. We grew up with them and saw the evolution of games right before our eyes. We stay up till 12 AM waiting for the megaton to drop. We can probably do a better job with our kids.

 

[OmniAvenger]

Simple answer is, no.

I always play the games that my kids are interested in before I'll let them touch a game. Unless it's something like Mario or Pokemon or Sonic the Hedgehog, when it's a forgone conclusion that this game is okay for kid consumption, then I put some hours into it first to see if it's appropriate.

I'm always blown away by parents that say they let their 9-year old play GTA IV or something along those lines (lots of violence, profanity, etc.). The last time this happened I asked the dad, "Are you fucking stupid?" And he got offended that I was "using that kind of language around his kids."

I laughed in his face and told him he should try playing the game.

 

[APF]

The only concern I'd have is if the violence would scare or traumatize the children. The content itself should be of no concern really, so long as the message of the game somewhat aligns with my values / the values my wife & I wish to project--but this has little to do with violence per se. The same goes for sex / nudity / drug use / other "adult" situations, frankly. I think the desire to "protect" children from seeing the reality of the world is far too often misplaced (though events and actions, even if fictional, still have to be contextualized, etc) and dangerous.

 

[Aske]

Nah. Violence, cuss words and boobies in any medium are not a problem at all in my opinion. I've seen it all (and then some ) when I was younger and I've turned out straight as an arrow (well maybe there's a few kinks =P).

My main thing against having my future children playing videogames is the fact that I want them adventuring in real life. Stand By Me style, Little Rascals style. My childhood style. I want them putting on their own plays and shit for me lol. I played videogames quite a bit from the ataris, NES, SNES, Genesis etc... but it wasn't until I got a playstation when I was in highschool that turned me into the gamer I've become. Hopefully my kids can appreciate life outside of videogames before puberty as I have. I'm more worried about the internet and cell phones than videogames though :lol.

I agree with this. If I had kids, I'd be far more worried about who they were talking to than what they were watching, playing or reading. I'd also be more concerned about incorporating other activities into their lives alongside the games than I would be about the content of whatever games they played.

The double standards towards perception of different forms of media are very interesting. When I was a kid, certain games and movies were off limits - but I could read anything I wanted. So I read a lot of very explicit books, and the violence, sex, themes and language were all far more extreme than anything I've ever seen in a movie or a game. People will argue that actually seeing a head bursting on screen is more graphic and therefore more potentially upsetting/dangerous/unhealthy for a child to witness than reading about such things. These people clearly haven't done much reading.

I'd certainly keep an eye on the games/books/films/music that my child was consuming, and there would probably be some things I'd want to read, watch or play with him/her in order to explain difficult concepts and put actions into context. But I can't think of anything that I'd slap a flat out 'no' onto simply due to M or R rated content.

 

[The Faceless Master]

i'm totally going to allow my kids to play violent games, and i'll even play along, and give tips, etc. i grew up playing MK, KI, etc and my younger brother grew up playing goldeneye, perfect dark and halo, and we both turned out fine!

 

[SturokBGD]

For the record, I always thought the "I did 'x' thing as a kid and I turned out OK!" argument never really did hold much water. It's as narrow a view to me as the nonsense the anti-gamers spout from the other side. If you're not a parent yet, then... well, you'll understand what I mean when it happens.

 

[Dementia]

Hell no.

But I will buy them porn and take them to strip clubs.

 

[Aske]

I'm always blown away by parents that say they let their 9-year old play GTA IV or something along those lines (lots of violence, profanity, etc.). The last time this happened I asked the dad, "Are you fucking stupid?" And he got offended that I was "using that kind of language around his kids."

I laughed in his face and told him he should try playing the game.

Difference between fantasy and reality. As a kid, I remember watching pretty tame action movies with my family in which words like 'shit' and the occasional 'fuck' were tossed around. No one batted an eye - but I knew I'd catch hell for it if I said either word myself.

People can play GTA and have fun with the silly gangsters, and they can watch them kill, drive dangerously, and swear up a storm in the game without believing that any of those activities is acceptable in a typical social situation in real life. Swearing around kids outside the context of videogames can make the behaviour appear acceptable outside the context of videogames, just as real world violence outside the context of videogames is a world away from shooting a few polygonal badguys. Or to use a more timeless example, it's funny to watch a cartoon character get hit in the face with a frying pan, but it's not okay to do it to a sibling.

I'm not saying you're wrong for viewing games the way you do; but I don't think it's illogical that the dad you spoke to is okay with his kids being exposed to curse words in GTA, but not okay with them hearing them from the mouths of adults in real life.

 

[Gbeav]

Hell no.

But I will buy them porn and take them to strip clubs.

People buy porn?

 

[ChoklitReign]

I'd let an 8 year old play Halo.

 

[soldat7]

Depends on the game and depends on the age.

 

[Always-honest]

depends on the age.. but i'll encourage them to play outside.....

but eah.. i'll even play them with them. games don't make people do weird stuff.

 

[MIMIC]

Grand Theft Auto: Hell no
Resident Evil: maybe
Halo: sure
Street Fighter: sure
World of Warcraft: I will snap the disc in front of him :lol (too many of my friends' lives have been ruined by this game)

 

[Zoe]

My wife later that night pointed out that a character says "ass" in MCLA. I laughed, because of how terrible a thing it was to hear a mild swear word in a game about illegal street racing.

People can be funny about things like that. I remember a conversation I overheard at Target once (paraphrasing):

Clerk: Now this game is rated M. It has violence...
Parent: Oh, that's fine.
Clerk: Bad language...
Parent: <sharp intake of breath> Ooooh, I dunno about that, son...

 

[Aske]

For the record, I always thought the "I did 'x' thing as a kid and I turned out OK!" argument never really did hold much water. It's as narrow a view to me as the nonsense the anti-gamers spout from the other side. If you're not a parent yet, then... well, you'll understand what I mean when it happens.

Most of us know that watching violent movies or playing violent games do not - by themselves - cause kids to be violent in the real word. "I did x and I've never done y" is a specific counter to the claim "if you let your child do x then he/she will do y". It doesn't prove anything, but it does disprove the argument when phrased as an inevitability.

However, I completely agree that many of the "I'm okay" arguments are about as relevant as phrases like "I smoked a dozen cigarettes a day for twenty years and I'm okay!". Just because not all of us are harmed by cigarettes or violent games, it doesn't mean that cigarettes and violent games are never harmful.

 

[B!TCH]

Videogames ruined my life

I won't let my future kids touch those things

:lol

I'm surprised this wasn't the first post.

 

[Duxxy3]

No way