Impeccable
Member
Or you can argue his very own daughter plays one of those violent games because SHE RIDES A HORSEY.
Now why does she need to shoot people in the face when it's obvious she'd have just as much fun on an age appropriate game?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
My dad let's my little brother play CoD, he's 6.
- Thread starter Silphonica
- Start date
Or you can argue his very own daughter plays one of those violent games because SHE RIDES A HORSEY.
Now why does she need to shoot people in the face when it's obvious she'd have just as much fun on an age appropriate game?
She also likes to play donky kong on our snes, but I'm not scared she's going to go throw barrels at people.
She also loves sims 3, so it's not like she has steady diet of gore.
Impeccable
Member
Why have her even bother play games that are not appropriate if she is obviously having just as much fun with things that make sense?
Because she wants to play a GAME, that she knows is a game? She's not becoming warped playing COD. Hell she is about as passive as a kid gets, she would rather run from someone picking on her them stand up to them. She's also my step child and he real father was letting her do this long before I came along.
Impeccable
Member
But Horzezzzzzz is a game too. Age appropriate SNES titles are a game. They are fun. New Mario Games are fun. Lots of games targetting at kids are fun to kids.
I don't get why it has to be a shooter when there are so many great options.
maverick40
Junior Member
So you would let her play the "No Russian" level without hesitation? Oh and no need for that whatsoever.
plagiarize
Banned
because I believe her parents aren't lying when they say the violence isn't having an effect on her at all? why deny her something she enjoys that isn't causing her harm? I remember certain kinds of violence not interesting me or bothering me as a kid (disposable bad guys being mowed down eh Commando), and certain kinds of violence really bothering me (generally, extended violence against a character I cared about eg Short Circuit 2).
relying on age ratings? that's bad parenting. monitoring your kids and what they play... that isn't. even if some of the stuff they play seems like it's too much for a kid. you just have to watch the kid to know if it is or isn't.
She likes it, she's not good at it, but she likes it. If it was harming her, making her more violent then we would have a problem and I would stop her, but it's not. It's a video game that is rather mild to the crap you see on tv everyday. Just because I let her play that does not mean I just let her do anything.
I fully agree with the above statement and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Why take chances when there's hundreds of absolutely amazing games to play.
Impeccable
Member
The main point I'm making is "why? "
I don't get why you have to shoot someone in the face to have fun. There are SO many options available for kids to enjoy. I get that some kids may be mature enough to grasp the concept and deal with the violence (although I struggle to see anything less than 10 getting it enough to enjoy) but what I don't get why parents feels it's appropriate given the vast choices available.
I'm not even going to touch the ratings issue because I agree there is discretion to be had in every situation.
She plays online, she can't play single player for the life of her. She would also have no idea what she was doing in no Russian or have any context to what was going on. She's not some bloodthirsty kid that your making her out to be, or what it's making her into. She sees it as a game that's fun to play and that's it. She likes to camp and try and shoot dudes that run by her.
Edit: also I want to point out she does not play it often, maybe once or twice a month, and we also play together with split screen. She rather enjoys her DS and Snes far more.
klapauzius
Banned
I don't think a kid will get a murderer because he play CoD sometimes.
The problem is that some kids play such games the whole day. If you look constantly at violent scenes you will get blunt about violence and could reflect these on real life. More so if the kid plays these games alone. It must not be so, but it could.
If a kid only likes war games like CoD I would show him other games. It is very easy to get the attention of kids if you play games with them.
As a sidenote: In my opinion the glorification of war shown in CoD & Co. is disgusting, so it is nothing that kids should see.
The problem is that some kids play such games the whole day. If you look constantly at violent scenes you will get blunt about violence and could reflect these on real life. More so if the kid plays these games alone. It must not be so, but it could.
If a kid only likes war games like CoD I would show him other games. It is very easy to get the attention of kids if you play games with them.
As a sidenote: In my opinion the glorification of war shown in CoD & Co. is disgusting, so it is nothing that kids should see.
plagiarize
Banned
my response is simple. if it isn't harming her and she wants to play it, why deny it her? I can pull up the studies showing that young kids don't seem to react any more to realistic depictions of violence vs Tom and Jerry if you like.
don't you remember being a kid? remember when you wanted one thing, and your parents got you a substitute?
Castor Krieg
Banned
They are lying - plenty of people more qualified than parents presented conclusive evidence for that.
Don't let me stop you.
Really I'm lying? Seeing as she has trouble killing bugs, and hugs people all day, she must be totally warped from playing cod twice a month.
I can show you her report card and parent teacher conference that I had on Monday to prove you otherwise, she's the most will behaved kid in her class. So please tell me how I'm making her a monster.
Impeccable
Member
Because you're the parent?
Castor Krieg
Banned
Great, yet another anecdotal evidence = fact.
So my own kid is not fact now to me? Wow
By any chance do you have kids or are you just using anecdotal evidence?
Castor Krieg
Banned
No, I don't have kids and I find it funny how you seem to assume you having one gives you some deeper knowledge about the fact, when we are discussing you letting the kid play CoD - not very 'parenty' thing to do.
Anyway, as I mentioned - there is ample research into videogame violence. As others have mentioned there is a reason content is age-restricted. you choose to disregard all of that, you have a right to do that.
I'm not claiming anything other then MY kid is not affected. Not anyone else's because every kid is different. So please get off your high horse.
BudokaiMR2
Member
Thinking back, outside of 2D beat em ups like Double Dragon the first real violent rage inducing game that I played which could be compared to blops would be Mechwarrior 2. But I was 10 years old so a little older than some of the kids mentioned in this thread.
As someone who is probably going to be a parent in the near future, I don't think I would allow my future children to play the more violent games like CoD and such. I don't plan to be the type who sticks strictly to the ratings and such but I feel like their more impressionable ages could be used more constructively.
Plenty of other good games out there to entertain kids. Although if they begged to blow up robots in MWO or something....That'ts another story. lol
As someone who is probably going to be a parent in the near future, I don't think I would allow my future children to play the more violent games like CoD and such. I don't plan to be the type who sticks strictly to the ratings and such but I feel like their more impressionable ages could be used more constructively.
Plenty of other good games out there to entertain kids. Although if they begged to blow up robots in MWO or something....That'ts another story. lol
I think part of the problem is that exposure to violent video games can have a long term effect that is hard or even impossible for you to notice right now. Why take that risk when there are so many great alternatives out there?
mediapulp_wes
Member
As a parent too, I would never be prepared to say my kid isn't affected. Sure we may not see any obvious signs, but desensitization is real and I'd be way more concerned about long term impacts that weren't obvious and wouldn't ever necessarily be obvious.
Would a 6yo watching porn twice a month for the same length of time affect her in an obvious way? I doubt it. Do you think it may have a longer term impact?
Id like to read those (and maybe even use them for a paper Im currently writing). Ive read plenty of studies about this topic recently and none have actually proven that kids dont react differently. Many have suggested it, many people have a theory about it, but not a single one has actually proven anything. Other studies and papers show a different scenario.
My psychology professor wasnt helpful either as he couldnt link me to one that would prove the point I was/am trying to make either.
I recently took part in a study myself where they compared my brains reaction to real violence (War Footage) to video game violence and movie violence. While I do not have the exact results yet, my brain activity was different when watching real violence as opposed to video game and movie violence. Other people have reacted differently to this. Their brain showed activity in the same spots for video games and real footage.
Theres also been a relatively recent idea that its not video games that make people violent/aggressive but that violent and aggressive people tend to play video games of certain genres. Plenty of studies can be found suggesting this. EG: (Kunczik, Michael; Zipfel, Astrid (March 2010))
We also know that children are often unable to actually deal with and process what theyre seeing on screen. The University of Indiana also found out that violent video games lower the brain activity when it comes to logical thinking and self-control. Violent video games stimulate certain brain regions that lower what wed consider to be good feelings. The Radiological Society of North America has found that violent video games definitely, and for a fact (MRT) create a stir for at least a short amount of time and also lower the activity in regions of the brain where self-control takes place.
perhaps her parents aren't equipped to properly say violence isn't having an effect? No apparant immediate effect perhaps.
Ignoring age ratings and assuming you know best is ignorant too. They are there for a reason. There might be some flex - eg I might consider my 10 or 11 year old child suitable to play/watch a 12 rated movie/game. But I'll not even entertain the idea of an 18 certificate until they're much closer in age.
AuthenticM
Member
The thread title bugs me every time I read it. Ugh.
I played Doom and Mortal Kombat 3 on my mom's PC when I was 5. In fact, as I recall, my dad would play MK3 with me when he had the time. He was also the one that showed me Doom. When my dad got me a N64, he'd buy all these M rated games for him to play and wouldn't give a rat's ass if I played them. I know I'm probably an exception but the only thing I got out of a childhood like that was being desensitized to violence. I am so thankful for my parent's caring of me (or lack thereof when it comes to video games). My dad introduced me to video games while my mom introduced me to anime. Absolutely love my parents for that.
I am so glad my parents didn't think like you. I'll also make sure I raise my kids the way my parents raised me.
Impeccable
Member
That's great you'll have a different parenting ideals, but what do you mean "think like you"?
NaughtyCalibur
Member
I've saw Robocop when I was 5. I got Mortal Kombat for my 6th birthday. I played Duke Nukem 3D religiously when I was 9.
I have never so much as been in a school fight, let alone gone on a killing spree.
That said, I do think it's important for parents to monitor their kids' behavior if they're going to allow them to indulge in mature content. There are clear warning signs if a kid can't differentiate between fantasy and reality and/or begins to act out what they see.
My 5 yearnold nephew for example has violent tendencies already, so I won't be letting him play any violent video games anytime soon.
I have never so much as been in a school fight, let alone gone on a killing spree.
That said, I do think it's important for parents to monitor their kids' behavior if they're going to allow them to indulge in mature content. There are clear warning signs if a kid can't differentiate between fantasy and reality and/or begins to act out what they see.
My 5 yearnold nephew for example has violent tendencies already, so I won't be letting him play any violent video games anytime soon.
Well, your idea of parenthood. I guess I sounded very offensive, I'm sorry for that, but your posts seem like an insult to my parents so I got kind of mad.
I'm just impressed that 6/7 year olds have the eye-coordination to even attempt Call of Duty online.
I think its up to parents to judge whether their kid is well-adjusted enough to handle this sort of thing. I'm not sure if its how I would do things, but if parents feel their kids can handle it, thats their judgement decision and its not really my place to say they're wrong.
I grew up on violent video games and while they weren't overly realistic in the beginning, I was under no illusion as to what I was doing. I was killing things still. And as I grew up, the on-screen violence ramped up but I was still ok. I definitely never became desensitized to stuff that happens in the real world. Kids can handle this stuff if they've got a decent head on them.
Impeccable
Member
My parents let me do all this stuff to, the only thing I remember ever not being allowed to do or see was Basic Instinct. I turned out perfectly fine like all of you.
Doesn't mean my parents did the right thing or made the right decision though.
AlimNassor
Banned
I would disable it. Of course I would keep a close watch on my child, if they begin to act different, the game is going away.
Two things in this Thread also bug me:
- "I did X and I turned out Y" will never count as an argument when talking about psycholgy. Why do people repeat it?
- "My kid / kid x gets a certain input and there's no effect".
Either a lie or your/the kid should see a doctor. This can be an indication for certain conditions that you definitely need help with.
- "I did X and I turned out Y" will never count as an argument when talking about psycholgy. Why do people repeat it?
- "My kid / kid x gets a certain input and there's no effect".
Either a lie or your/the kid should see a doctor. This can be an indication for certain conditions that you definitely need help with.
AlimNassor
Banned
But, it is true. Why do I need to go to a psychologist to get tests done on my future child just for playing a violent video game? If I feel my child is old enough and able to handle it, I won't stop them. Why is this such a travesty to you people is beyond me, as though my future child will grow up to be some sociopathic killer for playing a violent game.
Well, I wasn’t talking to you directly but if parents who claim that their kid has no reaction to an input would talk to someone who actually knows how things work, they’d be forced out of their delusion and see that their kid does, in fact, react to all kinds of input.
Completely different topic. I personally think that parents who let their children play these games miss out on great chances. Not even looking at whether you’re raising the next mass murderer or not, there are plenty of video games that do something good to children’s brains and people who chose game X instead of something that factually helps their children are not doing the best they could.
Your kid’s brain wants to be filled with stuff. They’re like a sponge that absorbs every kind of input and you’re wasting the chance here. I also highly doubt (there's an IQ tes that asks children what war is but I'm not sure which one it is) that children can grasp the idea of wars, violence, real fear, etc. They’re usually living in a very sheltered environment, are living a very egocentric lifestyle and there’s no reason to believe they have any idea of the bigger picture.
About the but it’s true: IIn general, anecdotal evidence is never allowed in an argument about psychology. You’ll never get a single point for that when taking an exam or similar things, for example. It’s just not something that can ever be used to support a certain thing or to dispute another.
A kid that doesn’t show a reaction to an input either has problems that parents should look into or the parents just lie. Both these things are facts and they’re not being disputed by anything said in this Thread.
No offense, but you really cannot predict whether exposure to violent video games will impact your child in the future. There are so many variables that go into the psychopathophysiology of a person; it will be hard to tease out what are the real causes of problems, but why risk it. Even if it never affects your child, it's an unknown right now; and you are choosing to allow an activity that certainly could do harm to a young brain's function/development. As many have already said; for you to claim that there are no impacts on your child just because you can't see any today or because you feel he/she is mature enough to handle it, is an ignorant assumption.
eso76
Member
PEGI didn't exist in 1982 and neither did any sort on parental control on videogames.
* "why ! were there even videogames in 1982 ??" joke incoming *
but seriously, while today's games look a lot more real than 80's' i think we've gone too far with parental control. I played every sort of game in my youth and watched every horror and violent flick, mom was always there to explain things to me and help me understand what was real and what was not.
Age ratings are for parents who don't want (or can't) spend time with their kids and let the tv / videogames do the job. I understand parents (me being one) these days are a lot busier than they used to be, but that's not how it was when i was a kid.
I remember the only time my mom questioned a videogame, it was Double Dragon in the arcades.
Main issue with the game for her, seemed to be the player being a blonde, blue eyed guy punching random guys who happened to be black for the most part.
Asked me what i thought about it and why i found it fun.
I probably told her i liked the music and graphics and it was fun because you could play with other people, never really paid attention to characters ethnicity or the fact you are indeed beating other ppl to death, i just thought it was well done as a game, very playable, with some depth and freedom. I was reading tons of videogames magazines back then, so i knew how to use those words
She was satisfied with my answer, understood that i wasn't playing the game imagining myself punching black guys.
* "why ! were there even videogames in 1982 ??" joke incoming *
but seriously, while today's games look a lot more real than 80's' i think we've gone too far with parental control. I played every sort of game in my youth and watched every horror and violent flick, mom was always there to explain things to me and help me understand what was real and what was not.
Age ratings are for parents who don't want (or can't) spend time with their kids and let the tv / videogames do the job. I understand parents (me being one) these days are a lot busier than they used to be, but that's not how it was when i was a kid.
I remember the only time my mom questioned a videogame, it was Double Dragon in the arcades.
Main issue with the game for her, seemed to be the player being a blonde, blue eyed guy punching random guys who happened to be black for the most part.
Asked me what i thought about it and why i found it fun.
I probably told her i liked the music and graphics and it was fun because you could play with other people, never really paid attention to characters ethnicity or the fact you are indeed beating other ppl to death, i just thought it was well done as a game, very playable, with some depth and freedom. I was reading tons of videogames magazines back then, so i knew how to use those words
She was satisfied with my answer, understood that i wasn't playing the game imagining myself punching black guys.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Of course not. That doesn't mean it isn't fucking OFF that a parent would deem point blank face executions to be suitable entertainment for a young mind.
lowrider007
Licorice-flavoured booze?
Agreed.
I made the same point to a friend of mine over the phone regarding this topic last night.
Video games are defended to an irrational level on enthusiast forums imo, it's like they are some kind of weird anomaly that can never do no harm, no matter how 'subtle' that harm may be, regardless of how extreme the content may be, prostitution, selling drugs, torture, vulgar language, it's ok to subject very young children to these things because,
"it's a video game, while my 7 year old daughter is gunning down people with a machine gun in realistic looking environments, watching torture cut scenes in between levels it's really teaching her logic based systems, and she's having fun!!"
ok.
But why subject your young child to extreme violence when it's not necessary?, I personally think as an adult we have a care of duty to project our children from unnecessary violence regardless of which form it takes.
I just don't comprehend how subjecting your children to violence is a 'good' thing, or why it's defended so strongly to do so, especially when there are so many other options out there in the gaming world, at the end of the day your not going to do your child any harm from not letting them play a small smattering of particularly violent games out there until they are a little older, it's not like you have to adhere to the ratings strictly, but noway should a child at the age of 6/7 etc be playing the likes of COD and Far Cry 3, it doesn't matter what we wanted as children or what we did, or rather got away with due to ignorance, as an adult you have a different responsibility, adults are there to protect children from violence, that's part of nature, not subject them to it unnecessarily so.
Just because on the surface it appears to do no harm doesn't make it right, it's a poor parenting/teaching method imo, I'm not saying you have to wrap your kids up in cotton wool but there has to be a balance.
When I was young playing violent video games I enjoyed them but I knew it was frowned upon by my parents and that what I was doing at the age wasn't really appropriate, knowing this kept me grounded and didn't desensitise me to the violence I was experiencing, but these days you have kids at 7 playing COD for example with extreme violence/language and they think it's normal, they've become completely desensitised to it all, what a lot of people here seem to be arguing for is mass desensitisation of violence for young children, which I think is ridiculous.
When or if 'holodecks' become a reality would you be comfortable with your 7 year old playing the role of a soldier in COD?
I wait for the reply,
"as long as the safety protocols are engaged why not?"
Dark Octave
Banned
d[-_-]b;45124135 said:
valentine71
Banned
Is it your father that is 6 or is it your brother? Reitterate it.
PetriP-TNT
Member
Yep, same here. I am totally ok with this (as long as he doesn't have a headset like apparently every other 6 year old kid out there).
GreggTheGrimReaper
Member
Doom was so pixelated, I know it was supposed to be gory but I couldn't make out any details and I was rocking a good PC back then. Also I found most of the old games almost comical unrealistic. As technology is getting faster and better and everything becomes more and more detailed and realistic the immersion factor is also getting a bigger role.
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
absolutely no one elses business to tell someone else how to raise their kids.
My son plays games - but i'm keeping it all fairly age appropriate. I personally would not want him to play COD (given he's not even 4) and i'll probably be restricting what he plays until he gets a fair bit older, but mainly because we've already had a few questions about what it means to die and to kill someone.
Not really a talk he needs at this age.
My son plays games - but i'm keeping it all fairly age appropriate. I personally would not want him to play COD (given he's not even 4) and i'll probably be restricting what he plays until he gets a fair bit older, but mainly because we've already had a few questions about what it means to die and to kill someone.
Not really a talk he needs at this age.