Slashdot Mirror
A Real Mom Reviews the Games Industry Report Card
Last month's National Institute on Media and the Family 'report card' was pretty much more of the same from the reactionary group. Recently a real parent (Colleen Hannon from GamerDad) sat down with the report to offer up some comments. "They still can't seem to read the names of the games off the front of the box. What they have listed as 'Call to Duty 4' is actually Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. That may seem like a minor mistake, but if you type what's on their list into a search engine to get more information off the ESRB's website or Google, it won't return the real results on the game. And without that last bit at the end, you're going to get a list with all the games in the series which can be confusing and not all of them are M rated. For someone who thinks parents should pay more attention and research they aren't helping them out much." Via GamePolitics.
The fact that he knew that was a featuer of games earlier in the series would indicate that he's more of one than most parents' seem to be.
Even those of the 'gamer generation'.
This whole mess is more about politicians being able to seemingly protect children, and get money/support from lobbying groups that want to protect the children than anything else. Parents that truly care take the time to look at the back of the box, read the descriptions and check the ESRB sticker. They don't bow to pressure from their kids to get a game that they're not comfortable with their kids playing. And then they probably watch their kid play some and make sure it's not outrageous.
Parents that don't care, or are just prone to give into their kids anyway aren't going to do any research and aren't going to be watching their kids play.
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
First Off:
"Retailers must return to the level of compliance in previous years" - Ok, lets see when I was a Babbages(Now Gamestop) Manager we didn't enforce anything. You have $59.99 to buy this game here is your copy. You know what - thats the way it should be. Your the parent pay attention to what your kid is buying and playing.
Then:
The list of games to avoid, thats a joke too, at least without context. My Daughter is 10 weeks old, but lets scale this up and say she was 10 Years Old instead. I'll go an record as saying several of those games I would let her play when she is a 10yo I don't see a problem. The Half-Life franchise, Gears of War, Call Of Duty and several others I'll let her play those from the moment she can point the mouse in the right direction. She will know the difference between shooting someone on a computer and really shooting someone. Thats my job as a parent to teach her that. Its not some out side random organization's job to dictate that to my child. Now its also important to note that she will not have a computer/game system (or TV for that matter) in her own room until she is 14 at least. Therefore the only systems she will have access too will be in shared and/or public spaces in our house. We will know what she is doing.
"Mediawise Recommend Games for Children and Teens"
Not a shooter among them interesting...guess what shooters are fun, and they always have been Atari 2600 when I was kid had a shooter came with the system it was called "Combat" funny that...all those games of combat and I'm not twisted warped or on death row.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Exactly. It's reverse ad hominem to think that being a mom justifies anything about her argument.
I've spent some time in game stores, and overheard a good few conversations. The best parents ask the salespeople what happens in the game. And the better salespeople can give the kind of information the parent wants:
"Some people fight each other. Like punching and kicking. There's not really so much blood, but the girls wear very revealing outfits."
"You skateboard around doing tricks. The crashes are pretty brutal, and there's some crude jokes."
"You collect and control little monsters that fight and stuff. You don't actually see them fight, you just kind of read what they did."
And I think that's what's missing from the ESRB web site - they don't give the kind of context many parents need to evaluate a game. Now I think it's reasonably clear a young kid shouldn't be playing either Dead or Alive Extreme 2 or Mass Effect (and both are M rated, which seems right) but look at the content descriptors:
Partial Nudity, Sexual Themes, Simulated Gambling
Partial Nudity, Sexual Themes, Blood, Language, Violence
From just that, you might think these are comparable games. Compare that to the information you get from a synopsis:
"You ogle bikini girls and buy them bikinis. That's the whole point of the game."
"You buy guns and shoot aliens. In the story, there's a love scene where you can see a girl's bum for a second."
Whatever you may think of the relative offensiveness of that content, I think that's information a parent needs to have in order to make a decision. These games' content are very different.
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
Well, there's two problems with your post. First of all, it's transparently obvious he wasn't attempting to be a linebacker tackling some mom, but rather was merely pointing out that, as is reasonable, she was probably buying it for some kid, and that the M meant it probably was not a good choice, as far as quality parenting skills go. The mom could buy it for herself, for her kid, or go get a Winnie the Pooh game instead. Second, "it's still [just] a video game" is like saying, "It's still just a movie", even though it's Scarface. Yes, that's what parenting skills are about: checking out what your kids are doing and making adjustments to it as necessary. These ratings are supposed to help, but it's clear nobody's "tested" them with respect to actual game-illiterate parents. A good portion of parents with "quality parenting skills", who are thus checking out and relying on these ratings, might have a problem finding out more about "Call to Duty" or some un-numbered "Conan" game.
She's pointing this stuff out, that many of the intended users of this list, video game-illiterate parents, won't know enough to correct the errors and ommissions. Think if someone published a Christmas gift list of "quality knitting needles", and you went to get the #3 needle for your gramma, but the style name was off, and didn't include a model number. Should you "know better, you poor-knitting-skilled buffoon"? Or should the writers of the list have analyzed their target audience better?
I assure you, the audience for this list is neither teenagers, nor young men in their 20s or 30s.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I don't know about you guys, but when I search for "call of duty 4" the first hit is http://www.callofduty.com/ which has call of duty 4 modern warfare as the main page. It even has an age restriction drop down menu to make sure you are old enough to view a site advertising a rated M game.
Weaksauce as they say...
A child's brain is different at different ages. They are not little versions of adults with just less experience. A young child will have problems interpreting your idea of 'ALL' input. As children age, their brain matures and develops more critical thinking and abstract skills. So, while I can agree with some of your ideas the application of them is problematic depending on the age of the child.