Slashdot Mirror
When Are Kids Old Enough to Play Videogames?
A piece at the MTV Multiplayer blog is exploring the issue of kids and gaming, wondering aloud how old is 'old enough'. A recent CES talk indicated that you should wait until at least seven to introduce your children to Mario, and we've talked in the past about the educational role games can have. MTV's Tracey John spoke to a pair of mothers who offered their own opinions on this topic: "When I asked Alisa why she thought that games weren't imaginative and explained that many games have challenging, puzzle-solving elements, she conceded a little but remained skeptical. 'Honestly, I haven't really explored video games thoroughly, and I'm sure there are video games that fit more the bill of something that I'd be interested in, but I'm kind of hard-pressed to find a game that's like reading a book or something like that. I understand the kids like it, so I allow them to do it; it's monitored but it's not my favorite thing for them to be doing.'" What's the right age for a kid to start playing games? Do you see games as more or less acceptable than traditional kid pastimes like TV or reading? Does it matter if the parents are gaming-savvy?
the parent(s) decide they are old enough. IMHO
Take some responsibility for your kids, parents, it doesn't hurt as bad as you might think.
No reason to force your kindergartner to play Grand Theft Auto, but if they want to play Mario or Pong or Tetris, it'll probably do more for their brain and development than passively watching VeggieTales.
You have to approach this through terms they know, in that any form of media you expose kids to, you have to ask someone why one is OK and another isn't? If it's pure ignorance, they have no case. If they start citing things like violence, imagery, etc, you confront them with the ratings system, and inquire about how they choose movies, TV, etc, and why they'd allow a higher rating on the games than the other media, and then start complaining about the games.
Just as I wouldn't expose a child to the "Saw" series I probably wouldn't give them GTA or some of the more gory games either. So why is there such an uproar about the latter, but not the former? It's just plain ignorance.
"Every book is a childrens book if the kid can read."
Whether a child is "Ready" for such things isnt something that can really be generalized. It really depends on each individual child, their ability to see the difference between reality and escapism, and their desire to make use of this kind of media.
Ice Cream has no bones.
I would find it hard to make the argument that games will ever "equal" books, for the same reason that movie versions of books often don't live up to the original books.
Books require a lot more imagination than games or movies because you have to infer what the people/places/things in the book look/act like based off of the descriptions.
That being said, I think it is hard to compare the three. A book like Hitchhikers Guide would make a poor game (IMO). A game like Metal Gear would make a poor movie (IMO). A game like Bioshock would make a poor book (IMO). But each of those excel at what medium they actually are expressed in.
My daughter is already facinated by games, and she's 3. She loves watching daddy play WoW, and most Wii games. She doesn't have the cooridnation yet, but she still loves to play games.
I think any time a child shows interest in any activity, as long as it's monitored and moderated, they should be allowed to do it. And as far as how it compares to the TV; games are more like books that a child can play. I personally think they rank right up there with books as far as importance in this day and age ( note that this means if my daughter plays games for an hour, we read for an hour too ).
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
A skills-based game, like Super Mario Bros. as a classic example, teaches the meaning of success and failure (something schools increasingly don't do). If you are good enough, you will win; otherwise, you fail. But everyone fails at first, over and over again; these games teach that if you want to be good at something, you have to suffer through being bad at it for a while, but you will eventually improve.
Games like the traditional JRPG or most MMORPGs probably shouldn't be played by children, as they teach that the way to succeed is not to improve your own skills, but to put in a lot of time leveling up. This perspective will be useless in the real world unless they get one of the few seniority-based union jobs.
This sort of philosophical distinction is seldom appreciated in discussions of children and video games, being drowned out by a debate centered on violence, but I think that in a long-term sense it's a much more important consideration.
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
...and learn how to put the disks back in their cases instead of data side down on the floor. Filthy rugrats.
Free the Quark 3 from asymptotic confinement! Bring your charm! Don't get down! All colours and flavours welcome!
Damn you, Babel Fish Dispenser!
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
What about LEGOS!? Seriously, they have a track record of several decades of non-damaging, brain-challenging, mind-engaging entertainment, and have been responsible for the last ~75 years of engineers. On that note, you might want to keep your kids away from them, or else the /. boards will be flooded in 15 years. Who knows what logical thinking and problem solving will do to today's society?
They're an entertaining diversion that, while not inherently destructive, can be damaging when eaten to excess or in place of other foods. I'm giving games the benefit of the doubt and assuming we're talking about age-appropriate titles and not GTA. Some games have puzzles, but it's nothing compared to, say, playing a strategy board game, doing a crossword puzzle, playing chess, etc. And games do little to enhance verbal ability, unlike reading. If you want to develop fine motor skills, why not take up billiards, foosball, table tennis, golf, etc.
Just like eating one serving of fries isn't going to kill you, neither will playing a moderate amount of games rot a kid's brain. But if he eats fries five times a day and consequently skips the vegetables and fruit...there will be consequences. Also, just like fries (and other unhealthy foods) games can be quite addictive.
Parents holding their kids back from videogames probably have all the best intentions in mind - as they should, since kids are in no position to do so by themselves. The constant rabble about Japanese teenagers dying at the local internet café after playing WOW 36 hours straight, or kids steeling cars after playing GTA is all the reason most parents need to be sceptic about computergames.
The lack of games actually targeted towards 2-7 year old kids is a much bigger problem IMHO.
I am a 34 year old gamer, and I have a 2½ year old daughter. I have tried on countless occasions to teach her how to play games (on our PC, Mac, Xbox PS2, DS) but most of the games are either too abstract or too advanced for her. Keep in mind that something as simple as "shooting" is a rather advanced concept for a 2-year old girl, and that "death" or "number of lives" can be a hard thing to teach a kid that age.
The real question is not "when are kids old enough to play videogames" but rather: "when are they old enough to become a target group" in the videogame industry,
Today's games are ill suited for very small kids - not because games in general are bad for kids - but simply because the lack of demand for such videogames has resulted in the absolute absence of suitable games for kids of that age!
- Jesper
(And BTW: suggestions on good games for a 2½ year old girl are welcome...)
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
It's also about fitting in socially. As a boy anyway most of your peers are going to be playing video games. It gives you some common experiences. I also believe that playing video games helps get children into the computer culture we have today. Children learn hand eye coordination as well as navigating UI's that are needed for important job skills later.
I know that i got into computer because of video games. I played console games but when my parents got a PC i was determined to play games on it. The drive i had to actually use the computer enabled me to learn my way around the OS when i couldn't figure something out. If there was noting interesting on the computer for me i would have not used it when it wasn't working. Instead i learned how to fix any problem on a computer myself, something i am very happy i know how to do for myself today.
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
When you find somebody who's really qualified to give "expert" opinions on how random people should raise their kids (keeping in mind situations and kids and parents are all different in many ways), you let me know.
... I'm entirely comfortable making my own decisions on how to raise my kids (4.5 and 2). The 4yo would play Yoshi's Island (DS) every waking hour if we let her, but we don't. :) She's learned letters, numbers, colors, phonics, reading and basic math through a combination of us reading with her, educational games (LeapFrog is your friend here), websites like starfall.com (hat tip to Gabe @ Penny-Arcade) and good old-fashioned one-on-one teaching and repetition.
In the meantime
Games have their place, just like anything else (including computers; she can't type yet, but she can navigate her favorite educational websites just fine). They're no more or less dangerous to kids' development than Baby Einstein videos, or educational TV, or pop-up books, or [insert controversial newfangled technology here].
The key here, as with everything else in life, is moderation and good sense.
illum oportet crescere me autem minui
Like candy. A little bit of TV or Video Games is fine, but a steady diet for a young child is a bad idea.
My kids are 8, 5, and 2. We like to make sure they get a balance of human interaction and physical activity, but once they've done that, there's nothing wrong with them spending 30 minutes or so playing Mario on the Wii, or watching TV.
(rot13) rpbzbab@tznvy.pbz
That is relatively close to my timeline, except I was raised by hippies. None of this coddling, think of the children BS. I was taught right and wrong, the differences between fantasy/fiction/reality, that I could say or do anything as long as it did not hurt another person, and that a person's word should never be broken. I was let into the real world.
That being said, I grew up cussing, watching what ever tv program I wished (not based on ratings), playing any make-believe game I could think of no matter the content, asking to be taught math, playing chess or checkers, reading/having REAL books read to me, realizing sex would eventually happen and it's natural, watching/being told family pets die, burying dead pets, watching/being told family members die, knowing not to steal but knowing I easily could, etc.
Sure, I am not "Normal" - but when I look at how my friend's families are, and how "Normal" people act or (don't) think - I'm ecstatic about my childhood.
We are not two separate species. There is not Homo sapien youngus and Homo sapien adultus, there is no age where suddenly we naturally understand the world. We learn through knowledge and experience. I understood more than my friends/classmates simply because I had started learning (just about everything) at an earlier age!
What I'm saying is, let go of most of the control! Don't try to create a list of the only things little junior is allowed to do/try. Sure you'll take out all the bad things, but you'll also miss most of the good. Sure, he'll specialize in hop-scotch, tag, pong, and super mario brothers... but he'll completely miss out on everything else - everything that will eventually be important to him, become his real life.
If I find them playing Grand Theft Auto at the next-door neighbor's house at the age of 10, I'm going to have a stern talk with the parent. They can't use the excuse "video games are harmless" because I'd just show them my International Game Developers' Association card - they knew I knew better than them.
Harmless? No, I'll give you that. There is almost nothing, from tv to video games to books to playing with the neighbor, that is harmless. The trick isn't protecting your child from harmful materials, but teaching them how they should act and think about those materials in a non-harmful way.
Just -1, Troll talking to another.
My son's been playing video games since he was 2. (He's 4 now.) When he first started, he didn't quite grasp how to move the mouse to get the pointer to do what he wanted. He quickly picked it up though and became quite the computer whiz. He even figured out how to launch his game from the Start Menu, which is quite impressive since he doesn't even read yet! (That we know of... maybe he's just playing dumb to lull mommy and daddy into a false sense of security. ;-) )
While visiting a zoo one day, they had a Fisher Price exhibit and he tried out the SmartCycle. The lady there was amazed that he picked up on all of the controls almost instantly. (He seems to have inherited his daddy's knack for computers.) In December, he got the SmartCycle as a present and loves pedaling, choosing which games to play, and playing all of the games that we've bought him. He doesn't need anyone to show him how something works. He just does it once or twice and figures it out.
Sure, the video games he's playing are educational in nature and not Super Mario Brothers-type games (much less Grand Theft Auto-type games), but I think introducing computers to toddlers is important. Just make sure to balance their activities out.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Hell, Mario Brothers demonstrably makes a great game, but a poor movie ;) Not to mention Mortal Kombat (great soundtrack, but that's about it).
Games are just a new form of media, and should be treated as such. If your kid never goes outside and gets exercise because s/he's always reading a book, that's just as unhealthy as if they were always playing a video game, or always watching TV, or whatever. Balance and moderation are the key, as well as maturity. Just like driver's licenses, even though the law says 16, I knew some kids who I would trust driving at 14, and I know some 40 year olds and it scares the hell out of me that they still have their licenses.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
It seems to me that the best thing to do is supply a kid with a variety of activities that are consistent with the way the parent wishes to rear the child. Books that age appropriate and teach the values of the parent. Physical toys that are age appropriate and expose the child to the norms that are expected of the parent.
Video games are no different. if the child does not have the hand coordination, the game will be useless. if the child does not understand the strategy, same thing. If the game depends on teamwork, and the child is still playing along instead of playing with, the game will not be useful. In the end, however, functioning in this world does depend on a high competence interacting with computers, so learning to interact sooner rather than later is probably a good thing.
OTOH, I notice that kids have such a myopic view of computers, as a device to consume games and prefab content from internet, that some of then have a very hard time treating the computer as a creative device. It is nice that they can pick up the technical aspects of the computer, but the overwhelming default use is as a television. I must say I miss the days when all I had was a bunch of sticks, or at most a bunch of Legos, with no pre-formulated expectations of what to do with them, and could just while the afternoon creating whatever came into my scary mind.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
As these posts have shown, when the whole family is doing it's a social activity. You can all participate, share stories, reenact bits, talk strategy, etc etc. It's more social than passively sitting around a TV together, that's for sure. A really small child participating in that is just participating in the family social structure.
For a family without gaming parents, though, I can understand why there might need to be different limits. If a 5-year-old is the only person in the family playing video games, it's going to be a more isolated activity. Time they could be spending playing with their parents will be spent alone, for all intents and purposes. Sure, the parents should try to be involved in *everything* their kid does - but if the parent doesn't really understand videogames and their social potential themself, they will have a very hard time getting involved in the same way a gamer parent would. They might hover around and watch to make sure Johnny doesn't play anything violent, they might even ask questions or try to help him solve puzzles. But I'm sure it would never occur to them that even in a one-player game, two people can act as a team with the second person providing feedback and suggestions, or that they might actually have fun if they get an account on the same site and play the game alongside their kid. So without the same social element, it makes sense to have different limits.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
No games really match the mindlessness portrayed of them by the media.
And one last point. Books are better for social development than a video game? Last I checked people don't tend to get together to read books, but frequently get together to play games. Either in front of one TV or over the internet using voice chat to communicate, makes little difference.
My partner is the opposite, and she's the one who didn't touch video games.
My point is that you can find extreme's on both sides of the argument. Would things be different without the video games, I think they would but I don't blame the video games, I blame the fact that they were allowed to sit there playing only video games when they should have been developing other skills as well.
Sad really.
Exactly! I'd wager that it was video games that got most of us computer professionals (IT, programmers, etc) into the world of computing in the first place.
So if the parents play video games (probably more likely than not these days), the kids will at least "play" that they play video games starting when they are 1 to 2 years old. About one year later, they will be able to actually play the games. I don't see any reason to prevent them from playing real video games at that point.
If the parents doesn't play video games, the kids won't be interested for a couple of years more, when they get playmates who play video games. I don't see any reason to introduce them to games before that, nor to stop them when they ask for it.
For pre-schoolers, you choose the games. For primary schoolers, they probably want to choose the games, but you should play the games as well. After that, general advice is more harmful than helpful. It depends too much on you and the kid.