GTA V Proves a Lot of Parents Still Don't Know or Care About ESRB Ratings 621
Deathspawner writes "Grand Theft Auto V has shown itself to be potential GOTY material, and has even managed to break a sales record already. But aside from that, the game has also become one of the most adult-oriented games ever released, with torture, drug use and sex prevalent not long after beginning the game. You'd expect this gameplay to deter most parents from picking the game up for their young children — but not so. An anonymous editorial at Kotaku written by a video game store employee says that out of the ~1,000 copies sold in the first week, at least 10% of them went to parents accompanied by a child. Clearly, this could be interpreted as a problem. Techgage adds that this is one of the biggest problems facing gaming today. With one breath, many parents criticize video games for being so violent, and with the next, they're saying 'thanks' at the counter after picking up these very games for their kids. While ESRB ratings and other warnings about violent games for kids have good reason to exist, many parents still ignore them, aren't aware to them, or simply don't care about their warnings."
Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
Some people still think that video games are only for kids, regardless of the content of the game. Getting past this idea would help a lot.
Different Parents (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe these are two different groups of parents...
Re:Different Parents (Score:5, Insightful)
Well.. this and the U.S. still has this puritan crap going on in the background that makes general violence and minimal amount of gore FINE but that showing too much of a boob (or anything slightly sexual) will TOTALLY CORRUPT MY BABY!
Seriously... killing people is fine but something that makes you feel good and is a gift to mankind.. NO WAY. OMG!!
I can't believe I have to mention this (Score:5, Insightful)
"With one breath, many parents criticize video games for being so violent, and with the next, they're saying 'thanks' at the counter after picking up these very games for their kids."
Are the same people saying both of these things? Or is it possible that "parents" includes millions of different people who feel differently about many things.
Not caring != not knowing (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd say parents know about ratings -- in fact, they know not only about their existence but also quality. And, especially, relevance.
In other words, they don't give a f...
If your children hasn't seen enough porn already, I pity both you and your offspring, as this means you keep them in a cage.
Re:If it was only about sex and drugs maybe. (Score:4, Insightful)
We still have people saying that Michelangelo's David is pornography.
Overlap? (Score:2, Insightful)
And what percentage of those 100 copies solid were to parents that complain about this stuff? The two are not necessarily the same subset, they could even be entirely disjoint or minuscule in overlap.
Some parents have faith in the maturity of their children. Some are of course just stupid.
Re:Some people... (Score:4, Insightful)
Some people also have the silly idea that violent video games can somehow harm children.
Can we finally put this concept to bed, please? Your ten-year-old isn't going to be irreparably mentally harmed from playing GTA5. Or from watching a violent movie or sneaking a look at some porn on the Internet.
Re:Different Parents (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd wager we're talking about the same parents. The ones that are vocally opposed to violent video games are the ones who think that if WalMart sells it then it must be ok for little Jimmy. They're naivety knows no bounds.
Re:I can't believe I have to mention this (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, it can't be possible these "parents buying the game with kids on tow" are buying the game for themselves never intending to let their child play it, too.
Just like when a family is at the store and buys beer as part of their weekly grocery shopping -- they must be letting their children drink.
Two groups of parents (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, your kid is probably not going to be "irreparably mentally harmed" from being exposed to violent video games too early. But there is such a thing as exposing a kid to shit that they're too young to handle (or understand). And that's not a good thing.
A kid's innocence is a precious thing, and it's a shame to squander it too early. That doesn't mean I want to have my 12-year-old still believing in Santa Claus, but I also don't want him introduced to the ugly world of violent crime, drugs, and prostitution while he's still in kindergarten either.
Re:Different Parents (Score:1, Insightful)
Well.. this and the U.S. still has this puritan crap going on in the background that makes general violence and minimal amount of gore FINE but that showing too much of a boob (or anything slightly sexual) will TOTALLY CORRUPT MY BABY!
Seriously... killing people is fine but something that makes you feel good and is a gift to mankind.. NO WAY. OMG!!
Please explain where you get that puritans are ok with violence because the above just makes you sound like a radical loon with a penchant for hating anything even remotely religious.
Re:I'm a little confused about GTA 5 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Some people... (Score:4, Insightful)
Part of the problem is that that the majority of adults can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality either. How many people are religious after all? And even if you buy into the silly notion that one religion may be correct, then the billions of people who follow the other religions are still fully believing in fantasy.
But then, simple violence and sex in media does not represent a fundamental attack on human rationality that religion in media does, even though it is somehow seen as more acceptable.
Re:Some people... (Score:2, Insightful)
That's a parent's prerogative. There isn't anyone better than the parent to decide what his/her kid can handle. It's individual to that child.
Re:Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny thing about a lot of parents, at least in the US, is they believe that seeing a woman's nipple does more damage to a child's innocence than any amount of gory body shrapnel.
Re:Some people... (Score:2, Insightful)
Let the flames start in 3...2..1..
Re:Some people... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Different Parents (Score:3, Insightful)
GTA could get its rating based solely on the amount of violence.
GTA V is rated M. If it had included sex, it would be rated AO. How do we know this? Because GTA:SA was also rated M. When it was discovered that there was a hidden sex scene, which you had to modify the game to uncover, it was rerated AO.
His point stands. Gratuitous violence is perceived as much less harmful than even non-explicit sex by those we are supposed to trust to make value judgements.
Re:Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's worth remembering here that the objection is not that children do not possess the ability to recognise the difference between fantasy and reality, rather it's that they're "impressionable". Their behavioural patterns are still being established, via a system of negative and positive rewards for their behaviour.
Normally, when a child commits a needlessly aggressive act, they are negatively rewarded by their parents telling them off, or possibly by the parents hitting them in (hopefully) extreme circumstances. When a child plays a violent video game, the game purposefully rewards violent behaviour with things like progress, a sense of achievement, unlockables/collectables, etc.
Being children, they unconsciously associate the endorphin rush with aggressive acts, or at least, the aggressive acts they commit to video game characters. The obvious question, of course, is whether that positive association with simulated violence corresponds to a positive association with actual violence, or even just aggression. That's something for the behavioural psychologists to decide. Until they do, I think it would be wise to exercise caution.
Re:Some people... (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course even here on slashdot, we will get modded down because "you can't attack religion"
What on earth are you talking about? Slashdot users are all but universally Atheist. The bulk of them aren't terribly competent, of course, but that's the kind that guarantee up mods for saying simple thinks like "religious people are dumb" or "ghosts don't exist".
Now, if you REALLY want to hit that +5, make a "scientific" claim that appeals to Atheists but has no actual scientific foundation or that is outside the scope of science. For example, you could say "Science has disproved the god hypothesis" and the scientifically illiterate majority of Slashdot users will immediate mod your post up.
Failing that, just repeat empty rhetoric that you heard from the less-than-competent during the Dover trial. That appears to be your approach:
Teaching religion and god is tantamount to child abuse.
Time to stop walking on egg shells when some one says something bad about religion.
It's sad, really.
Re:Some people... (Score:3, Insightful)
There are 30 year olds "kids" out there that can't handle GTA, but I'm sure that there are 8 year olds that can. There is nothing magic about the number
No. That might have been true with GTA in the past. Not GTA 5.
Go look at the topless lap dance minigame. Well, don't, because doing so at work might get you fired, and doing it at home might end your marriage. It is a full-on very graphic boobs-in-face lapdance.
No reasonable adult would deny the minigame is softcore porn.
While it is true some 8-year-olds can visit porn sites and see it elsewhere, in doing so they get all the "adults only" and "this is a work of fiction" and other warnings that tell you it is not socially accepted. They might still see it, but they have absolute knowledge that they shouldn't. In most countries of the world, if a non-parent gave an 8-year-old access to the same level of porn as GTA 5's strip club, they would be severely punished.
Handing GTA 5 to an 8-year-old child and telling them to enjoy themselves is not acceptable.
Re:Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
Some people also have the silly idea that violent video games can somehow harm children.
Can we finally put this concept to bed, please? Your ten-year-old isn't going to be irreparably mentally harmed from playing GTA5. Or from watching a violent movie or sneaking a look at some porn on the Internet.
It's interesting isn't it? A 3rd world child knows more about reality from merely existing than a child in the USA. You laugh when the 6 year old child thinks women have penises too, or that men don't have them... You fumble for words to describe the cycle of life and death as if such simple things aren't known to any who helps cook meals... Then you wonder why as they grow older they have severe relationship issues, teen pregnancy, and haven't a care in the world about politics, or their nation's killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in blame shifted retaliation for a terrorist attack that killed a few thousand.
If you ask me, we should be showing the kids even more "violent" video games. Let's have 3rd grade curriculum require playing a Hiroshima survivor simulator... Or at least watch the cartoon. [youtube.com] That's how your war budget could get redirected to NASA instead: Stop raising vapid ignoramuses.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Some people... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent poster is on to something.
When I was kid, games were not as realistic as they are today, but with that being said, I didn't play games to revel in violence. It was mostly about power fantasy, overcoming challenges, and mapping and defeating abstract systems. In the vast majority of games, violence is simply the substrate through which those ideas came through. Games with limited depictions of violence don't bother me too badly since they're easily forgotten and largely ignored by the player after the first couple repetitions.
I do take issue with some story elements though. Anyone who has been playing GTA games should know that banging hookers is just a momentary distraction in dozens of hours of gameplay that have nothing to do with that activity. But as the parent poster pointed out, people in GTA games are tremendously shitty people, and the player should have enough world experience to have some greater perspective over the underlying cynicism that pervades the world of Rockstar games. Similarly, I'm not going to let a kid watch a show like Niptuck, , 24, or Breaking Bad. Anti-heroes can be interesting to watch, but I don't want a kid's worldview shaped from the outlook of anti-heroes.
People can be shitty. This is true. People can also be shockingly good. People are usually both shitty and good in varying degrees. In my years as a teenager through my years as a young adult, I had too much cynicism, too much pessimism. I had ideas about what the world was, and I was wrong. I'm probably still wrong today as an adult, but at least I've learned enough to realize that. I would like to protect my kid from sinking large amounts of time into a game with such negative themes at least until he's old enough to compartmentalize that world properly, or see the satire in it. Teenagers are at high risk for taking on a jaded look at the world, I'm not going to help that happen to mine.
I don't have a hard and fast rules about when my kid will get to play what games. I'm a gamer who knows where to find enough information to make judgement calls as each case comes up. I also know that there are a ton of awesome games a kid can be playing instead of games that force the question of whether or not your kid should be playing it.
I think the more important take-away from discussions on appropriate videogame usage is that parents should ensure the proper context is set for what their kids play (and how much they get to play).
Re: Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
Most religions really have the same message. Be good to each other. The details and names are different. But that's really what it boils down to. I'm sure there will be replays talking about all of the bad things that religion has caused over the years. But most of those have to do with power mad people twisting the main message to meet their own perverse goals
In summary, you've never actually read the texts but imagined what it is you would like them to say. Religions aren't egalitarian and universally generous, they're highly exclusive and competitive. My religion is right, everyone else's is wrong. Good things will happen to you if you follow my religion, bad things will happen to you if you don't. Spread my truths and stop the unbelievers from spreading their lies. It's all different versions of carrot and stick, not just carrots and not for everyone. They all sell you on a similar story whether it's Heaven, Jannah (Islamic Heaven), Nirvana (Buddhism) or Vaikuntha (Hinduism) but while you don't care which religion, the religions do. If you don't accept Jesus Christ as your savior you're still going to hell and that's not really open for interpretation. We just like to quietly ignore those parts that aren't palatable in a multicultural world.