New game law in California........

[Zor Primus]

I find it funny how someone that admits to beating their kids is advocating famliy values...

Anyway back on topic...games that are extremely violent should not be played by kids under the age of at least 15...dont beleive me? I blame Pitfall Harry for my obsession with swinging over alligators on vines in the Everglades.

Edited October 11, 2005 by Zor Primus

[KingNor]

the problem is ABSOLOUTLY not a vendor issue.

working in the game industry i've met literally dozens of people who've worked at places like EB games.

not a single one of them willingly sold a game to a young kid who wasn't old enough for the rating.

the parents buy these games for their kids. and they actually get angry when the vendor suggests their kid isn't old enouogh for the game.

my friend told me he got this alot:

young kid comes in, "i want [violent videogame]"

friend says "you're not old enough you hve to be 17 to buy it"

kid goes back outside to his parents, SITTING IN THE CAR OUTSIDE WAITING, who then come in and yell at my friend for being an a-hole.

gee i wonder where these kids are getting their values from?

the worst part is that once the parents are there, the vendor can't refuse to sell the game to an adult. the kid sees this kind of behavior and sees that he's rewarded for it.

moral of the lesson, if you're not getting what you want, act more and more violent till you get it.

[Father Jack]

Anyway back on topic...games that are extremely violent should not be played by kids under the age of at least 15...dont beleive me? I blame Pitfall Harry for my obsession with swinging over alligators on vines in the Everglades.

335801[/snapback]

Too true I remember after I played Mech Warrior 2 for the first time I hopped in the giant robot my dad keeps in the shed and took out half the neighborhood.

Seriously though we don't need more laws we need parents who look after their kids. I used to be a manager at a mini golf course, and just about every day we would have parents dump off thir kids for hours on end, (We affectionately called them orphans). About 40% percent of these kids were well behaved, but the rest were little punk asses who you could tell the parents just wanted to get rid of for a few hours. You could also tell with those kids that this was nothing new the parents had probably been doing this for years, spoiling the them, and not giving them any dicipline. That's what I think the problem is. These parents just don't care, give them whatever they want to keep them quiet, and then blame society when something goes wrong.

I was spanked as a child (And paddled and had my mouth washed out with soap). And I turned out fine. As long as parents also explain why the punishment is being given I don't think this should be frowned upon.

In short parents should have the responsibility for their kids upbringing and dicipline, and not society, but cirtainly not the government.

[Metal_Massacre_79]

What I want to know is why does a game like this NEED to exist?

[Metal_Massacre_79]

I was spanked as a child (And paddled and had my mouth washed out with soap).  And I turned out fine.  As long as parents also explain why the punishment is being given I don't think this should be frowned upon.

335811[/snapback]

Amen to that! I was smacked around too, and looking back at my youth I FULLY DESERVED IT! People that don't understand why they are being punished end up saying "I'm never going to do that to MY kids," and then they start accusing everyone else who try to control their children of child abuse.

In all honesty, I feel that video games were a lot more fun when I was younger. Back then games were made to be fun, now it's all just blood and gore.

[JB0]

Too true I remember after I played Mech Warrior 2 for the first time I hopped in the giant robot my dad keeps in the shed and took out half the neighborhood. 

I could never find MY dad's mech.

So I just rode around on my bike and threw newspapers at old people after a round of Paperboy.

I was spanked as a child (And paddled and had my mouth washed out with soap).  And I turned out fine.  As long as parents also explain why the punishment is being given I don't think this should be frowned upon. 

Same here. Well, spanked. No mouth washing.

Of course, it doesn't work on everyone. Spanking my sister only made things worse. She just got pissed.

[Nied]

I was spanked as a child (And paddled and had my mouth washed out with soap).  And I turned out fine.  As long as parents also explain why the punishment is being given I don't think this should be frowned upon. 

Same here. Well, spanked. No mouth washing.

Of course, it doesn't work on everyone. Spanking my sister only made things worse. She just got pissed.

335849[/snapback]

Like I said I don't know if spanking needs to come into the equation just good old fashioned boundary setting. If I did something wrong I got sent to my room, no TV no Video games just myself alone in my room for at least a half hour. You don't need physical repercusions to get a child to understand something's wrong. I see too many parents who just don't do anything (spankings, grounding, whatever) to punish thier kids, they just think "that's my little angel" and let it go.

[JB0]

Like I said I don't know if spanking needs to come into the equation just good old fashioned boundary setting.  If I did something wrong I got sent to my room, no TV no Video games just myself alone in my room for at least a half hour.  You don't need physical repercusions to get a child to understand something's wrong.

I didn't mind my room thjat much, though.

It's as much a matter of knowing your kid as anything else.

  I see too many parents who just don't do anything (spankings, grounding, whatever) to punish thier kids, they just think "that's my little angel" and let it go.

335871[/snapback]

Damn skippy! Beat the parents if their kids are monsters!

[Father Jack]

Damn skippy! Beat the parents if their kids are monsters!

335873[/snapback]

Damn Straight

[Dangaioh]

... In all honesty, I feel that video games were a lot more fun when I was younger. Back then games were made to be fun, now it's all just blood and gore.

I too missed the days when games are fun and involving... now, i just play Lineage II hoping a half naked female dark elf comes walking by most of the night when I drive home from work.

Edited October 12, 2005 by Dangaioh

[Radd]

What I want to know is why does a game like this NEED to exist?

335813[/snapback]

Why do any games NEED to exist? I mean, I know where you're coming from, too many games to centre on gore and violence, or at least are marketed that way. Rather than "mature", I think most of them should be labled "juvenile."

Still, some games are violent and gorey and yet still bring good gameplay to the table. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with that.

In all honesty, I feel that video games were a lot more fun when I was younger. Back then games were made to be fun, now it's all just blood and gore.

Boy, those Mario games. Nothing but T&A with a healthy dose of violence. Nintendogs looks to be more of the same. How about that Ratchet and Clank? Meteos is another one of those violent games kids play these days. Don't get me started on Lumines.

[Druna Skass]

I wonder if we'd still have problems like this if people were reqired to pass a test before they can legaly have a kid.

In all honesty, I feel that video games were a lot more fun when I was younger. Back then games were made to be fun, now it's all just blood and gore.

Yeah games like Metal Gear Solid 3, Naval Ops, and Ace Combat are nothing more than shallow blood and gore games that can't hold a candle to any of the NES games.

Edited October 12, 2005 by Druna Skass

[yellowlightman]

I wonder if we'd still have problems like this if people were reqired to pass a test before they can legaly have a kid.

335974[/snapback]

Yeah, too bad we don't. I mean, facism rocks... worked well for Germany.

[MGREXX]

hmmm.............seems that retailers are scared with this new law. I wonder why?????

Their consience seems to be kicking in or is it the guilt that they feel because they realize that the gig is up and they are going to have to start OBEYING the laws or paying the fines because they KNOW they have not not doing $hit all of these years and now it is going to bite them in their greedy a$$e$. Hmmmm..........

Gamespot article

Edited October 12, 2005 by MGREXX

[Sumdumgai]

Teaching kids with only punishment won't work, it's a proven psychological fact. To teach a kid not to do something, you have to catch them doing whatever undesired behavior, and explain what they should be doing instead.

Yes it's much easier to give them a nice whack on the ass, send them to their room, or take away TV and computer privelages (not rights). But if you only tell them what not to do, and never tell them what they should be doing, you're not setting them any examples to follow.

Example: You don't want your kid to yell and make noise in the supermarket. The kid runs around and screams at the top of his lungs.

Bad way to handle it: Ignore the kid.

Worse way to handle it: Praise the kid because he's your little angel (you spineless dickweed)

Possibly satisfying but not good way to handle it: Bitch-slap the little monster

Good way to handle it: Before it happens, you set down ground rules of how to behave at the supermarket. You lay down the boundaries of what they CAN and can't do. When they break the rules and run around like a drunken hobo screaming, "GLAFF IN TEEFH", you immediately take action. You don't wait to chew them out after leaving the store, you take immediate action or they won't make as strong of a link between action and consequence.

How you handle punishment is up to you. Know your child. Disciplining them doesn't need to be a long severe process. For small kids that are fidgety, making them sit in a corner staring at the wall for a couple minutes is pretty punishing.

Laying boundaries and enforcing them early is the key.

Of course if you suck as a parent and are overly controlling, you're kids won't turn out as great as they could be. If you're like most kids parents nowadays, your child is doomed to be stupid, annoying, and hopefully will take him self out of the gene pool with an action worthy of a Darwin Award.

I like reading the Darwin Awards.

[kanata67]

geeze... now teenagers are going to have to play "hey mister" to get games as well as beer

as for games when we were kids... anybody remember slaughterhouse for genisis?

My favorite had to be "thrill kill" for psx... so absolutely gory it was pulled before it was released based on the promo pics alone . I guess I probably shouldn't have a copy . Which makes me wonder... can you get in trouble for distributing something that technically doesn't exist?

[JsARCLIGHT]

Out of curiosity I did some reading and have found that out of the handful of states that have tried to draft legislation banning sale and rental of video games to minors, 3 out of 5 of them have been deemed unconstitutional and have been taken down with the remainging 2 currently in court pending the same fate.

The similair laws in Washington state, the city of Indianapolis and my own place of residence Saint Louis, Missouri have all been overturned in Federal Appeals Courts due to violations of the 1st amendment. They may have had some court support in the beginning but that support vanished fast with higher courts. Similair laws in Illinois and Michigan are currently in court and facing the same or similair verdicts. The gaming industry is already planning to file suit (if they have not already) in California under the same grounds.

There is already legal precidence set in this instance in three states and by several different courts at the Federal level. Like it or not these laws will most likely eventually be overturned because they are unconstitutional.

Just a few of the Sources (that aren't from Gamestop):

MSNBC Article

C|NET Article

CBLDF Article

[JB0]

hmmm.............seems that retailers are scared with this new law. 

I haven't seen anything expressing fear. Certainly not in that article.

You're a 'tard, BTW.

Edited October 12, 2005 by JB0

[Metal_Massacre_79]

Still, some games are violent and gorey and yet still bring good gameplay to the table. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with that.

335950[/snapback]

SOCOM is violent, but not gorey. You aren't raping hostages or cutting heads off of people, but it does bring great gameplay. Not to mention that it just feels better when you are shooting a terrorist with a .50 cal than it does shooting a cop and stealing a car.

[Druna Skass]

OK if banning the sale of violent games to kids is unconsitutional, then how come the same doesn't apply to porn? Is two lesbians going at it, more "damaging" to a kid than a game like Manhunt?

[JsARCLIGHT]

The same DOES apply to porn... Federal judges on several occasions have thrown out porn laws at both a state and federal level for violations of the first amendment. Child porn is a special category in that it takes advantage of minors (and invokes molestation laws) but adult porn, much like movies in the US, is self-regulated under an outdated ruling from the supreme court from the eary '70s reguarding "public obscenity" (anyone here watch the movie "The People Vs. Larry Flint"?). There are very few laws on the books reguarding porn (that is not kiddie porn) and most deal with it as "public obscenity" because once again it is a matter of the first amendment. If you give a kid porn you are not breaking any porn laws, you are breaking a the law of contributing to the delinquency of a minor... an outdated law that has had trouble getting "updated" due to the first amendment.

Heck, the lion's share of this country's prohibitory laws stem from decades ago and are almost all based on "morality" and "public obscenity" laws from the 1920's and earlier. These laws skirt the first amendment in the same way that you can't yell FIRE in a crowded theater... you can have all the hardcore shizer barnyard porn you want as long as you do not publicly display it and in turn infringe on the rights of OTHERS.

Edited October 12, 2005 by JsARCLIGHT

[Nightbat]

How you handle punishment is up to you.  Know your child.  Disciplining them doesn't need to be a long severe process.

335981[/snapback]

No, but it's more fun to see them squirm and kiss-ass to get out of their punishment

Let them clean up the shed, your car, paint the house, unclog the toilet

and refill your Bloody Mary while you're enjoying a comfortable day in the sun

Edited October 12, 2005 by Nightbat

[anim3vboi]

So it seems a point of opinion of whose to blame, which is retailers or parents. I think its both. And i think you guys thoroughly discussed that. What i did not agree with at ALL was Hikuro's statment about being the KID'S fault? If you look into child psychology it clearly shows that children dont have rational thinking until much later. Thats why you always hear kids argueing with the most farfetched rationing. Or how parents say " Do as I say, not as I do" thats a load of BS. Kids emulate YOU the parents and everything else they see. To them, Reality and fantasy is one and the same thing.

Anyway about retailers and parents. I think its a step up to regulating the use of mature games. Sure theres loop holes, but when is any law air tight? If it will HELP, then im all for it. And i agree with everyone else. Parents SHOULD watch their kids. But lets face it. Some parents dont DESERVE to be parents, and just treat their kids like crap. And some parents work hard hours just to make ends meet, that they dont have time to watch their kids. Its a long chain of responsibility that could be passed from parents , to uncle/aunts/ to siblings, and you seriously cant make any laws forcing parents, or anyone else down the ladder to watch their kids more with so much conjecture and circumstances. You have to understand the government doesnt work all that efficiently, and cant always come out with an ideal solution. But just take it as it is. A step in the right direction. The law punishing retailers is a GOOD step up. thats my 2 cents.

[Metal_Massacre_79]

Yes, but the parent(s) should be held accountable too if their child claims that a game or movied became a motive for a crime. My son is only 4-1/2 and is never allowed to play unsupervised on the PS2 or the computer unless it's a game like Spongebob or Spyro. I think the bigger problem with raising children is that most parents don't want to get involved in their child's life. They think that the schools will teach them everything they need.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Games shouldn't be treated any differently to books, movies, music or other literature.

No need for new laws and restrictions.

The creators should have the right to freedom of expression.

Responsibility should rest on the parents of the child. Even if the parent is not at fault for what thier child does, they are still responsible for that child. The government will not raise them for you. The parents should be aware of what it was like when they were a rebellious teenager going behind thier parents backs to sneak around with thier friends when they thought they werent watching.

The criminals who murder and kill look for a scapegoat once they get caught and then try to trick the public into believing the game made them do whatever crime they commited. When it works they are laughing thier asses off at how easy it is to convince people they are innocent of any wrong-doing.

Please don't help criminals like that get off easy by making excuses for them.

And parents who sue the companies who had nothing to do with what these individuals do, money is not going to bring your child back. If anything the more the media blows the violence in games out of proportion, (which has no effect on what you do in reality, it is just a game) the more notoriety the criminal gets. They probably read the papers and see that thier acts are getting the attention, and purposely choose to do whatever they can to get in the paper - They are probably thinking, "hey if I blame this videogame I can get off easier and still continue to commit these murders". Getting the attention is probably thier reward.

Remember another thing: even if kids can't get the games by purchasing them, they can still access that game through an adult who will buy it for them,... or from an adult who has kids and will have access to his dad's games. These restrictions won't actually achieve anything in stopping children seeing the violent images. All it will do is make it so that the parent who is not at home 24/7 to watch thier kid, have thier kid be more sneaky about playing the restricted game. The fact that it is forbidden from them by thier parents, makes it all the more enticing. This is how children think. "If I can't have it, it must be something good I am missing out on." Maybe not all kids would think this way but you must keep this in mind if you have a child who you know you can't trust 100% based on thier past history. I swear if you disipline them when they are young, they will grow up in adulthood to thank you for giving them whatever guidance and passing whatever values on to them to help them in future. Like what someon else mentioned kids will mimmick your behaviour, so set a good example. When they grow up and forced to face the real world that's when you can relax your rules.

Kids will always be ahead of thier adult parents where knowledge of a certain game or technology is involved. If a teen is determined enough to get access to a violent game that his parent doesn't want him to see, they will eventually find a way.

It's not a case of whether restrictions and stuff is a good idea (I must admit it sounds good on paper), but whether it will actually work in practice. (this is where I am skeptical. I know as a child my own parents let me watch violent movies, and I have grown up without any criminal history - each child and each parent is unique in how they want to raise thier kids)

So, no, I don't think anything will change, just that these restrictions will just make the creators of these violent games, more scared to keep making them due to the belief that they could probably make more if they made a censored version of thier violent game. (as opposed to one which isn't censored and only appeals to the smaller market)

So like what happened with Aliens vs Predator movie, you might see some last minute butchering of the original to suit as wide an audience as possible to allow the little 13 year old kids to see the movie. This can destroy my enjoyment of the product imo (I'm against censorship) because like what another guy mentioned there are many good games that also happen to be violent. (but they do not rely on the violence to be enjoyable) They are not trying to be juvenile but in fact just trying to be realistic in how damage to a human body should look, based on the kind of weapons in the game. (example seeing a burning body after using a flame thrower on a person, or having a limb seperate from a grenade explosion which in real life would happen etc) Sure that is not necessary but the detail can immerse you into the game more when you see the effects of the weapon.

Edited October 14, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Project Phoenix]

hmmm.............seems that retailers are scared with this new law. 

I haven't seen anything expressing fear. Certainly not in that article.

You're a 'tard, BTW.

336042[/snapback]

I second that motion.

I would like to move that we ban MGTroll from the boards on the basis that he is:

a) A child beater

b) A retarded Troll

c) A happy person who watches Homotech

Thank you.

[JB0]

hmmm.............seems that retailers are scared with this new law. 

I haven't seen anything expressing fear. Certainly not in that article.

You're a 'tard, BTW.

336042[/snapback]

I second that motion.

I would like to move that we ban MGTroll from the boards on the basis that he is:

a) A child beater

b) A retarded Troll

c) A happy person who watches Homotech

Thank you.

336497[/snapback]

And I second THAT motion.

[Skull Leader]

I'll third it and drink to it!

[sabretooth]

i propose that we change the last point to "chocolate thief" ,"poo stabber" or the every popular "verbose bloated shitpile that feeds on errant feces and his own male ejaculate"

it just sounds classier

[Sumdumgai]

i propose that we change the last point to "chocolate thief" ,"poo stabber" or the every popular "verbose bloated shitpile that feeds on errant feces and his own male ejaculate"

336583[/snapback]

Ewwwwww.

You don't need guidance Anakin, I see you becoming the most psychotic of all Jedi.

[reddsun1]

i propose that we change the last point to "chocolate thief" ,"poo stabber" or the every popular "verbose bloated shitpile that feeds on errant feces and his own male ejaculate"

it just sounds classier

336583[/snapback]

Yowzers! When you guys decide to take a disliking to somebody, you really dislike them! Tough crowd, tough crowd!

[JB0]

i propose that we change the last point to "chocolate thief" ,"poo stabber" or the every popular "verbose bloated shitpile that feeds on errant feces and his own male ejaculate"

it just sounds classier

336583[/snapback]

Yowzers! When you guys decide to take a disliking to somebody, you really dislike them! Tough crowd, tough crowd!

336621[/snapback]

Aww, c'mon. He's earned every bit of it.