My Four-Year-Old Son Plays Grand Theft Auto

The point is that a free-roaming game like GTA leaves it up to the player to decide what to do. (Just like real life!) This little kid wanted to drive around and explore traffic and try being a policeman. An adult player wants to vent his frustrations by driving over people and having adrenaline-pumped car chases. Just because the game presents options and some objectives that are not for kiddy-winks, doesn't automatically mean that the kiddy-wink is immediately exposed to everything of that nature within the game. Again, the child in the blog post was very upset at having caused digital injury. I mean really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Its name is GRAND THEFT AUTO. It's not just a driving game. FFS.

---

A rose by any other name, huh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Then why are you harping on me for having an opinion that opposes the OP parent?

---

Heh. If the article is not making the point that you are opposed to, then you are not having an opinion that opposes the OP parent do you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Then why are you harping on me for having an opinion that opposes the OP parent? It's not a crazy or outrageous thing for parents to state what we think is a bad parenting choice, or what might be a better parental choice. That's what parents DO.

I don't know what your intention was when you posted this. Maybe it was the cute factor you saw as an adult gamer, seeing a little kid playing an adult game. I don't know. But parents probably read it differently. I know I did.

---

The problem I have is that you are trying to set yourself up as the only person who knows what is best, the only person who can decide what is good parenting. It's not the first time you've done this, either.

Once again, I wouldn't have let my kids play it at 4 years old - but it is probably less harmful for a preschooler than it would be for a kid at 9 or 10 who does have a greater understanding - and even then it is a parents job to choose what is best for their children. Censorship is censorship - it is a parents job to decide what they will or will not allow their child, and no one else. This means that I can not allow my kids to play Halo, because I think it is inappropriate, and even tell OG I think he's nutso for allowing it - but saying it's a poor parenting choice? You don't get to decide morals for anyone but yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

Not by much.... :o I'm old enough to be your . . . . older brother.

---

Ancient. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Yeah, well Ocean isn't 4 years old.

---

Ocean just turned 5 a few weeks ago.

Holy fuck, did you just compared a game's programming to the real life blind interactions of people over Xbox Live?
Do you don't understand this gaming thing at all. Any game becomes AO when you put it on Xbox Live. God forbid you end up in a game of Uno on there...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catgrrl

My beef is that he should have his kid classically trained ;) We still have an original Nintendo that works. And a bunch of games. So K will be playing that in the future hopefully. :)

---

I've mentioned that Brandy got me an SNES for our anniversery. Yeah, Ocean plays Super Mario on there more than I do.

Heh, Buddy Boy's (carefully supervised, of course) web searching the other day led him to a website that had all the old Mario games on PC. He bookmarked it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer

Ocean just turned 5 a few weeks ago.

Holy fuck, did you just compared a game's programming to the real life blind interactions of people over Xbox Live?
Do you don't understand this gaming thing at all. Any game becomes AO when you put it on Xbox Live. God forbid you end up in a game of Uno on there...

I've mentioned that Brandy got me an SNES for our anniversery. Yeah, Ocean plays Super Mario on there more than I do.

---

You're deluded if you think all parents have the same standards or teaching style. And it's not just related to game playing. :donkey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

You're deluded if you think all parents have the same standards or teaching style. And it's not just related to game playing. :donkey:

---

Perhaps you should reread that and apply it to yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littlelolligagged

Perhaps you should reread that and apply it to yourself.

---

I do. I also noticed how you put that (carefully supervised, of course) comment about your son. Good luck with that when he gets older. :bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

I do. I also noticed how you put that (carefully supervised, of course) comment about your son. Good luck with that when he gets older. :bored:

---

Luckily for me I'm a bit more tech savvy than you pass yourself off here as being. I'm not particularly worried - and out of my friends and relatives with teens and young adults, none of them have had the sort of massive problems that can happen, simply because they supervise, without trying to be controlling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

You're deluded if you think all parents have the same standards or teaching style. And it's not just related to game playing. :donkey:

---

Did you intend to quote me? I'm not seeing how your post replies to what I was saying, or even how it pertains to me. I'm well aware that parents have different thresholds for what they consider appropriate. I usually find my self being reminded by other parents that I'm far more hands off than what they consider safe or sane.

However I am curious as to why parents react the way they do towards certain items they find offensive. Thats why I asked you what part of this 4 year old playing GTA offended you. You answer: Its GTA. When asked whats wrong with GTA? Your answer is that its called GTA. Would it have been more appropriate if it was titled the "Life and Days of Ms. Fuffy Bunny"?

Now you're taking offense to Modern Warfare. Was it because they get to murder a mall full of civilians? Nope, it was because of how other people acted over the voice chat.

How does it make sense to be offended by a virtual experience because of the actions of physical people?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littlelolligagged

Luckily for me I'm a bit more tech savvy than you pass yourself off here as being. I'm not particularly worried - and out of my friends and relatives with teens and young adults, none of them have had the sort of massive problems that can happen, simply because they supervise, without trying to be controlling.

---

It's not too difficult to be more tech savvy than me. I've never claimed to be anything but a tech moron.

But aren't you the one who never let a non-family member baby sit your kids, because you never trusted anyone outside your family? And you're also divorced, as am I. How do you know what goes on during your kids' visitations with their father?

I don't think you have any place to lecture anyone about being controlling, lolli. :donkey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

How do you know what goes on during your kids' visitations with their father?

---

Whoops...

To OG: I'm not particularly "offended" by any of these games. I do tend to rely on the ratings, as a general rule, but then I also buy mature games and air soft pellets for my kids. Since they can't buy them without my consent. My kids are older now, though. I don't really know how I'd react to a toddler wanting to play mature games, other than saying No. And trying to find something geared toward toddlers. If they got bored then we may ramp it up a bit. I still think toddler games are fine for toddlers, and it's lame to say they're advanced or cute for playing above their age level.

I also wouldn't take a toddler to a PG-13 movie. Having been in theatres with those kids crying or asking loud questions, it's clear why they're rated PG-13.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

It's not too difficult to be more tech savvy than me. I've never claimed to be anything but a tech moron.

But aren't you the one who never let a non-family member baby sit your kids, because you never trusted anyone outside your family? And you're also divorced, as am I. How do you know what goes on during your kids' visitations with their father?

I don't think you have any place to lecture anyone about being controlling, lolli. :donkey:

---

:haha:

Too fucking funny.

You want to take caring for and protecting young children and make it the equivalent of how teens are supposed to be supervised?


Thanks, OG. ;)

I sat here and thought about answering more, and even typed quite a bit, but finally I decided that I see no particular need to disabuse you of your illusions. There's absolutely no point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

To OG: I'm not particularly "offended" by any of these games. I do tend to rely on the ratings, as a general rule, but then I also buy mature games and air soft pellets for my kids. Since they can't buy them without my consent. My kids are older now, though. I don't really know how I'd react to a toddler wanting to play mature games, other than saying No. And trying to find something geared toward toddlers. If they got bored then we may ramp it up a bit. I still think toddler games are fine for toddlers, and it's lame to say they're advanced or cute for playing above their age level.

I also wouldn't take a toddler to a PG-13 movie. Having been in theatres with those kids crying or asking loud questions, it's clear why they're rated PG-13.

---

In a PG 13 movie the child will be exposed to all the content that makes it PG 13. This is not necessarily the case with computer games :|

I'm afraid it's analogy time again, inspired by Nessus, and I think this one's appropriate. I think we all agree that Pulp Fiction is not suitable for 4 year olds. Now I show this youtube clip, from the movie Pulp Fiction to a 4 year old. And I'm going to make the pre-emptive argument in case the intention of making the analogy is misunderstood, of course I know a movie and a game aren't the same thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrGeOHpEGk0

Now the analogy is that it would be wrong for me to show the 4 year old this clip because the movie also features a number of scenes not suitable for 4 year olds. And that's the reasoning that just doesn't make sense to me.

Have a child of your own, then come back and talk. :bored:

None of the other parents in this thread seem to agree with your position, either, or at least the reasoning behind it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Have a child of your own, then come back and talk. :bored:

---

You're free to explain it to someone here who has kids. I'll be observing your explanation in the "having no kids, so can't be reasoned with" corner, and I promise to be quiet.

:coffee:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Have a child of your own, then come back and talk. :bored:

---

Does anyone know what the term for this is? Isn't it something like logic or thought terminators? I can't remember at the moment, but essentially they are phrases or ideas people pull out when faced with the desire to abruptly end a mode of thinking using a non sequitor or specious logic. Other examples include "Think of the children", "You're either with us or against us", "Love it or leave it", "They hate us for our Freedom", etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timbuk2

As Zig asked, what harm do you see as having come to the child. Not what might have come.

---

Harm right now? Apparently none. The thing is saying "it's just a game" doesn't go as far with a 4 y/o as it does with someone older. Real life and "games" are a lot closer together. So yeah, I'd be worried about some small degree of internalization, from the reaction to accidentally running over a woman, grabbing parked cars *least worrisome* and taking those emergency vehicles when their drivers were out of them.The game's interaction is not just "I'm a firefighter" but "I can go out and fight fires now." And it's not like the kid wasn't engaging in any violent behavior in the game. He WAS doing Vigilante missions. Do I think the child is warped for the rest of his life? No, of course not, but there is the possibility that the game can affect him negatively, particularly if he plays it more than this one time with his father watching. Along that same vein I seem to recall that a child that age is still in the range where you have to be worried about how the TV interacts with a young child's need for stimulation.

LOL, I wonder what does more damage though....playing the game yourself or watching your dad scream and cuss at the screen while he's playing. :haha:

Sorry, it had nothing to do with the discussion at hand, but my mind goes off on a tangent quite often. :p

Well, kittycat, while they will learn profanity once they hit kindergarten anyway, it's generally nice for mommy and daddy to avoid it whenever possible.

The good news is that, after the kindergarten trying out the new words you learned, then mommy and daddy get a few years reprieve.

hehe, ya, I've really got to curb my language. Especially when in the car.

Luckily hubby isn't as bad about yelling at the TV as I am. But since I don't have much time yet to get into console games she is safe from my tirades for the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

None of the other parents in this thread seem to agree with your position, either, or at least the reasoning behind it.

---

Also to Ziggy and Illusions: I meant when it's theoretical, "other peoples' kids" vs your own, or children in your charge like being a teacher, you may change your mind about what's an innocent thing, or something to avoid. Only lolli and OG were the other parents posting. Too bad we didn't have teachers or day care workers, or other parents talking about this, too. Oh well.

It's probably related to the group of folks in this forum, predominantly gamers. I can almost guarantee if this was a parenting forum, there'd be more sharing my opinion. ASAIK Pediatric organizations recommend against 4 year olds playing games like GTA, as well as tv shows/movies not rated G, with legitimate reasons behind limiting "virtual violence" exposure. And gamers could at least admit the addictive nature of video games.....often hard enough for adults to control impulses to play for hours on end, let alone a little kid. :coffee:

IMO toddlers should be riding trikes ("real driving"), learning how to share toys in the sand box ("real altruism"), putting Legos together ("real building"), or visiting a fire house ("real role models"). Not playing GTA or other adult virtual games. It's not an outrageous opinion that just popped into my head.

It's inane reasoning stemming from ignorance and hysteria. Of course a "parenting forum" would have people agreeing with you, they're just as hysteric and ignorant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littlelolligagged

:haha:

Too fucking funny.

You want to take caring for and protecting young children and make it the equivalent of how teens are supposed to be supervised?

---

What you quoted didn't say that at all. :confused:

Quote:

---

Thanks, OG. ;)

I sat here and thought about answering more, and even typed quite a bit, but finally I decided that I see no particular need to disabuse you of your illusions. There's absolutely no point.

---

And what's the name for that tactic? Where anyone who disagrees has "illusions"? :donkey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

It's inane reasoning stemming from ignorance and hysteria. Of course a "parenting forum" would have people agreeing with you, they're just as hysteric and ignorant.

---

Now it's ignorance and hysteria, because I don't think it's wise for a FOUR YEAR OLD to play GTA? :haha:

So what age do you think might be too young for games like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

And what's the name for that tactic? Where anyone who disagrees has "illusions"? :donkey:

---

I think everyone here would call it sensible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Now it's ignorance and hysteria, because I don't think it's wise for a FOUR YEAR OLD to play GTA? :haha:

---

No, we think its ignorant when you lack the ability to distinguish between part of a game, and the whole game. Driving around in GTA does not have to be violent unless you purposefully approach driving in a violent manner. I doubt sitting with your child and allowing them to just drive around in GTA would lead them to become violent as you seem to imply. It would be no more violent than a realistic driving simulator.

And I think you underestimate what a precocious 4 year old can do after that.....they learn fast how to turn things on when the house is asleep or parents are distracted. They can't read, but understand pictures and symbols before they're 2. Some can even crack safety features at a young age.

What I'm not understanding is the level of umbrage to my opinion, or why everyone's so eager to say it's fine for a 4 yr old to play (even parts) of GTA---no big deal, no harm no foul! Anyone care to explain that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Too bad we didn't have teachers or day care workers, or other parents talking about this, too. Oh well.

---

:confused:
This is what I went to college for, and Brandy has run a licensed (what a bitch!) daycare out of the rear room for a couple of months now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

it's fine for a 4 yr old to play (even parts) of GTA---no big deal, no harm no foul! Anyone care to explain that?

---

flashback!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer

Me thinks GGT doesn't understand how GTA works.
Yes, in GTA you can murder people, run people over, blow them up. Yes you can have sex with whores for money, then run them over to get your money back. But you have to know such events exist. You have to be of an age that understands that if you take X sized van to a person dressed as Y, then park in an alley that looks like z, the resulting rocking of your van means you're having sex.
Does a 4 year old understand that? No. A 4 year old sees a game filled with people that are no more real the baby dolls she plays with. She sees a maze of streets she can hazardly drive a dump truck down until her character gets reset.

---

This is why I keep asking you what part of the game(s) you find offensive. You're attacking the game as whole, even though a 4 year old would never be able to activate or perform some parts of the game. You hate GTA because its GTA. That makes no sense.

Too bad we didn't have other parents and/or teachers in this thread. You know exactly what I meant, OG. But you still haven't explained why you think GTA is okay for toddlers. Especially since baby dolls, dump trucks or driving games can be geared toward a toddler.

In Brandy's day care, surely she wouldn't think it's just fine to let the 4 year olds play GTA, or parts of it, just because she's supervising. I doubt the parents would agree with that either. Don't you suppose?

It really is too bad there's no people agreeing with you, isn't it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Too bad we didn't have other parents and/or teachers in this thread. You know exactly what I meant, OG.

---

Sure do, selective poll taking,

Quote:

---

But you still haven't explained why you think GTA is okay for toddlers.

---

I've done so twice now. We're however still waiting for what part of GTA you found offensive.

Quote:

---

Especially since baby dolls, dump trucks or driving games can be geared toward a toddler.

---

And baby dolls, dump trucks, and driving games can be geared towards older kids and adults as well. Ever heard of Twisted Metal, or Chucky? Or seen a child use his dump truck to run something over, or play a driving game backwards just to cause havoc.

Nothing is 1 size fits all.

Quote:

---

In Brandy's day care, surely she wouldn't think it's just fine to let the 4 year olds play GTA, or parts of it, just because she's supervising. I doubt the parents would agree with that either. Don't you suppose?

---

Some games are on lock down due to the range and volume of the children in the room, and some aren't. The SNES is in the backroom, and sometimes some of the kids play Primal Rage. A game about dinosaurs and giant monkeys that once upon a time caused Mortal Kombat level outrage.

No, you just keep saying it's no big deal. Not why you think so, or what lead you to believe so.

I don't mind being a minority opinion here, Nessie. Fuzzy appears to agree, But no one can show me why I should change my view.

Pediatricians, child psychologists, and teachers are where I got my information, and since the "jury is still out" on how those games affect young minds, I'll err on the side of caution. They're not being deprived of games or game-playing if limited to age-appropriate ones. There's something to be said for letting a toddler be a toddler, plenty of time to introduce other adult-oriented stuff in life.

Again, where are you guys coming up with your ideas on this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Not why you think so,

---

Lets trying coming from this at another angle, but I do believe Ness already explained it this way.

Games like GTA are open ended, the only react to what the player is able to initiate. If a 4 year old doesn't know about sex, the game isn't going to magically start sexing up their character. If the 4 year old doesn't go around shooting shit up, shit isn't going to randomly start shooting up the player. If someone wants to simple walk around Liberty city, the game allows that.
The game allows the player to explore, grow, and evolve at their own pace.

What you're suggesting, keeping children locked into games that restrict their free thought into predefined paths, I consider that bad.
Yes there are open ended games that ain't as controversal as GTA, but that doesn't make GTA the anti-christ of video games. Having to explain to a kid why they can't do something in a game means that game is holding that child back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer

What you're suggesting, keeping children locked into games that restrict their free thought into predefined paths, I consider that bad.
Yes there are open ended games that ain't as controversal as GTA, but that doesn't make GTA the anti-christ of video games. Having to explain to a kid why they can't do something in a game means that game is holding that child back.

---

:rolleyes: Oh FFS, now I'm restricting free thought and turning GTA into the anti-christ of games? Get a grip, I suggested no such thing.

Media content comes with ratings for a reason. Parents in general use them as a guidleline for a reason. There's nothing wrong or sinister in that.

Quote:

---

The game allows the player to explore, grow, and evolve at their own pace.

---

There are age-appropriate alternatives that achieve the same goals. That's my point. You still can't explain why a 4 year old should be exposed to parts of GTA :bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Parents in general use them as a guidleline for a reason. There's nothing wrong or sinister in that.

---

There is actually a lot wrong with that.
This is mainly reserved for another thread, but this is the lazy way out for parenting. Parents that shop via age tags (even as a general rule) are going off of the opinion of another adult, someone they know nothing about (from family to qualifications), in order to raise their own children.
Again, thats bad.

You may enjoy a movie called This Film Is Not Yet Rated

Quote:

---

You still can't explain why a 4 year old should be exposed to parts of GTA :bored:

---

You're changing the direction now. You took offense because this child was exposed to GTA. You took offense to any child being exposed to GTA. I've asked you why you took offense, and while you still haven't answered, I did answer you question. Why its OK. A child should always be allowed to openly express themselves. Sometimes thats through open ended worlds without limits (which, thanks to guidelines, E games do not allow), sometimes thats with a blank driveway and 3 colors of chalk. Some children grow up more with a heavy sense of technology, while some children enter school not knowing what youtube is.

Should children not be allowed to watch Sesame Street's Youtube channel because other parts of Youtube might expose them to concepts that you are not ready for them to experience?

I already said I wasn't offended! And that my view stems from Pediatricians and child psychologists expressing caution toward very young children being exposed to certain games/movies/activities. And that I have relied on ratings, as many parents do. There's a plethora of age-appropriate games for toddlers that achieve the same types of problem solving driver games that are FUN without using a game like GTA. That's why it's not on pre-schooler or kindergarten play lists. It's not like there aren't alternatives.

I'm not anti-game or anti-technology for young kids. I'm sure as young tech geeks have children, the kiddie genre will explode with even more new things, and that's a good thing. Some video games are now being used to treat autistic or ADHD kids. But parents still need to make decisions and have a good reason to DO something as well as NOT do something, and monitor how much stimulation (and what kind) young kids are exposed to. Media will still be rated, so parents can have that tool.

It's hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube. A 4 yr old who's played GTA with daddy will naturally want to find new levels in that game, or want to watch him play the "adult" parts. He knows they're 'there' and is curious. Games are meant to be moved into by levels, not introduced (as YOU say, with restrictions and boundaries) and then backed away from.

No, a child shouldn't ALWAYS be allowed to openly express themselves. But that's a different topic.