My Four-Year-Old Son Plays Grand Theft Auto

[Timbuk2]

It's not like little tykes cars running an obstacle course, or bumper cars hitting fellow drivers or the wall.

This is the thing.

From what the fella related in the article, it largely was the toddler learning to drive an obstacle course, getting to grips with controlling vehicles in a virtual setting. With the added extension, or motivation, of driving to help people. GTA is an open enough platform with which to do that.

If the father taught his kid in the game to steal a car, drive to the corner, score some smack then go shoot up, it would be a different matter. But he didn't ... soo ...

What he did do is allow his kid free reign in the GTA virtual setting, and it is fascinating to see how that ended up; from 2 points of view;

1. That the child was altruistic, entirely of his own accord and without prompting from Dad
2. That GTA was open enough to allow the child, when given free reign, to be altruistic.

I agree I would be a little uncomfortable with this 'experiment', but it is what it is, and I see no harm as having come to the child now that it has taken place.

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

[GGT]

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

[Ziggy Stardust]

Ah, when all else fail, play the victim card.

So, does this mean you won't answer what part of GTA you specifically found offensive that this 4 year old discovered?

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

That's an adequate response to all the pointsTimbuk has made?

[GGT]

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

That's what makes parenting more than just sperm or egg donors. We're supposed to think ahead about the what ifs, and what might comes. Some err on the side of caution, some err on the side of throwing caution to the wind. For a toddler playing an auto obstacle course, or "being altruistic", problem solving while maneuvering, or tuning fine motor skills, there are age appropriate games geared toward toddlers. GTA isn't one of them.

[Ziggy Stardust]

there are age appropriate games geared toward toddlers. GTA isn't one of them.

You just don't realise no one is making this claim do you?

NOT EVEN THE ARTICLE I POSTED.

[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.

Ocean also has some of those E games as well. Dollar for dollar those of the most buggy and frustrating games in our house. Especially those damn Dora games. She tried playing one last night, twice in 10 minutes she encounter progress killing bugs, one that wouldn't allow her to float on a cloud, and another that sent her walking through the sky until she fell off the map.

[GGT]

You just don't realise no one is making this claim do you?

NOT EVEN THE ARTICLE I POSTED.

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.

[EyeKhan]

You're older than me, aren't you?

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

[GGT]

Yeah, well Ocean isn't 4 years old. No idea what you'll let Scarlett play by the time she's two or four. That will be your call as a parent.

btw I do know how GTA works, because I've got two sons who've played it. I also noticed their language changed after they started playing Modern Warfare on X box live. Their game language started creeping into their real life language. That's another thing parents have to pay attention to, and talk about, and teach. Games aren't all just fun and games anymore.

[Catgrrl]

LOL, you would think they'd fix bugs in children's games, but I guess they don't care because parents will buy anything for their kids. I have a lot to look forward to, eh?

This is a dilemma I ponder over in my own household: we have tons of video games, and many not kid appropriate. Several of the GTA titles, Brutal Legend, etc. Should I hide them, just tell her they are the grownups games? I'm leaning on keeping the child friendly games in her reach, and the others on a high shelf or something.

I've been playing video games since I was 5, when Nintendo came about in the US. Killing Goombas and bombing Ganon. I don't remember being told I couldn't play any games my aunts owned. I guess really the only difference now is that there is more "realism" to games. Back then the violence was in 16 bit and not so gory. Pixelated blood on a 13 inch screen isn't something to balk at I guess.

Ya, maybe the Dad should have tried out a regular racing game (Rad Racer used to be one of my favorites). But, the point of the article was to show that video games alone don't cause the instability and violent nature in a child. If you are teaching your child the difference between real and play, all is well. A Parent teaches their child morals and values. Not a game.

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.

EDIT: And no, K will not play GTA until she reaches double digits if I can help it.

[Nessus]

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.

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

A rose by any other name, huh

[Ziggy Stardust]

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?

[littlelolligagged]

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.

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

Ancient.

[Ominous Gamer]

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...

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.

[littlelolligagged]

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.

[GGT]

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.

[littlelolligagged]

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

Perhaps you should reread that and apply it to yourself.

[GGT]

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.

[littlelolligagged]

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.

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.

[Ominous Gamer]

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

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?

[GGT]

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.

[Ominous Gamer]

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

Whoops...

[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.

[littlelolligagged]

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.

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.

[Nessus]

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

[Ziggy Stardust]

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.



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.

[GGT]

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

[Nessus]

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

[Ziggy Stardust]

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

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.

[Illusions]

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

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.