My Four-Year-Old Son Plays Grand Theft Auto

[GGT]

OG, despite your apparent obsession with games, and the amount of time you spend playing them, not everyone shares your interests or, uhm, proclivity. It's disingenuous of you to say parents are being lazy or disinterested in their children because they're not like YOU. (I'm also not going to try and trump your ace by getting into your personal parenting style or priorities, one better than the other, so stop trying the same with me.)

I'm more than willing to have a discussion that goes beyond defending my POV. I still see no suggestions from you about ratings, for other parents or non-gamers to use, for the best interest of their kids. Crow managed to do it, admitting that play-throughs may not always be possible, and assessing games is more complicated than ever. But all I'm seeing from you is being contrary and condescending. Not sure what that chip is on your shoulder, or what purpose it's serving.

This isn't a computer game, but a computer conversation.

[Ominous Gamer]

I was unaware reviews and youtube videos required users and readers to be gamers and I'm pretty sure I've already said rating scales were bad and need done away, not replaced.
You don't have to be a gamer to understand whats in a game, just like you don't have to be a race car driver to understand how fast that go kart he wants can go, or a marksman to understand how dangerous paintball and BB guns are.

Nice dodge by the way.

[Catgrrl]

Let's be honest: Ratings are really there as a cover-your-ass measure so when parents complain, all can be said is, Hey there's a rating on that box!

I'm okay with there being ratings. I do find some of the random crap they write under the ratings to be bogus. Comic mischief?

Not that many parents look at the ratings even to this day. So, like every other "warning" label that goes ignored, it's all about covering yourself as a company.

[GGT]

I was unaware reviews and youtube videos required users and readers to be gamers and I'm pretty sure I've already said rating scales were bad need done away, not replaced.
You don't have to be a gamer to understand whats in a game, just like you don't have to be a race car driver to understand how fast that go kart he wants can go, or a marksman to understand how dangerous paintball and BB guns are.

Nice dodge by the way.

Who posts the reviews matters, ditto for youtubes. You want to do away with ratings ala ESRB, that's clear.

You assume that what's out there is fine now, because you say so? Well that's just not good enough. Especially since more games will come and go, with lightning speed, and the technology will evolve faster than any parent (or librarian) will be able to manage. Surely you noticed that the AAP says they have to define a "new normal" almost constantly? Or don't you think pediatricians really care about kids.....

People do need a more reliable way to get an idea of what they're buying/giving. It needs to be something any player, parent, grandparent, teacher, friend or relative will find consistent and helpful. We don't have that now. And you damn well know it. Dodge that.

[Ominous Gamer]

Let's be honest: Ratings are really there as a cover-your-ass measure so when parents complain, all can be said is, Hey there's a rating on that box!

I'm okay with there being ratings. I do find some of the random crap they write under the ratings to be bogus. Comic mischief?

Not that many parents look at the ratings even to this day. So, like every other "warning" label that goes ignored, it's all about covering yourself as a company.

I wouldn't even take it that far. Its pretty much a system forced on the publishers so that the B&M stores can cover their asses. When Take-Two offered to buyback copies of San Andreas when it was discovered you could take part in simulated clothed sex, but only with an unauthorized 3rd party mod, only 2767 people filed for a refund. That game has sold over 21 million copies to date.

[Catgrrl]

I love it when I bought God of War 2 for my brother last Christmas, and the register lady asked me if I was buying this for a minor (Best Buy). I said it's for my little brother-he's 25.

She laughed and said she has to ask. I don't know if that was company policy or just that store.

[Ominous Gamer]

You still haven't addressed the original issue GGT, and you're not even covering new ground anymore.

Who posts the reviews matters, ditto for youtubes. You want to do away with ratings ala ESRB, that's clear.

How is this relevant to the conversation? Playthrough videos are pretty self explanatory, and yes you have to find a source of information you are comfortable with. Again, thats true for every and any interest a child could have.

You assume that what's out there is fine now, because you say so? Well that's just not good enough.

What are you defining with "that"? This doesn't make any sense.

Especially since more games will come and go, with lightning speed, and the technology will evolve faster than any parent (or librarian) will be able to manage. Surely you noticed that the AAP says they have to define a "new normal" almost constantly?

If anything this is a case against allowing a centralized body decide what is and isn't decent. They are reacting to how society is already acting.

People do need a more reliable way to get an idea of what they're buying/giving. It needs to be something any player, parent, grandparent, teacher, friend or relative will find consistent and helpful. We don't have that now.

and this justifies the ESRB....how?

[littlelolligagged]

This thread is like watching dogs chase their own tails.

[Ominous Gamer]

I love it when I bought God of War 2 for my brother last Christmas, and the register lady asked me if I was buying this for a minor (Best Buy). I said it's for my little brother-he's 25.

She laughed and said she has to ask. I don't know if that was company policy or just that store.

Consumerist.com has horror stories of stores not selling to adults because they think the purchase may be for a minor. If it weren't for the fact that I get $50 games for $12, I wouldn't shop at Target at all. I hate that they're swipping my license just so I can purchase a game. I'm carrying a baby, I've got a Discover card in one hand and car keys in the other, and you want to find a way to deny my purchase because of age? Really?

This thread is like watching dogs chase their own tails.

hush, this is the most exciting thread tonight

[GGT]

You still haven't addressed the original issue GGT, and you're not even covering new ground anymore.

How is this relevant to the conversation? Playthrough videos are pretty self explanatory, and yes you have to find a source of information you are comfortable with. Again, thats true for every and any interest a child could have.

What are you defining with "that"? This doesn't make any sense.

If anything this is a case against allowing a centralized body decide what is and isn't decent. They are reacting to how society is already acting.

and this justifies the ESRB....how?

How convenient. You say people need to find a source of information they're comfortable with, even if it's the current (lacking) ESRB system. Then you diss the ESRB without offering an viable alternative. Play throughs and youtubes are not sufficient. I can use wiki or google to lead me to blogs or gamer sites pronouncing how fine it is for four year olds to play GTA San Andreas. Even though groups of parenting experts would disagree.

It's not even about "decency" as you suggest, but age-appropriate games. Is this how you'd address questions from parents, as a Librarian and someone who teaches IT classes? Really?

[GGT]

This thread is like watching dogs chase their own tails.

Then by all means, post your opinion as an MD specializing in Pediatrics.

[Ominous Gamer]

How convenient. You say people need to find a source of information they're comfortable with, even if it's the current (lacking) ESRB system.

Maybe comfortable is the wrong word. Since this thread is an obvious failure in that regard. Maybe its more along the lines of parents being able to understand when they've getting a full and complete picture of a product.

comfortable with, even if it's the current (lacking) ESRB system. Then you diss the ESRB without offering an viable alternative.

ESRB is not viable, my apologies if you think I suggested that. Parents paying attention and taking time to understand their children seems pretty viable.

Play throughs and youtubes are not sufficient.

Why? They provide the most complete and balanced take on a game. The source is the game itself.

Is this how you'd address questions from parents, as a Librarian and someone who teaches IT classes? Really?

Librarians and teachers are "designed" to allow the students and interviewees to find the path to their own answers. That usually requires the interviewees to be able to complete whats called a reference interview to find the root issue.
Again, as we see here, sometimes both parties are able to address whats being asked, and sometimes people aren't able to address what they need to address. This is really common when the college kids come in looking for research to understand a subject and don't understand that they're leaning so hard to one side they've blocked out other opinions and the questions that lead to them.

[GGT]

Maybe comfortable is the wrong word. Since this thread is an obvious failure in that regard. Maybe its more along the lines of parents being able to understand when they've getting a full and complete picture of a product.

ESRB is not viable, my apologies if you think I suggested that.

Threads do take tangents and curves. I don't consider this thread a failure. Maybe Ziggy does, though.

Why? They provide the most complete and balanced take on a game. The source is the game itself.

Repeating: not all people can play through snippets of a game, let alone get the full picture by doing so. Crow recognized that, why can't you? Aunt Mildred in Milwaukee may end up sending a totally whacky game either far above or below the child's age level (and no, gifts are not always something people ask parents about first....)

Librarians and teachers are "designed" to allow the students and interviewees to find the path to their own answers. That usually requires the interviewees to be able to complete whats called a reference interview to find the root issue.
Again, as we see here, sometimes both parties are able to address whats being asked, and sometimes people aren't able to address what they need to address.

You're saying that if Aunt Mildred came to your library asking about fun, popular, yet appropriate games for her four year old niece/nephew, you'd have her complete a reference interview first? When her root issue is giving a video game that the four year old will enjoy and will be age-appropriate? Then you'd send her off to youtube to play loads of play-throughs, and weed through thousands of opinion posts? And if she comes back addressing what YOU think is the wrong issue, you just declare Aunt Mildred stupid?

[Ominous Gamer]

Repeating: not all people can play through snippets of a game, let alone get the full picture by doing so. Crow recognized that, why can't you? Aunt Mildred in Milwaukee may end up sending a totally whacky game either far above or below the child's age level (and no, gifts are not always something people ask parents about first....)

Are you replying to 2 separate posts here?
Maybe you're not understanding. I'm not telling anyone to play through the game. I'm saying that its already been done and either videoed or written up.
I'm already covered the part of parents playing interference. Is that why you waited several posts to bring it up again?

You're saying that if Aunt Mildred came to your library asking about fun, popular, yet appropriate games for her four year old niece/nephew, you'd have her complete a reference interview first? When her root issue is giving a video game that the four year old will enjoy and will be age-appropriate?

Child's interest?
Siblings?
Maybe even have to get into where the child lives to understand how the parents are. Age appropriate is a moving target, based on everything from the child's development to how conservative the parents are.

Then you'd send her off to youtube to play loads of play-throughs, and weed through thousands of opinion posts? And if she comes back addressing what YOU think is the wrong issue, you just declare Aunt Mildred stupid?

I'd send her to the appropriate materials to make her own decisions. Since librarians are not in the position to be making decisions for anyone. The reference interview is also ongoing because people are easily distracted. Now if it took 160 interactions and Aunt Mildred still refuses to answer what we are asking in order to help her, yeah I might think she was stupid.

[GGT]

Child's interest?
Siblings?
Maybe even have to get into where the child lives to understand how the parents are. Age appropriate is a moving target, based on everything from the child's development to how conservative the parents are.

Well FINALLY we get to the same place, sorta. The age and development of the child matters first, really more than anything. When parents or relatives aren't cognizant of these things, usually experts like pediatricians or early-ed teachers ARE. They can mention things like fine motor skills, gross motor behavior, age curiosity, pushing limits, normal anxieties, early morality shaping....role modeling and parent bonding....while feeling a subconscious need to please (or test) the parent.

Games, to very young children, are really much more than just games. It's not just a tech issue, but a parenting and child development issue. I laid that all out posts ago.

All we have now is ESRB, plus some subjective things in play throughs or haphazard reviews, or recommendations. We can look at AAP or other expert group reviews too, but the whole thing requires a sophistication and puzzle piecing that Aunt Mildred just gives up on. We can and should do better.

I'll reiterate, just as the OP did: GTA San Andreas is NOT a game for all four year olds. Any parent egging the kid on needs to ask why they're doing it, when/if there's a better alternative for the child.

[Nessus]

After all my posts, how can that be?

That's the real mystery, isn't it.

[GGT]

That's the real mystery, isn't it.

Hello there Nessie. Sarcasm doesn't translate well here, you know. Since you must have missed it.

Is your mood any better yet?

[Nessus]

Again, it's not someone's "mood" that makes conversation difficult when you're mixing fallacies with a hefty dose of moving goal posts

[GGT]

Again, it's not someone's "mood" that makes conversation difficult when you're mixing fallacies with a hefty dose of moving goal posts

Actually, Crow and Cat and OG and I had a very productive and civil discussion after all. We didn't change the world, but we had a nice time.

Find another thread or person to piss on, Nessie.



(Oh yeah, and if you just want to pick on me personally, there's a new thread about Crazi-Ness that might suit your needs just fine.)

[Ziggy Stardust]

Crow and Cat and OG and I had a very productive and civil discussion after all. We didn't change the world, but we had a nice time.

Darwin wept.

[Nessus]

Don't you mean pissed

On someone

"personally"

Ughhhhh

[Ominous Gamer]

Games, to very young children, are really much more than just games. It's not just a tech issue, but a parenting and child development issue. I laid that all out posts ago.

and as everyone else posted so long ago, you have yet to lay out why what this child experienced fell outside of this description, and how using 1 game over another can result in an 8 year old talking about murdering whores.
This is a problem when parents raise their children based on the advice of other people. Its not one size fits all, its easily corrupted because of external forces, and the parents themselves do the worst damage because of bad interpretations.

[Knux897]

Games, to very young children, are really much more than just games. It's not just a tech issue, but a parenting and child development issue. I laid that all out posts ago.

All we have now is ESRB, plus some subjective things in play throughs or haphazard reviews, or recommendations. We can look at AAP or other expert group reviews too, but the whole thing requires a sophistication and puzzle piecing that Aunt Mildred just gives up on. We can and should do better.

I'll reiterate, just as the OP did: GTA San Andreas is NOT a game for all four year olds. Any parent egging the kid on needs to ask why they're doing it, when/if there's a better alternative for the child.

This right here is total failure of understanding