Gaming Rant

Absolam

Illkillya wrote:

No, they aren't. The parents who walk into your Irish game shop and specifically ask if its OK for the kid are NOT the same ones that start a riot when theres a bit of bad press. You are generalising so much in your rant, you're missing the fact that those parents are a DIFFERENT SPECIES.


Please do not tar decent Irish parents who understand the way things are, with the same brush as those other freaks, because your rant applies to a very very very [....] very small minority of adults in Ireland.

I think Flogens point is that it is the parents who don't take responsibility for monitoring their children in the first place that are up in arms when they believe that child has been unduly influenced by a product such as a game or movie.
Responsible parents who make an informed decision when educating / entertaining their children don't then try to abdicate responsibility to an anonymous third party manufacturer when they have problems with their children.

rainbow kirby

Prior Of Taize wrote:

The problem with Game is that the staff are complete and utter assholes...

Oh, be nice.

frodi

Prior Of Taize wrote:

It is right to not sell 18+ games to under 18's...

The problem with Game is that the staff are complete and utter assholes...

They must have asked you for ID then!
I find most of the staff in gaming place ok. Most of the time I prefer to get them off the net anyway. No ID reqd. (OK so you have to use a credit card!)

monument

Prior Of Taize wrote:

The problem with Game is that the staff are complete and utter assholes...

Never mind about banning games… Do you want to be banned?

Personal insults are not tolerated here. Read the charter!

monument

frodi wrote:

I think that some of the ratings are a bit of a joke. I've let my 10 year old son play GTA VC (belonged to a 10 y.o. friend of his) I watched them as they played. They were both well able to differinitate between real life violence and cartoon violence. I saw a lot worse violence in Lord of the Rings which was 12PG. A lot comes down the the kid who knows the difference between games/films/cartoon and real life. I think that it also lets him work out his natural aggression on the game 9new controller every three months or so) rather than on his siblings.

When the the censor’s office is looking at the two, they see something like this…

(note: this is all just possibly what they might see; the IFCO wasn’t publishing this kind stuff online at the time of LOTR, and they don’t publish such data from games; it's all guess work...)

Lord of the Rings

Violence - Moderate
Drugs - None
Sex / Nudity - None
Language - None/Mild

Other/Comments:


GTA

Violence - Strong
Drugs - Strong
Sex / Nudity - Moderate/Strong
Language - Strong

Other/Comments: set in adapted real world cities, the ability for random acts of violence, the ability for acts of violence towards police officers, prostitution, gang violence, glamorising gangs/violence/prostitution etc etc etc

cHilliSheep wrote:

You most deffo are an evil bitch, im sorry but id hit you if it was me in that situation..

And they say games dont cause violence?

stevenmu

monument wrote:

Never mind about banning games… Do you want to be banned?

Personal insults are not tolerated here. Read the charter!

That brings up a good point, instead of banning games or films it would be much easier and more effective to ban idiots who think it's ok to copy their favourite game or film.

frodi

And they say games dont cause violence?

There was violence, drugs and sex in this world long before PS2 or films. How did games cause this violence? The games are a mirror to society not the cause.

evad_lhorg

rainbow kirby wrote:

Oh, be nice.

yes lets be nice. i know im not an asshole i know kirby isnt an assh9ole and ok flogen is a bit of an asshole but hes still cool. muwahahahha only jokin.

impr0v

frodi wrote:

I think that some of the ratings are a bit of a joke. I've let my 10 year old son play GTA VC (belonged to a 10 y.o. friend of his) I watched them as they played. They were both well able to differinitate between real life violence and cartoon violence. I saw a lot worse violence in Lord of the Rings which was 12PG.

As is the case with all ratings, but especially the case with games I think, the 18 tag has a large safety factor built in, i.e. the censors office know that 17 and 16 year olds are going to get their hands on it, but by certifying it as 18+ they will keep the majority of 10, and 12 year olds from getting their grubby little mitts on it without running the idea past at least one parent.

Dont be at yourself

I've been experiencing this whole phenomenon over the weeked too. It's quite irritating, but there's nothing more a sales assistant can really do than point out what the game is about when approached by a parent on behalf of their kid. I must say though, that this irritation is balanced out by being able to tell all those lovely little darlings that they can't have GTA unless they go get their mammy.

As a further point of discussion:

Am I correct that GTA: San Andreas doesn't carry a legally binding 18+ rating? Isn't it only one of those PEGI ratings? Surely that's a bit ridiculous for a game of that nature, effectively leaving it up to the retailers to enforce the rating. It's not going to be an issue for the moment, but only because retailers can sell out their stock in a few hours while refusing as many 14 year old skangers as the shops will hold. But a few weeks down the line, what's to stop them selling games like these to kids? Retailers holding the responsibility of moral guardian isn't very well thought-out, surely.

honru

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Am I correct that GTA: San Andreas doesn't carry a legally binding 18+ rating?

It does. Most 18s games garner the film censor rating, possibly to further emplify the nature of the game. All the copies of San Andreas I've seen have an 18s BBFC rating on the cover.

Dont be at yourself

Ah, my mistake. The box didn't spend much time in my hands

monument

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Am I correct that GTA: San Andreas doesn't carry a legally binding 18+ rating? Isn't it only one of those PEGI ratings? Surely that's a bit ridiculous for a game of that nature, effectively leaving it up to the retailers to enforce the rating. It's not going to be an issue for the moment, but only because retailers can sell out their stock in a few hours while refusing as many 14 year old skangers as the shops will hold. But a few weeks down the line, what's to stop them selling games like these to kids? Retailers holding the responsibility of moral guardian isn't very well thought-out, surely.

Ireland has subscribed to PEIG, games are still sent to the censors in each country as provided in law (described below for Ireland/UK) – it looks as if the UK are the only PEIG member to keep the their censor’s 18+ logo.

Here’s something on the subject, I….err… made earlier…

Irish Film Censor, possible extended remit - Justice Minister

Talking at the publication of a survey on parents’ views of film age ratting, Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, said he was examining the Irish Film Censor Office’s remit of the classification of games.

The survey by the Ifco and the market research company Lansdowne revealed that parents are most concerned with ‘drugs/drug taking’ with 83 percent saying it ‘very’, and 14 percent saying it was ‘fairly’ important in the rating of films. It was followed by violence (75/20), racial reference (65/25), underage drinking at school (59/35), sexual activity/dialog (57/35), and anti-social behaviour (55/37) – “bad” language, horror, nudity, drinking, and smoking, all fell below 50 percent in the ‘very’ important range.

The recently changed games classification system is still for the most part voluntary, in 15 European countries under the control Pegi, unless according to the IFCO a game is “deemed prohibitable” (sic).

In Ireland, and the UK, computer games only have to be submitted to the respective censor if they contain certain content (- mainly when such could incite a person to crimes, hatred against a group of people, or when they contain obscene or indecent matter, or gross violence or cruelty towards humans or animals).

The website of the British Board of Film Classification notes, “Because most video games do not realistically depict humans or animals, they are exempt, but many video game distributors prefer to submit their games to the Board for classification in borderline cases”.

McDowell said had more concern of children’s exposure to the internet, then multiplex cinemas. Surprising, for some, he stated, “I don’t think there is much you can do in relation to the internet, because by definition it is a very open medium”, on the subject of parental control “It isn’t for Government to control or regulate access to the internet”.

The UK based publishers’ group Elspa maintain that around 90% of games are exempt from legal classification. Indeed, the majority of games are not as violent as Grand Theft Auto, Doom 3, or Manhunt – they just happen to sell extremely well, and brilliant for certain newspapers on slow news days.

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

Pharcyde

I stuck two bangers in my cats eye sockets last night then chopped it's head off after seeing it done on "Itchy & Scratchy" in one of yesterdays numerous Simpsons episodes screened at 6pm; 3 hours before the watershed.

Is it just me or is it strange that no one has ever campaigned for Homer & Co. to be taken off the air? Or Tom and Jerry, the Roadrunner etc..

With regard to the Trevor McDonald show tonight, did you see the mohter of those two red-necks; either drunk or stoned, or both! Case in point. They failed to point that the case taken against R* North was thrown out purely on the basis that the 14 and 16 year olds shouldn't have had the game in the first place!

Does anyone think R* will be commended for including in San An, the importance of cardiovascular excersice and weight training in order to maintain a healthy lifestyle?

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

Smellyirishman

Bah! had a HUGE post written but deleted it, basically...

I am old enough to deciede what I want(17) it is not the governments choice to make for me.
Kids are going to get it if they want and the kids that are trouble makers will *more than likely* have parents that wont care what they are buying(or know its GTA:SA and cant wait to play it themselves)

Yes, the parents should stop thier kids playing violent games if they going to complain.
Yes, people should be warned that it is violent.

However, I should not be prevented from choosing what I want to buy, just because somebody else has decieded I am too young for it.

(Nah, this hasnt come off at all how I wanted! Oh well, get a good nice sleep before my mammoth gaming session with GTA tommorrow, then go and shoot up my school, I mean, attend my lectures)

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

Pharcyde

Out of the how many millions of GTA III / VC sold aound the world - TWO incidents are said to have been infuenced by the game?

If you're capable of beating your mate to death with a hammer in the first place, video games should be the last place you want to start looking for answers!

As in the case of the two hillbillies in the states, how did they get their dads guns in the first place?

Smellyirishman

smiaras wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Exactly, Finally, someone understands me.

But seriously, there is a BIG difference between cars,drugs,murder and a freakin game!

Well, ill have it tomory, so watch out world, I may just shoot you, oh wait, cant get a gun, eh, ill beat you up, oh wait, im under 10stone, I`ll eh, YES, I`ll knock you over, oh no wait, I cant drive, or rob cars, I`ll eh.... I`ll..... I`ll, eat till I get sick?:eek:

flogen

Illkillya wrote:

When I was 17 I watched Rated 18 movies. Unless you're a freak, you won't be stealing a Cossie and trying to mow down a line of Hare Krishnas after playing a video game. Most parents who allow their children to buy these games realise that their kids aren't retarded sheep, and a violent video game isn't a big deal for the average Irish teenager. This does not imply that they are lazy or ignorant, on the contrary... I'd have much less respect for the parents who don't allow their normal 17 year old to play GTA.

As has been said, an 18's cert is there to stop young kids, its pretty much known that 17 year olds and 16 year olds are going to get their hands on it, if they changed the rating to 17's, then the 16 year olds would be in your shoes, if they brought it down to 16's... well you get the point. Anyway, I'm sure most parents don't mind their 17 year old playing SA or watching an 18's film, to be honest I don't care if they don't mind their 7 year old watching an 18's movie or playing SA, they should just know why that product is 18's first and make the decision for the right reasons (i.e, they feel their child is mature enough to view the product without consequence or they feel the product isn't as bad as the rating suggests etc.) rather than the wrong reasons (i.e. I'm too lazy to take care of my child, let TV do it, or I don't want my kid to moan so I better shut them up with this product). They should also understand and be happy with any possible consequences of product, and not feel the need to blame anyone else if things were to turn ugly.

No, they aren't. The parents who walk into your Irish game shop and specifically ask if its OK for the kid are NOT the same ones that start a riot when theres a bit of bad press. You are generalising so much in your rant, you're missing the fact that those parents are a DIFFERENT SPECIES.

The parents who walk into your shop allow their kids to watch the Simpsons. Their kids are allowed to say 'damn'. Next time the parents ask about the 18's game, ask them if they PERSONALLY were up in arms over manhunt. They will say wtf is manhunt. So many Americans parents freak out when their kids eat cocopops, because the sugar content will make him go berserk. These parents ban their kids from the Simpsons, but they are NOT the same people who you talk about in your rant. These are the parents whos kids buy Manhunter off their next door neighbour secretly.

Please do not tar decent Irish parents who understand the way things are, with the same brush as those other freaks, because your rant applies to a very very very [....] very small minority of adults in Ireland.

I'm sorry but I know from the way these parents I'm ranting about act that they don't really care. They just want to shut their child up, or they dont even consider the implications before purchasing, when they are told explicitly by staff that a game is ultra-violent and contains pretty much every crime you can think of, and yet they still buy it for their 10 or 12 year old. The fact that they have to ask at the counter about the content of a game is bad enough IMO, if I had a kid who wanted me to buy an adults product I'd most certainly know everything about it before I even set foot in the store.

And as I said, I'm sure there are plenty of parents who weight the issues up and make their decision, and that's fine, that's their business really. I'm sure they made that decision for decent reasons and won't jump to blame anyone else after anything bad happens.
You seem to think I'm ranting about clever parents who actually give a crap... you missed the point tbh.

As for smellyirishman, we've all been almost 18 and been pissed off at not being able to do 18 year old things, but as I said earlier, a line has to be drawn, and I think 18 is about as good as it can get for these things (some people would even need a few years extra! )

flogen

Smellyirishman

Flogen: I agree, but still I WANTY, I WANTY, WAH WAH :rolleyes:

Maybe there should be a test to deciede if the limit should be dropped for you? Like if your a knacker you are immediatly limited to push bikes and chopping karts for transport. And they definitly cant have kids.

Jammer

I'm 17, have played GTA:SA for a couple of hours, and i don't feel influenced to go and beat up prostitutes or join some gang and shoot people. During the summer, on holidays, i consumed a fair amount of alchol and commited no acts of violence, did no harm to myself or others, nor did i disturb or disrupt anybody elses night. I feel that i should be able to buy 18's games, goto 18's films and get into 18+ clubs on a friday and saturday night. But i cant. Its the law, so i deal with it.

As for parents letting their kids play it, i don't think its right to let an 11/12 year old kid see someone punch someone in a car and say something along the lines of "get out of the car m*ther fu*ker"...granted there may be worse said walking down henry street on a wednesday morning, or on itchy and scratchy, but it doesnt make it right.

I first played the original GTA behind my parents back, and when they saw/heard the content they took the playstation off me, and i haven't seen it since. Different strokes for different folks.