Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Douglas Schweitzer's picture
Douglas Schweitzer

The Security Sector

Rating and selling video games

The US isn't the only country where kids are playing what are sometimes age-inappropriate video games. According to this IDG News Service article I read in PC World, European children are now being protected by the European Commission as far as their access to violent and explicit video games.

Right now most of the nations in the EU are still using the pan-European games information (PEGI) rating system for labeling video game boxes, but the commission hopes to develop a better system without delay. While they've been looking to update PEGI and have a more standardized system, only in the past few months have they been particularly motivated and that's because of November's school massacre in Finland after it came to light that the killer was an 18 year old devoted video gamer.

I'm certainly no expert on child psychology, and whether we can say that exposure to violent video games makes kids more violent is I think still uncertain. I do know that there are plenty of kids playing violent games - and yes, many of them are dysfunctional adolescents, but most of them aren't violent in the real world.

That said, I can't say that I disagree with a new and improved rating system and quite frankly, I'd like to see our rating system better enforced here in the US. Just because violent games don't necessarily produce violence in kids, doesn't mean children of any age should be allowed to experience them. While these may seem like mutually exclusive beliefs, I'm just simply convinced that younger (and less mature) children can save violent, explicit video games for when they're older.

What People Are Saying

The recurring fallacy, put

The recurring fallacy, put forth by fear-mongering politicians and lazy editorial writers alike, is that every parent in the U.S. interprets "violence" in exactly the same way, and that every child in the U.S. is identically prepared to handle a given fictional narrative according exclusively to his or her age in years.

In other words, Mr. Schweitzer, before you start making any blanket claims that 'violent games are bad for kids,' you'd better explain exactly what you mean by "violent," and you'd better explain exactly for whose "kids" you are making this judgment. In this article, you don't even try.

Your claim that you'd like to see our rating system in the U.S. "better enforced" demonstrates a more sinister misunderstanding. The ESRB age-appropriateness ratings are guidelines, not laws. If you don't like the way they are handled by your local game retailer, then have your children shop someplace else. Like everyone else, you are welcome to your own opinions about violence in story-telling, but those opinions do not trump the First Amendment.

It's not the government's place to tell me how to interpret the narrative content in the games I buy for my kids, and it's not the government's place to decide if my kids are mature enough to handle that content. It's not your place either, Mr. Schweitzer.

I'm so glad I don't live in

I'm so glad I don't live in Europe. I thought it was bad here in Canada. When is the governments going to back off and let me raise my own children.
I don't need these people telling me what’s good and not good for my kids.