[UPDATED] Report Recommends Health Warnings on Video Game Packaging (UK)

[CaptStu]

From the Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/):

Video games will be forced to carry cigarette-style health warnings under proposals to protect children from unsuitable digital material.

The report, commissioned by the Prime Minister in response to a growing moral panic about video games, will conclude that they can harm the development of children’s beliefs and value systems and desensitise them to violence. It will also recommend that retailers who sell video games to anyone under the age rating on the box should face a hefty fine or up to five years in prison, The Times has learnt.

The report, written by Tanya Byron, the clinical psychologist and television parenting guru, is also expected to address the dangers of children’s use of the internet.

“Parents are afraid to let their children out,” she said. “So they keep them at home, but allow them to take risks online.”

She will call for a massive campaign to educate parents, teachers and childcarers about how to ensure that children get maximum benefit from the digital world without being exposed to its dangers.

MORE HERE (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3628894.ece)

Editor's Note - Tanya Byron denies (http://www.mcvuk.com/news/30026/Byron-I-dont-want-change-in-retail-law) that her report calls for 'cigarette-style' warning labels on games.

[fitbabits]

Changed headline - there's more to the UK than England! :)

[fitbabits]

Note - following are press releases in response to this report:

Thursday 27th March/...ELSPA, the Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association, welcomes the findings of the Byron Review. It lays out an important framework to deliver a better understanding of how to protect children on-line and when playing video games.

Paul Jackson, Director General, ELSPA, said: “We fully support Dr Byron's advice to parents on the use of technology in the home and parental awareness of their children's activities, including the need for wider awareness of age ratings on video games.

“We believe in one legally enforceable system for classification of video games and to build increased public awareness of both the age ratings system and the long-standing availability and use of parental controls on all games consoles.

“However, we are concerned that the proposals as they stand may struggle to keep up with the public’s increasing desire to buy and play on-line.

“The games industry would need to be re-assured that the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) would be capable of delivering against any new remit, or whether PEGI may be more appropriate. We welcome the news that the Government wishes to consult with the industry on any changes to the classification system.”

“We look forward to working very closely with Government over the next few months to address these concerns as the implications of the review are fully understood.”

Responding to the Byron Report, David Cooke, Director of the BBFC, said:
“I warmly welcome Dr Byron’s report. She has listened very carefully to all the arguments, and exercised her independent and expert judgement.

“It is clear from Dr Byron’s report that games classification is less well understood that that for films and DVDs. We all need to work hard to bring understanding up to the same level, and help parents and children make informed choices. Games like Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas are for adults, and should be treated in the same way as ‘18’ rated films and DVDs.

“Dr Byron says that when it comes to content, parents want better information on which to base their decisions. I welcome the film-style classification system and greater role for the BBFC which she recommends in paragraph 7.47 of her report.

“At the BBFC we provide symbols which are trusted and understood; thorough, independent examination by skilled games players; individually tailored health warnings, and also the full reasoning for the classification covering all the key issues; a cutting edge approach to online film and games content, including independent monitoring.

“We co-operate closely with the Pan European Games Information Systems (PEGI) and will continue to do so.
“Unlike PEGI, the BBFC has the power, in exceptional cases, to reject films, DVDs and games which have the potential to pose real harm risk. We reject an average of two to three works a year (mostly DVDs) and will continue to do so where it is necessary to protect the public. At the adult level, we respect the public expectation that adults should be free to choose except where there are real harm risks. But we do not think it would be right to remove the reserve rejection power and we are pleased that Dr Byron agrees with this.

“The BBFC has been able to handle a major expansion of the DVD market over the last few years, and we are ready and able to take on the extra work envisaged by Dr Byron. We attach great importance to providing a speedy and effective service, primarily to the public, but also to the creative industries who produce films, DVDs and games. We will be talking to the Government, PEGI and the games industry about how to implement Dr Byron’s recommendations.

“We are also studying very carefully Dr Byron’s recommendations on the risks children face from the internet, and believe we have a significant contribution to make in this area too.”

[CaptStu]

Changed headline - there's more to the UK than England! :)

Nope. Just England. That's all that matters. :D

[reimomo]

Well I poked around hoping I could hate the person who made this study... from her wiki page I'm not sure I can.

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/byronreview/

has a pdf of the study. will be back :)

[CaptStu]

Well I poked around hoping I could hate the person who made this study... from her wiki page I'm not sure I can.

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/byronreview/

has a pdf of the study. will be back :)

Why? Because she's somewhat cute.

http://www.culture.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/FEA8C6E5-A976-452B-93C9-47FC0F4B72AF/0/tanyabryon.jpg http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/content/images/2007/10/12/tanya_byron_470x300.jpg

[Purple Santa]

Now ratings on games are equal to health warnings on cigarettes? The quote from the article:

Dr Byron wants a single statutory classification system. Ratings would have to be displayed prominently on all packaging materials, like health warnings on cigarettes, as well as on shop display cases.

How is having a "single statutory classification system" or ratings "like health warnings on cigarettes"? I found what this on Wikipedia for cigarette warnings in UK:

One of the following general warnings must be displayed, covering at least 30% of the surface of the pack:

* Smoking kills
* Smoking seriously harms you and others around you

Additionally, one of the following additional warnings must be displayed, covering at least 40% of the surface of the pack:

* Smokers die younger
* Smoking clogs the arteries and causes heart attacks and strokes
* Smoking causes fatal lung cancer
* Smoking when pregnant harms your baby
* Protect children: don't make them breathe your smoke
* Your doctor or your pharmacist can help you stop smoking
* Smoking is highly addictive, don't start
* Stopping smoking reduces the risk of fatal heart and lung diseases
* Smoking can cause a slow and painful death
* Get help to stop smoking: telephone/postal address/internet address/consult your doctor/pharmacist
* Smoking may reduce the blood flow and cause impotence
* Smoking causes ageing of the skin
* Smoking can damage the sperm and decreases fertility
* Smoke contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.

This doctor is claiming health risks that endanger children and then states she wants a better rating system. Linking a rating system to the health warnings of cigarettes is ridiculous. Of course there is much to what the doctor says that is ludicrous. I just couldn't believe she's using the rating system as a warning system to parents in the same way warnings on cigarettes do.

[Variable Gear]

"Hand in the Pot" says:
I welcome the film-style classification system and greater role for the BBFC which she recommends in paragraph 7.47 of her report.

The PEGI rating for San Andreas was 18+ (http://www.pegi.info/en/index/global_id/23/?searchString=grand+theft+auto%3A+san+andreas&agecategories=&genre=&organisations=&platforms=&countries=&submit=Search). I don't understand how this would be confusing to anyone. The PEGI rating literally says, "don't buy this game for someone unless they are 18 or older," and I'm not sure how a film-like rating system would make it easier to know the age range of a title. How can you make it easier to understand than putting the recommended age on the box?

PJ says:

We believe in one legally enforceable system for classification of video games and to build increased public awareness of both the age ratings system and the long-standing availability and use of parental controls on all games consoles.

I believe that such a system already exists. You just need to encourage more people to use it.

[reimomo]

Linked to this, it is also difficult to independently monitor retailers’ compliance with the agerating systems. Trading Standards are able, under the Video Recordings Act 1984 to carry out test purchases in relation to video games rated by the BBFC. However, pressures to carry out test purchase operations elsewhere (e.g. alcohol, cigarettes, knives etc.) mean that video game test purchasing is often sidelined. Very little is done to monitor sales of PEGI games to children under the specified age. As no offence is committed Trading Standards do not have a duty to carry out test purchase operations. Whilst some informal monitoring takes place and some stores carry out their own independent monitoring, which results in punitive measures, including sacking, there is no official, comprehensive and independent process carried out by any of the trade bodies (e.g. ERA; VSC).

The only mention of cigarretes in the report. I'm no expert on the field, but it seems fairly balanced. On the one hand games aren't cigarettes, but on the other hand there are a TON of things I'll never let my children do that most parents don't even know about, when it comes to games and the internet.

Coincidentally this is applicable to variable gear's post as well. Its a decent read, I definitely can't hate her (and I usually prefer my random internet women to be slighty more attractive, and much more nekkid, so its not just that :))

[Purple Santa]

Well I poked around hoping I could hate the person who made this study... from her wiki page I'm not sure I can.

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/byronreview/

has a pdf of the study. will be back :)

Thanks for the link. I think everyone should read this before commenting further. The objectives of the research from my readings was to get a "perspective" on the use of the internet/video games from kids and their parents. I don't think what she found was anything we didn't know already. The conclusion of needing a better system to have handy for parents to gather better information on what their kids entertainment is valid. The study made some good points on this. However, it's the leap of conclusion the doctor and then everyone will take with this study (like the prime minister and every other politician) that children are in such DANGER . Danger as in unhealthy to the child's health we need to compare it to the warning label of cigarettes. Again, just utter panic "the sky is falling" rhetoric. It's sad when someone actually does do decent research and then takes their own research and twists it.

[Citizen Philip]

I suppose the current rating system is using inexplicable hieroglyphs or obscure Pict symbols...

http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/3464/anubishf5og8.gif

[Citizen Philip]

....Again, just utter panic "the sky is falling" rhetoric. It's sad when someone actually does do decent research and then takes their own research and SELLS it.

Fixed that for you? :D

[DCIII]

Why? Because she's somewhat cute.

http://www.culture.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/FEA8C6E5-A976-452B-93C9-47FC0F4B72AF/0/tanyabryon.jpg http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/content/images/2007/10/12/tanya_byron_470x300.jpg


... and, in case no one noticed, she's married.

[LongStepMantis]

"Hand in the Pot" says:


The PEGI rating for San Andreas was 18+ (http://www.pegi.info/en/index/global_id/23/?searchString=grand+theft+auto%3A+san+andreas&agecategories=&genre=&organisations=&platforms=&countries=&submit=Search). I don't understand how this would be confusing to anyone. The PEGI rating literally says, "don't buy this game for someone unless they are 18 or older," and I'm not sure how a film-like rating system would make it easier to know the age range of a title. How can you make it easier to understand than putting the recommended age on the box?

PJ says:


I believe that such a system already exists. You just need to encourage more people to use it.

As you pointed out, it isn't that people don't understand the systems.
It's that they don't bother looking at them to begin with.

I'd post the PA strip of the little kid getting his mom to buy him "Blood Capt. Blood" if I could get PA to load...really slow today.

[Flatpicker]

I believe that there should be heath warnings on video game accessory packaging.
I cut my finger really bad trying to open an extra 360 controller package. ;)

[Purple Santa]

Fixed that for you? :D

LOL. Excellent point sir. Thanks for the fix.

[GunnyMo]

"a growing moral panic". Seriously? I guess it's good to know that mainstream UK is just as fucking stupid as mainstream USA.

[Varsity]

The polarisation of research paradigms is evident in the field of video games. This distinction between the two camps has been labelled by Egenfeldt-Nielson and Smith (2004) as:

The Active Media perspective where researchers seek evidence of direct harmful effects using laboratory experiments and surveys. One of the largest groups to use this approach in the context of video games is based in the United States and led by Professor Craig Anderson whose research is reviewed below.
The Active User perspective which is social scientific in orientation and argues that reactions to media content are context-dependent. Research from this tradition does not directly ask about questions of effect but seeks to understand player’s interpretations and response to technology and the influence of wider social and cultural factors on this (e.g. see work by Buckingham e.g. 2006).
Psychologists based in the UK (and all of those we consulted with for this review) tend to subscribe to the Active Users view and question the validity of the Active Media perspective research evidence of the harmful effects of video games in real world terms, given that the studies are laboratory based. Psychologists from the United States argue much more strongly that the there is evidence that playing violent video games increases aggressive and antisocial behaviour among children and adolescents (Anderson, Gentile and Buckley, 2007; Comstock and Scharrer, 2007).
God save the fucking queen.

"a growing moral panic". Seriously? I guess it's good to know that mainstream UK is just as fucking stupid as mainstream USA.

The Times is a tabloid. See what the Guardian had to say.

[LongStepMantis]

"a growing moral panic". Seriously? I guess it's good to know that mainstream UK is just as fucking stupid as mainstream USA.

That's just mainstream anywhere for ya.
Reasonable, rational people will always be the minority. Sigh...

[Evil Avatar]

From the Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/):

MORE HERE (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3628894.ece)

I'm sorry all I heard was blah blah blah I'm a dirty tramp.

[Varsity]

In relation to these concerns we need to consider whether excessive gaming by children is due to the addictive nature of video games for them or if it is more a matter of parents not feeling able to manage their children’s behaviour effectively. Children can take many activities to excess if their behaviour isn’t moderated and balanced, whether it’s playing games, watching TV or eating. Research has yet to determine whether some types of game are more addictive than others or whether there are inherent features, either individual characteristics (e.g. children with obsessive compulsive tendencies) or circumstantial features (e.g. children in situations of boredom) that predict high usage. It is certainly conceivable that children with particular cognitive, behavioural or personality characteristics may be more vulnerable.

A further issue here is that there is a cultural judgement about excessive behaviour. In the context of video games, excess is looked upon as being a bad thing. In the context of, say reading, it is conceived of as much more positive – the term ‘book-worm’ might be muttered somewhat proudly.

"…many of the stories told in video games are just as involving, emotional and thought provoking as any film or book."
(Children’s Call for Evidence)
I wasn't expecting that kind of discussion. Shame that's all there is!

[Variable Gear]

"…many of the stories told in video games are just as involving, emotional and thought provoking as any film or book."
(Children’s Call for Evidence)

Well, that discounts the entire report.

[boratika]

Did anyone see that study from late last year talking about how the number of warnings on a product and on products in general is inverse to the amount of attention paid to warning labels. And basically because people are so used to seeing warnings like "Do not throw in the direction of another person" on a frisbee has lead to people not notice warnings like "High voltage contents. Opening may result in serious injury or death".

I can't find a link, but I'd would be good here. It was in a reputable journal and maybe British (not sure though.) The rating is already one warning, ie the maximum amount you can have and have people pay attention.

[Varsity]

Did anyone see that study from late last year talking about how the number of warnings on a product and on products in general is inverse to the amount of attention paid to warning labels. And basically because people are so used to seeing warnings like "Do not throw in the direction of another person" on a frisbee has lead to people not notice warnings like "High voltage contents. Opening may result in serious injury or death".

I can't find a link, but I'd would be good here.

www.darwinawards.com

[BigJonno]

The confusion regarding rating labels is because parents seem incapable of understanding the PEGI ratings that were introduced a few years ago. Everyone knows the BBFC ratings that are used on films as well, but games only get them for violent or sexual content. From what I've heard, people think the PEGI ones are the equivalent of "for ages seven and up" on a board game.

If the BBFC ratings were used on all games (so kiddie games had little "U" rating symbols on them) I think there would be much less confusion.

Overall, I think the report is good and could go a long way to silencing the "ban this sick filth" crowd, it's the sort of sensible approach that helps protect gaming from censorship. However, I do object to the comparisons with smoking. The idea of massive labels covering box art is ridiculous.

[reimomo]

I'm sorry all I heard was blah blah blah I'm a dirty tramp.

Yeah, she must be a ho. What was I thinking? Read the report. Even just some of it. Hell, go to chapter 6: video game evidence, and read the whole thing.

[Hesuchazo]

I don't care what they put on the package, as long as I can still buy the games, get the content I choose, and make decisions for my own kids.

Really...this is much ado about nothing. WHO CARES how they wrap up your games, as long as you can get them?

[Variable Gear]

If the BBFC ratings were used on all games (so kiddie games had little "U" rating symbols on them) I think there would be much less confusion.

If they simply looked at the rating on the front of the box, and then turned it over and looked at the content descriptors there would be even less confusion. Stupid people always exist, and I don't support evolution of the PEGI rating system in order to appease the ignorant. They don't deserve respect.

[Serapth]

I just realized something horrible about myself.

I am apparently more likely to read what a woman types on the internet if I know she is hot.

This is a very disturbing discovery and completely lacks any foundation in logic. I can feel better knowing that those folders are photoshoped, as she is British... but look at those teeth! No way that photo isnt doctored!

[Savok]

Further proof that socialism is awesome.

[BigJonno]

If they simply looked at the rating on the front of the box, and then turned it over and looked at the content descriptors there would be even less confusion. Stupid people always exist, and I don't support evolution of the PEGI rating system in order to appease the ignorant. They don't deserve respect.

The confusion exists because there are two completely different ratings systems in effect, one of which has existed for years and is understood by the vast majority of the populace and one which is new and resembles board game age suitability ratings. If most violent videogames have "15" or "18" BBFC ratings on, I can understand how someone would assume that any game without one of those symbols would be suitable for their child, assuming that the "18+" PEGI rating just means that the game is hard. This isn't out of stupidity, but out of ignorance of a poorly-labeled, under-promoted rating system.

The Byron report recommends a single, clear, well publicised, legally enforceable rating system and I'm 100% behind that. Common sense suggests that it is the same system that is used by movies and understood by everyone. There are some parents who will ignore the ratings, but there's nothing we can do about that short of censorship and big brother government, which this is all about avoiding in the first place.

[bKangy]

I hate parenting these days. Wrap your fucking kids up in cotton wool. Don't let them go out to play, they might get run over or abducted! Don't let them eat certain foods they might be allergic! Slap a bunch of shit all over video game boxes in case I'm too retarded to check up on the media my kid is consuming!

Boohoo, we're raising a bunch of nonces and paper pushers. And if you fall off the curve, you fall off it big time because nobody has any idea of why you need to drag yourself through life sometimes. Some self-proclaimed expert gets her crap published and there's always some moral panic. Steel yourself up against this shit and do your own parenting you yuppie fucks.

And the Prime Minister commissioned this report because of "growing moral panic"! Growing moral fucking panic? How about the morals of the government? Or the police state? Everyone in this country is pathetic, I hope it burns. We can waste money slapping cover-ruining BS on boxes for video games and nobody will acknowledge the fact that this Labour government has taken us to war against popular opinion without any real Parliamentary consultation, driven it's own people to suicide and instituted the destruction of liberty in the name of stopping terrorism, despite the threat from Al Quieda being pathetically small in this country compared to anything the IRA presented just years earlier. We can run an inquiry into this but not into the Iraq War?

Fuck everyone, I hope this place burns.

[Variable Gear]

The Byron report recommends a single, clear, well publicised, legally enforceable rating system and I'm 100% behind that. Common sense suggests that it is the same system that is used by movies and understood by everyone. There are some parents who will ignore the ratings, but there's nothing we can do about that short of censorship and big brother government, which this is all about avoiding in the first place.


And the Prime Minister commissioned this report because of "growing moral panic"! Growing moral fucking panic? How about the morals of the government? Or the police state? Everyone in this country is pathetic, I hope it burns. We can waste money slapping cover-ruining BS on boxes for video games and nobody will acknowledge the fact that this Labour government has taken us to war against popular opinion without any real Parliamentary consultation, driven it's own people to suicide and instituted the destruction of liberty in the name of stopping terrorism, despite the threat from Al Quieda being pathetically small in this country compared to anything the IRA presented just years earlier. We can run an inquiry into this but not into the Iraq War?

Fuck everyone, I hope this place burns.

A Tale of Two Countries?

[Philonious]

I just realized something horrible about myself.

I am apparently more likely to read what a woman types on the internet if I know she is hot.

This is a very disturbing discovery and completely lacks any foundation in logic. I can feel better knowing that those folders are photoshoped, as she is British... but look at those teeth! No way that photo isnt doctored!

It isn't just you. Everyone does it.

[OUX]

Who cares? They will be begging us to save their asses when the zombies come for them. Because we will be in the know.

[Morangie]

You really shouldn't have linked to a tabloid like The Times for something like this, try a real paper like The Guardian if you want the actual news.

In relation to video games, all the report really says is that the BBFC should rate all games just like they rate all movies and television. I don't see how anyone who wants games to stop being treated differently can complain when they stop getting treated differently.

[Savok]

You really shouldn't have linked to a tabloid like The Times for something like this, try a real paper like The Guardian if you want the actual news.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Varsity]

We're talking about England here, Savok.

[bKangy]

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The Guardian is a far superior paper to The Times although the quality control leaves something to be desired. The Times though, is essentially for people who want to read a "serious" paper without being challenged or having to deal with too much actual thought one way or the other.

[Morangie]

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Lots of left wingers read the guardian, which must be because they only report horribly biased stories? The reality is that it keeps the news sections as unbiased as possible and that seems to attract lots of left wing readers. It says more about the sort of person who chooses to read the Daily Mail than it does about anything else.

[TeeCakes]

If you're a parent and you've bought your kid any other next-gen system than a Wii, prepare for their innocence to be plundered, plain and simple. A rating system is only for the games themselves, but it's not like kids aren't able to just go on the PSN or XBLMP and download MA-17/18+ demos all day, anyway.

Once again, parents are trying to avoid being parents, by blaming some arbitrary system that the industry comes up with for their kids being exposed to offensive material. An artist (i.e. videogame dev) shouldn't have to alter his vision to cater to lazy parents, and an artist's distributor/promoter (i.e. videogame companies) shouldn't be responsible for preventing unsupervised kids from being exposed to the artist's adult themes.

I certainly wouldn't purchase a $300+, online-capable multimedia console for my (HYPOTHETICAL) 8-year old, or provide unfettered high-speed internet access to them knowing all the pedophiles and idiots online that may take advantage of their inexperience. Parents just seem to be out of touch with reality, if they actually believe that just a harsher ratings system is the cureall for their kids' declining moral values, and not good-old-fashioned, responsible parenting.

[Oddmaker]

As long as they dont stick them on the game label and just the dvd casing then I'm all for this.

[BigJonno]

Okay, here's a quick breakdown for people who haven't been following this.

1. Tabloid fear mongers and tosspot MPs like Keith Vaz have been banging on for ages about the evils of videogames.
2. Government realises it needs to do something, commissions report.
3. Byron woman conducts studies, releases report.
4. Report concludes that *shock horror* some games shouldn't be played by children, there should be a ratings system and parents should be made aware of it.

As has already been mentioned, this isn't anything that gaming parents the world over haven't known for years, but governments have to spend lots of money and make things official, y'know.

This isn't about parents shirking their responsibility, this isn't about games being evil and this isn't about censorship. For once, the government has actually done the right thing and listened to the concerns of its citizens without listening to the tabloid bullshit. If the government actually continues this remarkably sensible course of action it will clear up the ratings confusion and show that it has taken steps to prevent unsuitable games from falling into the hands of children. Then it can shut up the fearmongers and let adult gamers get back to playing games without worrying that that they're going to be banned to satisfy a bunch of ignorant twats.

It's like the cigarette thing. It's illegal to sell them to kids, they have bloody great health warnings on them and there is a huge campaign promoting NHS quitting services. There's nothing more that the government can do before stepping over that line and banning them. Same with games. If they implement a clear rating system, make sure it's enforced and educate parents then they can take that same stance. Responsibility for children's access to these games will be firmly in the hands of their parents, exactly where it should be.

[Morangie]

A rating system is only for the games themselves, but it's not like kids aren't able to just go on the PSN or XBLMP and download MA-17/18+ demos all day, anyway.
They aren't able to just go on the PSN or XBLMP and download MA-17/18+ demos all day if the parental controls are set up, on the 360 at least. I don't know the PS3 handles it.
Same with games. If they implement a clear rating system, make sure it's enforced and educate parents then they can take that same stance. Responsibility for children's access to these games will be firmly in the hands of their parents, exactly where it should be.
But they already had a clear rating system. Any games featuring realistic violence or sexual content already had to be rated by the BBFC, with the legally binding restrictions those age ratings carry. This report just recommends all games get a BBFC rating and if parents couldn't figure out before that Mario might be more suitable for kids than the 18 rated Gears of War, slapping a PG on the Mario box won't exactly help.

I don't really have any problem with all games needing to be rated by the BBFC, but the BBFC might. Thats a huge amount of work they'll need to take on, playing every game released from start to finish to examine all the content. A bad movie might only be 2 hours long, a bad game could be 20.

[TeeCakes]

They aren't able to just go on the PSN or XBLMP and download MA-17/18+ demos all day if the parental controls are set up, on the 360 at least. I don't know the PS3 handles it.

This is true for the PS3 as well, actually, but it's pretty well-hidden from console-ignorant parents who've just bought the system for their kids and don't bother to setup anything past the network/display settings. You also get locked out from BD/DVD films that are rated PG-13+ if you set the parental controls to the desired levels beforehand.

So saying, I agree with you-- how much more help do parents need to, y'know, actually be a parent to their kids? It's one thing to claim that violence portrayed in videogames are harmful to kids, but this study seems to neglect to mention that kids don't typically have the disposable income that's required to purchase these next-gen systems, so obviously they're getting it from an enabling mommy or daddy.

All I see when I read these press releases or studies calling for a revolution of the 'broken' rating system or some such outrage-of-the-minute are people with an agenda looking towards the usual suspects (i.e. new media and videogames) to blame the Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies on. Because of course, it's simply too politically incorrect to examine more culpable causes like, say, organized religion (9/11, the Crusades, practically every major war in history, etc.) for the continuing flaws of man.

Question: which of the two activities, religion or entertainment, implicitly tells a person how they're supposed to live their lives? Which one portrays itself as a blatant fantasy, and which one tries to pass itself off as historical doctrine, and the "absolute" truth? Which of the two is seen as a 'healthy' thing to obsess over, even though religious extremists will always be 1,000x more dangerous than a WoW-extremist? I think these are the questions people should be asking, and not "How easy is it to tell from this vague label that 'Gears of War' wasn't made for Little Johnny to play?"

Ah dammit, I've wandered on top of my soapbox again, forgive me while I jump back down and retreat back inside my shell...

[Savok]

Lots of left wingers read the guardian, which must be because they only report horribly biased stories? The reality is that it keeps the news sections as unbiased as possible and that seems to attract lots of left wing readers. It says more about the sort of person who chooses to read the Daily Mail than it does about anything else.
Key words, "as possible".

[BigJonno]

Teecakes, what the fuck are you on about? We're all having a discussion about videogames and you start having a dig at organised religion. Anyway, most major wars of the last century were politically motivated.

[TeeCakes]

Thanks for illustrating my point about the touchiness of the religion subject, BigJonno. No need for vulgarity, brother.

I was more demonstrating that anything can be demonized, even something as seemingly innocent as organized religion, it's still a fact that people have killed more over religious disputes than videogames (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47143), I don't think anyone can/should try to just dismiss that fact is all I'm sayin'.

BTW, there's a difference between the "border fights" (the armed political altercations you refer to that have occurred in the last century) and "every major war in history" that I referred to as being the direct result of, in many cases, religious persecution.

But just for you, I'll clean up my earlier comment so that it's devoid of the (one small paragraph of) religious stuff, since you obviously ignored the parts where I talked about on topic things!

This is true for the PS3 as well, actually, but it's pretty well-hidden from console-ignorant parents who've just bought the system for their kids and don't bother to setup anything past the network/display settings. You also get locked out from BD/DVD films that are rated PG-13+ if you set the parental controls to the desired levels beforehand.

So saying, I agree with you-- how much more help do parents need to, y'know, actually be a parent to their kids? It's one thing to claim that violence portrayed in videogames are harmful to kids, but this study seems to neglect to mention that kids don't typically have the disposable income that's required to purchase these next-gen systems, so obviously they're getting it from an enabling mommy or daddy.

All I see when I read these press releases or studies calling for a revolution of the 'broken' rating system or some such outrage-of-the-minute are people with an agenda looking towards the usual suspects (i.e. new media and videogames) to blame the Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies on...

..."How easy is it to tell from this vague label that 'Gears of War' wasn't made for Little Johnny to play?"

[BigJonno]

Apologies if I came over rude, it was more of a shock "WTF?" as your religious tangent was rather random. :D