Age ratings on games/films

roundthebend

Like many parents, I'm sure, we're confronted by a dilemma. I can handle it, but I like to think I'm not being pig-ignorant to true sense, or so arrogant that I can't change my opinion on the subject.

So, I believe that parents should use their own intelligent judgement to decide on how best to raise their children. When it comes to games (e.g. GTA V) I have very little idea about the actual content other than what I've read and heard. So, I trust the ratings board that it really is best left to over 18s because the content isn't appropriate for less mature minds.

Now, I accept that some kids are more mature and that the ratings step up from 15 (or 16) to 18 which doesn't allow for graduations in between, so I conclude that as a parent I could decide that my child is mature enough to play it when he is younger than 18.

I think it's perfectly valid to consider the "harm" that my son might be suffering as an outcast amongst his peers. He has told us that he gets laughed at because we won't let him play. I don't want to give in to that but I'm not so stubborn that I will refuse to give in just to show them. Maybe it's not such a big deal that I want to see him ridiculed over it. But in this case, I think it is a big deal and he has to respect that. I actually think it shows why his peers aren't mature that they ridicule him about decisions that he doesn't even control.

For what it's worth, the ridiculing isn't that bad and he's a smart kid who can handle it to a degree.

So, I just want to make sure that I'm considering all the factors. Is there some fundamental bit of sense that I've overlooked? Has anyone else in this situation had a moment of clarity and thought "y'know what, my kid is ready for this"?

ICBM

Yes.

Both games and films. Interestingly my 12-year-old daughter decided for herself that she didn't want to play a particular 12-rated game because it was "too violent". I've also allowed her to watch 15-rated films which I have trouble seeing why they are rated as such.

I think that both she and I are at least as capable of deciding what is appropriate for her to watch/play as the ratings board are.

Myranda

My parents were always happy for me to see higher rated stuff as long as I could remember... partly because I sneakily watched some 18 rated horror of some description and didn't react to it... think it was Nightmare on Elmstreet. Since I didn't freak and have nightmares they really just weren't fussed.

Girl I baby sat - niece of a friend whos family pretty much adopted me, is now older than I was when I saw aforementioned scary movie and she still jumps and gets skittish at loud noises she's expecting, think something like Nightmare on Elmstreet could turn her into a gibbering wreck.

Things are subjective. 

Just like when I watched G.I.Joe 2 and saw the soldiers being killed left right and centre in the film I thought "This film is for children - and yet it's clearly very very violent." later in the film there's a panning shot across a battlefield of charred and bloodied corpses... as a 12A children of any age can go see it with an adult, and there were little children watching it. Some films and games with low ratings are not going to be suitable for children that are allowed to see them, let alone ones too young. 

roundthebend

Thanks for your replies.

ICBM, I'm not sure that I understand your point. You're saying that you've had the moment of clarity and decided that your daughter is ready to watch/play older rated films/games. And that you believe in your own judgement and hers as much (or maybe more) than the ratings board.

I, too, don't have 100% faith that the ratings board are always consistent, or that they are thinking of my son when they decide the ratings. But I recognise that they have an advantage over me in knowing the content of the entire game. All I have is what my kids tell me, what my mates tell me and what I read or hear in the news.

We let both our kids play a couple of 16 rated games, and 15 rated ones too. That's because we've been able to vet them first and put controls around the way they are played. I'd quite like to play GTA V but I have learnt in the past that I don't have time to invest into these big games to find out whether the content is suitable throughout. Assassins Creed (whichever version) seemed harmless a first then there was a scene where someone had their legs brutally broken as punishment. That gave me a shudder, yet my 2 kids laughed about it. I think the mature reaction is not to find that funny, but to recognise it's just a game so not to worry about it. But my kids seemed to be desensitized to it.

Myranda, I think we'll be happy to let our kids do the same. We make a call on each game/film separately using as much information to decide as possible. It's interesting to hear your understanding of why your parents did it. I think I'd prefer it if my child did have nightmares about these games, it would show that they were sensitive to nasty stuff. I want them to be the type of people that see shit happening and real life and feel so moved by it that they do something rather than shrug their shoulders and move on.

One of my concerns about games like Black Ops is not the gore or content, but the sheer pace and mania at points of the game. Especially online multiplayer mode. When our kids play together with friends on shoot 'em up games we have to repeatedly ask them to calm down and stop screaming, and not to be so animated in front of the screen. And the dinner time just after a session is often marred by them both shouting at each other across the table in an incomprehensible way - not angry shouting but over-excited volume.

Ultimately, this is overlooking a key point. All this talk of 18+ games, but we let our kids play on a range of games already and they have plenty of other activities. They don't NEED the latest game, they just WANT it.

Myranda

roundthebend said:

Myranda, I think we'll be happy to let our kids do the same. We make a call on each game/film separately using as much information to decide as possible. It's interesting to hear your understanding of why your parents did it. I think I'd prefer it if my child did have nightmares about these games, it would show that they were sensitive to nasty stuff. I want them to be the type of people that see shit happening and real life and feel so moved by it that they do something rather than shrug their shoulders and move on.

That's just it though - from an early age I knew it was just a movie and not real, so no matter what the film content is - it's not real. Real life if different.

mike_l

personally i'd ban tele ads for any game.
My old boss did once comment that "every ad break theres at least one for video games". So kids are seeing ads every 15ish minutes, so thats kinda ingrained that they'd want that game.
I've seen ads on daytime tele for 18 rated games, surely if they were aimed at adults the ads would be on later, after the watershed.

ICBM

roundthebend said:

ICBM, I'm not sure that I understand your point. You're saying that you've had the moment of clarity and decided that your daughter is ready to watch/play older rated films/games. And that you believe in your own judgement and hers as much (or maybe more) than the ratings board.

I didn't need the 'moment of clarity', but yes. Particularly mine, obviously - but she knows quite well what her own limits are.

roundthebend said:

I, too, don't have 100% faith that the ratings board are always consistent, or that they are thinking of my son when they decide the ratings. But I recognise that they have an advantage over me in knowing the content of the entire game. All I have is what my kids tell me, what my mates tell me and what I read or hear in the news.

Actually I'm not talking about games - she's not really into games, apart from the one she decided was too violent, which I'd already played all the way through (Tomb Raider) - but about films. I find some of the ratings quite puzzling - in both directions, and I find it particularly wrong that mild sexuality seems to attract a higher rating than quite serious violence.

If you're worried about kids being scared or disturbed by things they might see on a screen you'd need to keep them away from the news, too. Often it's not always the outright visual content.

CabbageCat

Much of it depends on how sensitive the parents are. If Mummy and Daddy are freaking over the spooky ghost then a young child will probably freak twice as much.

18 is a bit of a dumb rating, though. How many people will realistically stop a 17 year old from playing GTA or watching some slasher movie because they are too young? As the OP says, there would be considerably more damage done by peer ridicule than by actual game content.

strumjoughlamps

My kids seem to know what is real and what is not and I do let them watch some films or play games above their age, Singstar is pegi 15 iirc.

What gets me is some films ratings, take Rock of Ages for eg which is a 12 so I had no problem trusting that and letting my 12 yo daughter watching it but I found a couple of the sexual nature scenes unsuitable... now I am not a chastity belt no boys/girls til 18 type Dad but some scenes in pegi 12s latley are pushing it too far imo

dafuzz

One of my earliest memories is climbing into bed with my parents - my mum was asleep and my dad was watching a movie. The guy in the movie walked up the stairs and opened a door and from inside the room an axe flew into his head. I must've been about 5. I think my dad was drunk, anyway he laughed and said 'these stupid films' and I took his lead and laughed too. I wasn't bothered by anything I saw on telly after that.

Now my neighbours had three sons and they were very sheltered in that sense. When I was about 12 I had Robocop on video and took it round for us all to watch and their mum clocked it and said 'no way, you're not watching that' and took it off me. Fast forward a couple of years and we're watching a school football match. One of the strikers went for goal and the keeper went in too rough and the striker's leg broke at the knee - actually snapped backwards iirc. The guy next to me - one of the sheltered neighbour kids - fainted dead away.

My daughter's 8 so her tastes are pretty childish still, but I've impressed upon her from an early age that nothing she sees on telly is really real. Even the news is edited to create a particular emotion. I shown her youtube videos of people doing their own horror make up to try and dispel anything she might inadvertantly see. When you see somebody applying latex to their face and colouring it with fake blood it removes the scariness, so you can appreciate at the end how clever it is rather than be fooled and frightened.

I find Eastenders far more grotesque and damaging to be honest.

roundthebend

Interesting comments, and a few with a similar theme. It's one I've heard before too. That theme is essentially saying that you can teach your kids that movies/games aren't real so they're not adversely affected by them. And once that's done you can, with a sensible head, let your kids play some games that are above their age rating.

Here's my thoughts on that: as an adult, we can distinguish between real world and virtual world, then decide to not be too upset by stuff in the virtual world. Of course, we can tell our kids that games and films aren't real, but that doesn't show them what is real. Personally, I think it takes a level of maturity to be able to control your reaction to horrific events depending on whether they are real world or virtual. My fear is that we teach kids to deal with the virtual horrors at a young age so we can feel good about letting them play games that are above their age group, all the while not realising that we've just created the new problem.

My kids think dropping a nuke on North Korea would solve that particular problem. Same goes for Syria.
They find the news sensational sometimes but they don't show the emotion that a mature person would when presented with evidence of chemical attacks on innocent people. When they do that, I think I'll be happy to let them play older rated games.

Am I making sense? I appreciate it seems like a strict approach, but I'm trying to use intelligent logic rather just a gut feeling.

fretmeister

I watch it first then decide.

Some 12 cert films are so tame I have no idea why they are not PG. Others I think should have been 15.

I have less problem with them seeing monsters / mummies / aliens and the like than I do with people being shitty to each other. Monsters are easily explained as fairy stories. Can't say that about people.

roundthebend

Films aren't too difficult to vet, it's just 1½ - 3 hours of time. But games like GTA are enormous.
I think I agree about monsters/mummies/aliens being different. My kids are old enough to know that those aren't real and can't be either.

fretmeister

My kids are 10 and 7.

So a 12 cert is the highest I'll go anyway.

GTA is 18 so they've go no chance of me supplying it before a 16th birthday.

daveyh

My son is 12, and after vetting I've let him play Gears of War, Halo, Assassins Creed and other things. So far he hasn't tried to assasinate someone or believed aliens are going to erupt from the ground. He has watched films rated much older and remains a sensible kid who is fully aware of whats right/wrong or /real fantasy.

stickyfiddle

TBH even I'm finding some games pretty distasteful these days- torture scenes in COD, massive murder counts, gore and whatnot. The more realistic graphics are getting the less acceptable I'm finding mass murder. 

The Last of Us dealt with it brilliantly, but the body counts in the recent Tomb Raider and Uncharted 2/3 are humongous and totally incongruous for the characters involved, in what you'd otherwise think were relatively kid-friendly games (based on old TRs and the colourful good-guy-ness of Uncharted).

ICBM

roundthebend said:

My kids think dropping a nuke on North Korea would solve that particular problem. Same goes for Syria.

So do a lot of adults.

Show them the old 1980s film 'Threads' or get them to research what actually happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki for a "school project" and they'll go off the idea.

strumjoughlamps

Show them the old 1980s film 'Threads' or get them to research what actually happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki for a "school project" and they'll go off the idea.

I remeber having to get a permission slip signed to watch that at school.

jonnyburgo

My boy is 8 and although we dont allow him to play violent games, he recently came back from a neighbours house acting really weird, his eyes were bloodshot and he was in a strange trance like state. Eventually we got it out of him that he'd been playing COD for a few hours with our 10 yr old neighbour. Needless to say he hasn't played it since.

RobDavies

My eldest is thirteen and plays GTA, COD etc etc.  I have no problem with it as he pretty much self censors himself anyway.   He won't watch anything that's the slightest bit "jumpy".   Super 8 scared the life out of him and he has steered well clear of The Woman In Black - despite his younger brother watching it, and enjoying it.

Virtually every kid in his year at school plays GTA.  He'd be an outcast if he didn't - same as those kids when I was at school who weren't allowed to watch Grange Hill or The Young Ones.....

Oh, how we laughed at them.

ICBM

stickyfiddle said:

but the body counts in the recent Tomb Raider ... are humongous and totally incongruous for the characters involved

To be clear, when I mentioned Tomb Raider earlier I meant the reissue of TR2, which is what my daughter has. She used to watch me playing the old one and thought it was cool, so I got her it. The parts she doesn't like are when the baddies are humans, rather than animals or monsters.