yes but shouldn't the childrens PARENTS be aware of what their kids are playing? last I checked, if you weren't old enough to buy M games you couldnt buy M games without your parents there. And if the kid does become screwed up cuz mommy bought him dead space, who's fault is it? the games or the parents?
Report in American Academy of Pediatrics journal concludes that PEGI system's 18+ designation has a forbidden-fruit appeal for young girls as well as boys.
Whether it's staying up past bedtime or playing with their food, kids enjoy some activities partially because they're forbidden. According to a new study in the journal Pediatrics, games with restrictive ratings hold a similar appeal.
A group of researchers took 310 Dutch children between the ages of 7 and 17 and showed them descriptions for fictitious games. Included in some descriptions were Pan European Game Information (PEGI) ratings from 7+ to 18+ or violent-content warnings. The children then rated each game based on how much they wanted to play it.
As the researchers had predicted in their hypothesis, the games with restrictive ratings and violent-content warnings drew higher ratings from the study participants. That finding wasn't limited to a portion of the test subjects; the games that bore warnings of sinister content were more attractive in every group, including 7- to 8-year-olds and girls.
Although the researchers were testing a hypothesis that many would have taken for granted, their conclusion featured an assumption that has been contested (and found wanting) in courts many times in recent years. "Pediatricians should be aware of this forbidden-fruit effect," the researchers caution, "because video games with objectionable content can have harmful effects on children and adolescents."
"Fitctitious games" - not the 'M' rated games that are really out. That means all of these games could have been shovelware, but just by the premise the study group picked the 'M' ones for some reason... Now the question is why? Is it because of 'M' content? or is it because of past experience with 'M' rated games playing better? or is it something else entirely? Nice study, but the reason WHY the chose the game is still unknown and this study didn't help determine it. Nice try, but having the results be the same as the predicted hypothesis doesn't make the hypothesis right when you have that big of an unknown in the study.
Total bullcrap. Everybody knows that most of these "violent" games have higher production values, more challenge and overall better gameplay. Thats why the kids want them, because they want the best...
pppfffftt the needed to do a study to determine this? come on folks, everyone knows that most humans like doings things forbidden to them, its part of human nature
Curiosity is a very natural behaviour in humans. Children particularly, in this case forbidden video games.
I don't trust researchers. To stay in business you have to find the answer the guy who paid you wants. How do I know if the artwork on the covers of the mature games wasn't more exciting or if the comments on the back of the fictitious boxes weren't written to excite them more?
The sad part is that someone got paid for this "study". I can't wait for the new study that proclaims..."Breaking a bone is painful!"
".....can have harmful effects on children and adolescents" The study after all is quite right, quite a few of you seem to have a interest for rating M.
That can be said about anything really. Most kids want engage in more adult activities than might be healthy. Don't think we needed a study on this for anything other that a 'proof' factor.
Im not surprised the rating system started about the time I started high school and there was an appeal to the M-rated titles because you felt like you were playing the same thing adults were playing but now that Im an adult I dont care what the rating is on the games I buy and out of about 80 games I own only 4 are rated M.
Maybe the concept of playing cutsy games just doesn't appeal as much as playing action games... in any case, the research shows that children tended to like games that had a high rating, but it doesn't show that they like it because it is forbidden... to do that you'd need to run the same game with the same description against two seperate test groups (both which would have to be indicative of the population). For 1 group you'd have the real rating, for another you'd have a lower fake rating.
Regardless of what this article says, when I was a kid, I didnt even get what the hell the ratings ment.
This test seems flawed. The kids should have been given descriptions of the games independently of the game ratings. If the kids were attracted to the descriptions of violent games, instead of just the ratings, than the "forbidden-fruit" argument would make more sense. After all, when kids go to a store to buy games, they don't make their decision to purchase the game based on the rating, they look at the box art and the game summery on the back of the box.
Regardless of what this article says, when I was a child I did not want a game more if it was rated M.
Duh, do you think people would willing choke themselves inhaling smoke? Almost every single smoker started before they were legal. This is old news and has nothing to do with video games or violence.
But... OF COURSE!!!!! how many money did spend the American Academy of Pediatrics in this study to discover this... they could just ask to a skilled mother and she will said the same thing but for FREE!!!! man, these intellectual people seems more like a bunch of idiots every time they manages to open their mouths... and they go to the college to get all this knowledge... sad. On more important news and discovers: A lot of people have finnaly get a CLEAR and real picture and video footage of Bigfoot, having some kind of... relaxing activity with Nessy while a group of alliens was taking dirty pictures of the couple... what noone saw was that behind the distracted alliens, El ChupaCabras was sucking allien goat's to death (that sounds weird)... i mean, sucking their blood, that is... because everyone knows that the alliens raise goats in their ships, cause is their favorite food. I could be banned for that sucking comment if the mods didn't know who El Chupacabras is :P
=.= im like 14 and i play M-rated games but only because M rated games are the games which doesnt suck as much as the other ratings like Killzone 2 ^.^ which i am gettin but me getting RE5 first before that lolz
Sadly there is a time when we must give up our Barbie Horse Adventure! (To do list) 1.Throw out Barbie Horse Adventure 2.Buy a copy of Gears of War 2 3.Go Play Airsoft
doesnt make anysence. If a kid (like mine) can handle it and wont be like talking about it i would let her or him play it because THERE going to play it anyways.Parents and people need to be aware of we all are going to see something very violent in our lives so if a kid could handle it show it early if not hold back a bit
Kids are interested in things that are "mature" and "forbidden"...no ****! Seriously, how much money did they spend on this?
@ Sig12047 Because that's what research is about: not only making new findings, but challenging supposed "facts." The average person will flatly state "facts" without proof of any sort, instead relying on "common sense." So many "common sense" myths have been dispelled in this way, and some are are actually proven. Part of a true professional's job is to challenge the so-called facts.
Tell me something I don't know. People need to understand that video games aren't really as bad for children as they think they are. I played Mortal Kombat at age 5 because my I liked it and my dad trusted me. If you treat your kids like they can make certain decisions on their own instead of treating them like they're ALWAYS UP TO NO GOOD, then maybe they won't turn up to be so bad in the first place. Also blame the fact that E-rated games nowadays are mostly crap because game companies nowadays think that kids will buy any crappy game(mostly due to the casual gaming explosion) they make. Therefore they half-ass them for a quick buck. However most game companies also know that M-Rated games are supposed to be bought by relatively young adults who more often than children can distinguish a bad game from a good game therefore nowadays M-rated games are usually decent(more so than E-Rated games nowadays anyway)
Well, how about this. Get games that are graphically gory/sexually insane and rated M and rate them I for Infants (Ages 1-5). Problem solved.
umm... I thought this was common sense? It's natural curiosity for crying out loud! If you make something taboo or restrict something, even for good reason, you plant a Big Red Button and sometimes it's hard to resist not pressing it.
The obvious solution is to give the mature ratings to the games with no objectionable content, and give violent games ratings that will make kids think they are boring kid stuff.
Well that was dumb, any kid with half an eye could have told them that. The fact is that it's just WAY too easy for younger kids to get their hands on violent video games than it is for them to get their hands on other violent things, like the butcher knife, a copy of Rambo or that super special magazine dad keeps in a box under his bed. Tougher rules in gaming stores are needed, but we all know how reliable store clerks can be. But inversely, how kids are affected depends on the kid. If you're a vaguely normal person, like most of us, it wouldn't really do much. I played the zombie-fountain-bleeder Medievil 2 when I was about 10 or 12. On the other hand, kids who are of a more violent mind (which is like, half of all American teens anyway) would be very affected by the games because it allows them to simulate something which they would love to do almost as a fetish.
Kids always want to do what they're kept away from. They'll listen to music with the parental advisory label on it. They'll swear around their friends and not around their parents. They'll look at indecent images on the internet or in a magazine when nobody is looking. They'll drink their parents' wine coolers. They'll go watch R-rated movies on their own. They'll smoke their first cigarettes before they're 18; they'll probably smoke pot too. They'll sneak out at night. They'll try playing M-rated games. I guess it could be worse, I mean they could just be getting each other knocked up.
Wow, I wonder if they want to watch R-rated movies more too, or want to listen to music with the "Explicit Lyrics" sticker on the album...
Of course the forbidden-fruit theory applies here. The whole reason M-rated games get higher ratings is that they have the freedom to do what they want, whereas E or T games have to be more anodyne and safe. That is why Grand Theft Auto 4 is the highest grossing media entity in history, and Simpsons Hit and Run is considered one of the worst games ever.
@ Generic_Dude It's very true, when I was a kid growing up on SNES and 64, I didn't really care if i couldn't play mortal kombat or doom, I had amazing games like Zelda, mario, banjo kazooie, mario kart, starfox, goldeneye....they don't make games like they used to.
Or maybe they don't make as many great E-rated games as they used to, particularly for PS3 and 360. Sure, you've got great titles like Viva Pinata, Lego Star Wars and Ratchet and Clank out there, but let's face it: the best games on PS3 and 360 are the M-rated games: Halo 3, Gears of War, Killzone 2, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Metal Gear Solid 4.
Avalanche Studios co-founder says developer's ambition is for action, not moments that make players cry; steampunk-style game on hold. Full Story
- Posted May 15, 2013 6:33 am PT
4A Games creative director Andrew Prokhorov thanks Jason Rubin for telling the studio's story, but says, "We deserve the ratings we get." Full Story
- Posted May 16, 2013 12:44 pm PT