221 réponses à ce sujet

[Appolo90]

Tirigon wrote...

randumb vanguard wrote...

there are AO games which you have to be 18 in order to by and are imposible to find. And there are 6 year olds who play M games... stupid parents...

What means AO?

Adults only.

AKA porn.

[Tirigon]

randumb vanguard wrote...

adult only, more or less porn games...

So this is were you glad about Internet cos you get it thrown at you everywhere, right? At least that is the case in Germany with porn games.

[SarEnyaDor]

http://en.wikipedia....-rated_products

[SarEnyaDor]

It is just really odd that (should this law be allowed to be implemented, it was already passed) that ME and DA would then be in the same category as porn, cigarettes, alcohol and firearms.

[Tirigon]

SarEnyaDor wrote...

It is just really odd that (should this law be allowed to be implemented, it was already passed) that ME and DA would then be in the same category as porn, cigarettes, alcohol and firearms.

Well, ME has all of that. Firearms even as a major part of the game.
So it´s probably deserved.


[Possibly sarcasm employed here]

[Jaryd theBlackDragon]

My mommy always said that stupid is as stupid does.

[SarEnyaDor]

I need more stuff in the ... thing that stuff goes in....

*facepalm* I think they'll need to seek ID before allowing people to watch the Flinstones, they may have slept in twin cots, but Fred was drunk in many an episode after too much partying in the Waterbuffalo Lodge.

Modifié par SarEnyaDor, 26 avril 2010 - 09:20 .

[Fizzeler]

Beocat wrote...

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

Beocat, according to my research there's only 25 AO games out there, and most of them seem to be ancient porn games.
Perhaps games are censored in development before being rated? It'd explain why, out of hundreds of game releases a year, only 25 games have ever been given AO.

@Merin, yeah it does hurt the retailer in a way. Why should I go into a store and risk having my ID rejected (as it almost always is) when I can just go online and get the game cheaper and not be ID'd? It's a double-edged blade either way, but the method we have in the UK (I feel) is the best option. What's more damaging to a company? $40 dollars of a lost sale or a $1000 fine with possibly a reputation hit?

I think Indigo Prophecy had an AO PC version back in the day.  I would have had that one for sure if it had been console based.  I simply loved that game.  I doubt I missed much with the M version, but for my collector's wanting, I want the AO version just to have. 

so what you would also like a T Rated version of Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (of which I still own to this day)

This entire law is just moronic IMO it is the parents duties to regulate what their kids can play NOT the governments and as several have said if the kid can't buy it then game Piracy will shoot up

[Kenrae]

Tirigon wrote...
Over here in Germany many games are already banned. Even DAO may only be sold to persons above 18.

Well, I wouldn't buy DA:O to an underage.

I prefer that this law is enforced, even if there's ways to bypass it, just like alcohol and other products. For starters, when there's a law against something people tend to think more carefully about it. Yes, some parents will buy GTA to their 10 yo, but others will see it in a different light just by there being a law. It's human nature.

And yes, it's a parent responsibility to educate their children, but at the same time, shouldn't we protect the children, who can't protect themselves, against unresponsible parents? To put a more extreme case, would you let a parent to give alcohol to a 9 yo son? What about not sending them to school or giving them extreme porn? There must be a line somewhere, we can discuss where this line should be drawn, but calling for parents' responsibility can't be the answer to everything. Unless we want to live in a pure anarchy or something like that.

[Kenrae]

SarEnyaDor wrote...

It is just really odd that (should this law be allowed to be implemented, it was already passed) that ME and DA would then be in the same category as porn, cigarettes, alcohol and firearms.

The fact that porn is in the same category than firearms in some countries is already messed up. We don't need to add videogames to the list.

[Wicked 702]

Seriously, what is the friggin' big deal? When I was a kid, I'd try to go to Rated R movies. Sometimes, I could get in. Other times, the guy would ask for ID and I couldn't. All this would require is the clerk to ask for ID before selling a rated M game to a kid. I already have to prove it's me when I buy beer or use my credit card. What's the difference?

OH! And to the people that keep wondering if businesses will stop carrying Mature games for "fear" that they'll get fined, GET REAL! Take an economics class for pete's sake. And do a little research. Most "gamers" are over the age of 18 anyway. If a business decided not to carry rated M games, all they'd be doing is shooting their bottom line in the foot. No intelligent corporation is going to do that. Never.....

Modifié par Wicked 702, 26 avril 2010 - 11:20 .

[Jalem001]

Wicked 702 wrote...

Seriously, what is the friggin' big deal? When I was a kid, I'd try to go to Rated R movies. Sometimes, I could get in. Other times, the guy would ask for ID and I couldn't. All this would require is the clerk to ask for ID before selling a rated M game to a kid. I already have to prove it's me when I buy beer or use my credit card. What's the difference?

OH! And to the people that keep wondering if businesses will stop carrying Mature games for "fear" that they'll get fined, GET REAL! Take an economics class for pete's sake. And do a little research. Most "gamers" are over the age of 18 anyway. If a business decided not to carry rated M games, all they'd be doing is shooting their bottom line in the foot. No intelligent corporation is going to do that. Never.....

It's not the government's place.  Government =/= Parent.  That's the big deal. 

[Tirigon]

Kenrae wrote...

Well, I wouldn't buy DA:O to an underage.

Well I would, if I don´t have to spend MY money. Unless it´s a gift, in which case he would obviously not have to pay me...

I prefer that this law is enforced, even if there's ways to bypass it, just like alcohol and other products. For starters, when there's a law against something people tend to think more carefully about it. Yes, some parents will buy GTA to their 10 yo, but others will see it in a different light just by there being a law. It's human nature.

As much as I dislike GTA, what´s so bad about 10 years old playing it? If they enjoy it I see nothing wrong with it.

And yes, it's a parent responsibility to educate their children, but at the same time, shouldn't we protect the children, who can't protect themselves, against unresponsible parents? To put a more extreme case, would you let a parent to give alcohol to a 9 yo son? What about not sending them to school or giving them extreme porn? There must be a line somewhere, we can discuss where this line should be drawn, but calling for parents' responsibility can't be the answer to everything. Unless we want to live in a pure anarchy or something like that.

The difference between alcohol and PC games or Porn is that alcohol is a poison that can harm you by destryoing brain cells. That´s a scientific fact.
Games and movies on the other hand are simply a form of entertainment. And I wouldn´t mind giving porn to a 9 year old, unless by "extreme" you mean sick sh!t like snuff or child porn, in which case I wouldn´t give it to an adult either but call the police and get the asses who produced it arrested.

After all, a 9 year old child probably wouldn´t watch it anyways. I know for sure I wasn´t interested in such stuff when I was 9 , and if anyone had given it to me I´d have thrown it away and done something more interesting - like playing outside or whatever children do.

[AntiChri5]

Be glad you guys dont live in my happy little nanny state.



We arent allowed to have 18+ games.

[Tirigon]

Jalem001 wrote...


It's not the government's place.  Government =/= Parent.  That's the big deal. 

Yes.


Besides, look at Germany when you think such a law would be good. We have it since always, and atm our politicians are trying to forbid so-called "killer games", that means Shooters and popular games the politicians don´t know, for EVERYONE.
That will be the next step. First you forbid it below 18, then for everyone, and next time you look you can get in jail for playing Counterstrike.

[Wicked 702]

Jalem001 wrote...

Wicked 702 wrote...

Seriously, what is the friggin' big deal? When I was a kid, I'd try to go to Rated R movies. Sometimes, I could get in. Other times, the guy would ask for ID and I couldn't. All this would require is the clerk to ask for ID before selling a rated M game to a kid. I already have to prove it's me when I buy beer or use my credit card. What's the difference?

OH! And to the people that keep wondering if businesses will stop carrying Mature games for "fear" that they'll get fined, GET REAL! Take an economics class for pete's sake. And do a little research. Most "gamers" are over the age of 18 anyway. If a business decided not to carry rated M games, all they'd be doing is shooting their bottom line in the foot. No intelligent corporation is going to do that. Never.....

It's not the government's place.  Government =/= Parent.  That's the big deal. 

Fallacy. The government is whatever we make it to be. We make the laws, through our Representatives, to govern us. We can choose to elect people that make it so stores can sell to anyone. We can also, as we've done, elect people that make it the law that stores cannot sell games to a person based on their age.

Whether I morally agree with you or not is beside the point. The point is that this law is no more an inconvience to the average person than tieing your shoelaces. If you don't like it, elect someone else. Or start a proposition signing, if your state allows such referendums. Either way we follow the laws as written, otherwise what is the point of society?

[Tirigon]

Wicked 702 wrote...

Fallacy. The government is whatever we make it to be. We make the laws, through our Representatives, to govern us. We can choose to elect people that make it so stores can sell to anyone. We can also, as we've done, elect people that make it the law that stores cannot sell games to a person based on their age.

I wonder, are you a hopeless idealist, incredibly naive or is this all sarcasm?

Whether I morally agree with you or not is beside the point. The point is that this law is no more an inconvience to the average person than tieing your shoelaces. If you don't like it, elect someone else. Or start a proposition signing, if your state allows such referendums. Either way we follow the laws as written, otherwise what is the point of society?

We don´t follow the laws as written, or at least we shouldn´t.

The National socialists followed written laws when they killed millions of people.
The Stalinists followed their written laws when they killed millions of people, too.

These 2 examples should show why blindly following every law is stupid.

Society doesn´t need laws anyways. The most basical, like not to harm others, should be common sense, and laws that are against common sense shouldn´t exist.

[addiction21]

Jalem001 wrote...


It's not the government's place.  Government =/= Parent.  That's the big deal. 

And it is parents voters going to the goverment to make this happen...  if you must point a finger and least point it in the right direction.

Modifié par addiction21, 26 avril 2010 - 11:50 .

[Godak]

Tirigon wrote...

The National socialists followed written laws when they killed millions of people.
The Stalinists followed their written laws when they killed millions of people, too.

I fail to see the parallel between, "Let's put an age limit on games." and, "Kills zee peoplez!"

[Tirigon]

addiction21 wrote...

Jalem001 wrote...


It's not the government's place.  Government =/= Parent.  That's the big deal. 

And it is parents going to the goverment to make this happen...  if you must point a finger and least point it in the right direction.

And why, pray tell, should everyone suffer because some dumbasses are unable to care for their children?

[addiction21]

Godak wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

The National socialists followed written laws when they killed millions of people.
The Stalinists followed their written laws when they killed millions of people, too.

I fail to see the parallel between, "Let's put an age limit on games." and, "Kills zee peoplez!"

It is called a strawman fallacy... or hyperbole I am not positive. Pretty sure its one or the other.

[Tirigon]

Godak wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

The National socialists followed written laws when they killed millions of people.
The Stalinists followed their written laws when they killed millions of people, too.

I fail to see the parallel between, "Let's put an age limit on games." and, "Kills zee peoplez!"

There is none.


This referred to

Either way we follow the laws as written, otherwise what is the point of
society?

I wanted to show that not every written thing is automatically right.



You must see it in the context I wrote it, not in context to the OP, which it does, honestly, lack.

Modifié par Tirigon, 26 avril 2010 - 11:53 .

[AntiChri5]

Godak wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

The National socialists followed written laws when they killed millions of people.
The Stalinists followed their written laws when they killed millions of people, too.

I fail to see the parallel between, "Let's put an age limit on games." and, "Kills zee peoplez!"

Me too, but never argue with a Godwin.

[Tirigon]

AntiChri5 wrote...


Me too, but never argue with a Godwin.

God I hate these trolls.

You are unable to get my point and so you refer a wanna-be funny "law" someone has once created.

Cheap, just cheap.


You might read my answer to godak for clarification, in the unlikely case you are interested at all.

Modifié par Tirigon, 26 avril 2010 - 11:56 .

[addiction21]

Tirigon wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Jalem001 wrote...


It's not the government's place.  Government =/= Parent.  That's the big deal. 

And it is parents going to the goverment to make this happen...  if you must point a finger and least point it in the right direction.

And why, pray tell, should everyone suffer because some dumbasses are unable to care for their children?

More hyperbole. Who is actually going to suffer? Kids that should not be getting them in the first place? The smart ones will just order online with a store bought credit card. If it is the really young children that do not work yet then this will not stop those same parents from the buying the game for them like before.

So  tell me where the 10s of millions of suffering people will be coming from? What will actually change?