To be strict about video games?

[balinesecat]

We allow the kids to play video games but with time limits and stick strictly to the age ratings.

DS is still in primary school but has friends whose parents are buying them 12, 16 and even 18-rated games. He gets to have a go when he's over at theirs. Those kids then expect to play those games when they come over to ours - of course they get a hard no. But I'm a bit put out that some parents seem to be totally laissez faire about this.

AIBU to think these parents are being irresponsible allowing their kids to play mature-rated video games? Or am I just being a prude?

Nope, you're not a prude. These games are 18 for a reason. My DD wasn't allowed to play COD when she was younger or GTA but her friends were. She didn't really question it. She now won't allow me to get Fortnite for my 6 year old as if she wasn't allowed older games, then he's not allowed either 😂

My ds 13 nearly 14 hates me because I won't let him have GTA, his adult older brother told me it was a strict no he can't have it. I had no idea of what it was actually about, my eldest put me straight.

DH and I are both gamers and take the age ratings on games as advisory. If the DC want to play a game then we play through it ourselves first to see what we think of it and make a decision based on that, the consoles are in the family room so they don't play on them unsupervised, and for online games they're not allowed to add 'friends' unless they're people we know in real life and DH or I have said it's okay.

My eldest is 10yo and plays Fortnite. He also plays Zelda (12), Super Smash Bros (12), MegaDrive Classics (12), and a few of the Final Fantasy games.

Some games like GTA (which I love and respect as a modern media masterpiece) definitely not. Other games maybe - I still don't know why Fortnite has the age rating it does, there's no blood and the 'violence' is entirely cartoonish.

It's best to actually play games yourself and come at them with a bit of knowledge than make arbitrary rules out of ignorance.

The only reason Fortnite is a 12 is because of the online/chat element, if you put that aside then content-wise it is no worse than Minecraft.

I agree with you.

EwItsAHooman

Ah, that makes sense.

I'm so conflicted on this as I played many games that I was well under the advised age rating for when I was younger, and in general I think the advisory age is a bit off on some games.

CoD is moderately violent but no more than an action film would be and get a 15 age rating, which I think many people would allow a 13 year old to watch. GTA however, I think does warrant children being a bit older not for the violence but the context and story line.

My feeling is that it's more about putting violence in context, gore isn't always bad.

I do remember a few years ago possibly ruining a small boys Christmas as he was asking his mother for Dishonoured for Christmas (eavesdropping on the train) and I commented "it's an excellent game and the throat slitting animations are very well done".

games, even benign ones, are designed to be highly addictive.

Do you let your DC loose on anything else that's highly addictive?

Some parents are idiots, more concerned with being their DC's cool friend than actually doing some hard parenting.

YANBU.

I should add that although I sometimes play video games myself (Uncharted, Spider-Man, Red Dead Redemption etc.) I'm not familiar with the ones that DS's friends are into.

I always figured that the video game industry wouldn't put a higher rating on a game if it could get away with a lower one, which is why I've been strictly adhering to these ratings.

However the ratings given to Fortnite and Super Smash Bros mentioned earlier make me wonder whether I'm being too strict.

That said I'd probably still ban Fortnite for the sheer annoyance factor.

YABU to feel "put out" about anything another parent does. It's their choice. Making it about how you feel about other parents is where you lose me; you do what you feel is right for yours, let them make their choices as they see fit.

I don't let the DC play massively violent games. DS13's Dad has older DC so when he's there he plays "older" games, and I trust his Dad's judgement to know which ones are and aren't suitable. I don't mind what other parents choose, though, because it doesn't impact on my decisions either way.

You are not a prude, parenting isn't universal.
Our dd12 has been allowed PUBG since release, and Fortnight, Overwatch etc.
She plays GTA but only with myself, dh or dd19 ( and only online)
However with friends at our house we stick to Just dance, sonic, mario etc, I usually ask parents first

There is absolutely nothing violent about Smash Bros. You don't even "knock out" your opponent like in more conventional fighting games; the aim is to knock them off the stage.

YABU to feel "put out" about anything another parent does. It's their choice

I think OP is put out they are letting OP's primary school aged son play 18+ games, rather than that they are letting their own children play the games. They get to make choices about their kids, not other people's, and for me it would be common courtesy to check.

As a gamer my whole life, I would probably allow most children to play a 12 rated, like even youngish kids. But I would might do a little research on it first just incase and keep general supervision.

But I wouldn't allow kids to play 18 rated games in my house and certainly not shooter games like cod until they are actually 18. Hmm...well, maybe 17. But there's no way 13 year old kids should be anywhere near 18 rated games.

I find www.commonsensemedia.org/ a useful resource - there are reviews by both parents and kids on games there, with average crowd-sourced age ratings.

Also, I play rd redemption 2 and it is amazing but I wouldn't let anyone younger than 17 play it. (...in all fairness, probably because i'd be hogging it though).

Supersmash brothers and things like Zelda are fine for all ages though.

I let ds 5 play Batman Arkham city with his dad for a few hours on a weekend.Hes not allowed to play "live" online games though or cod,gta type games

When mine were younger I always had a look and gauged for myself the suitability of them. As an example most of the wwe games were 16 rating yet wwe was shown at 5 in the evening on tv and had a whole host of kids toys. So although the games may well have contained violence it wasn't really anything more than what they knew about iyswim

I would agree with you, if the age rating seemed in any way meaningful.

I was playing a video game... would happily let the kids watch as i played. I thought theyd love this playing it themselves, it would be a blast, very dungeons and dragons role play, its a bit dodgy at times but nothing massively concerning for a pre-teen and early teen.

It's an 18.

I absolutely couldn't believe it when i realised. I was right, the kids love it. But an 18 i just don't get.

Even some of the more morally controversial elements, if you playing a game like lego city undercover, rated a 7 you'll find many similar gameplay elements just in cartoon form....

nick a car and go on a murderous killing spree... yep you can do that in lego city in a age 7 rated game.

Disney infinity, kill a load of people, yep but its ok cos these are the bad guys.... just think about that for a second....

It may be (marginally) less graphic but thats still what you are doing.

In the end if your child has a good grip of whats real and whats not, the benefits to their bilateral coordination, general coordination forward planning skills probably outweigh the downsides. I certainly couldnt persude my kids to do the level of OT and physio to get the kind of benefits ive seen from playing computer games. If i started to see any negative impact (temper esp) id be stepping in quick.

Id rather judge for myself than rely on fairly ambiguous age ratings

I don't think you are being unreasonable. At all.

We got a bit further. If we know the parents let their kids play older games, we don't accept play dates. If we find out after a play date, we don't accept them again.

Our choice.

All that said, some of the ratings do seem odd. When he is a bit older to understand the nuance I will relax. But he's 7yo so for now we are super strict.

Oh and fortnite can sod off. I live with the dances being thrown about every 2 mins, I don't want the actual game near me...
GrumpyOldishWoman

That said i have an (almost) blanket ban on any game that cannot be immediately saved and turned off. That ruled out fortnite.

@greeneggshamabdchips. Interesting you mention temper when most of the gamers I know (all 16+) tend to lose their rag mostly at Fifa which has a very low age rating.

Mine were allowed Fortnite but after a few moths of playing it they both received a ban until they're adults that can play it in their own homes, mainly because the aggressions coming out of them, copying things they've seen and heard in the online chat options, when my 12 and 14 ye old sons are threatening to 'mutilate your skull' and the like I said absolutely not, game was gone.
I do okay through things first though and judge it as we go along, their allowed to watch and play WWE but any sign of them doing the mines at home will be another instant ban.
They cannot separate gameplay from real life so they have it down for them. I can't see any other way of managing it.

I dont know about you but i find games that have a high investment cost (the i want to win) but no real way to mitigate against loss (eg you have to get the this spot to save the game, you're neck and neck with your opponent but your opponent gets the goal) are likely to be bad for tension and therefore temper, I'm more likely to limit those kind of games.