to think SIL was wrong to buy game for nephew?

[geekymummy]

The game is The Simpsons, my nephew is 5, the packaging says suitable for age 12+... she says she'll keep an eye on it whilst he plays.

I used to work in a game shop, I used to come across so many parents buying games for their kids that were unsuitable. It irked me no end, and this was before I became a mum

I know the game probably won't have blood and gore, but my point is about what I think is a lax attitude about these things...

The snobbery is "I don't let my child watch Tv/play computer games etc etc...lowest common denominator etc etc etc "
My DD age 6 is in the brightest set at school she reads a year above her age...she is active happy and healthy....I resent comments that "parents like computer games because they keep kids entertained for hours"....
She has Narnia (12 rating) for her DS there is nothing to concern ME in in....and it stimulates her improves her co ordination and concentration far far more thatn the ridiculous Disney/Nemo etc Age 3+ games which she fids tedious and boring....but then maybe I am the snob....by the time these kids are adults if they are comptetent and proficient with computer they will not be able to function to a high level in our world...but hey ho they can always bake

thats NOT competent and proficient obviously

I'm with serenity

I am competent with a computer and I didn't use one til I went to sixth form college.

Skills for a post oil world, thats what we all need.

Thing is macdoodle, you are confusing age and difficulty. Of course, the easier children's games are rated 3+ but it does not follow that the only harder, more challenging games out there are higher rated games.

Specifically for the DS, there is Animal Crossing, Lego Star Wars, all Pokemon games, Luminous Arc, Mario and Luigi Partners in Time (AWESOME game) and that's not even starting on the puzzle games. These are all 3+ and all games that adults play. And that doesn't even count all the PEGI 7+ games.

SO the argument of having to go to a higher age rating to get the difficulty seems odd to me. You have to look a little harder but the games are there.

Dh went mental with his ex when he found out that their 6yo ds had been watching his Godmother's kids (aged 15 & 18) play GTA.
He's told her that if she is planning on getting him a games console (she's looking to get him one for Xmas) he is vetting all the games she will buy for him, because she just doesn't know enough about computer games to judge whether the content is suitable for him or not. I remember one weekend, dss told us mummy said to tell us to let him watch Pirates of the Caribbean(she knew we had a copy), apparently he had seen bits of it at already mentioned house. We refused - far too scary(I found it scary in places ) for a 6 year old, he got freaked out at Harry Potter! She also was going to let him watch Torchwood, fortunately we had seen the first episode and explained to her exactly why it wasn't for kids (like the trailer didn't make it explicit enough)
Definitely would like to reinterate that the age ratings on games do reflect the content and not the difficulty - they are equivalent to BBFC classifications.

I didn't use one properley till I started my second job ...I consider myself able to get by...we are the lost generation...we didn't have them at school yet need them for daily life (in my job we cannot function without them)....for our kids they are as vital if not more so than reading and writing and this will continue to progress rapidly...I understand the age appropriate stuff but really those that ignore how very important computers and technology will be for the furture generations are hiding their heads

i do agree abotu agge classification but there is alwasy an underlying snetiment thta pcs/games are not quite U and nice kids playw iht sticks

and stioks are good and pcs are bad

my son is coming up for 3 and some of his friends have played on consoles/PC's already, 2 of them we know have their own mp3 players!!

it shocks me how much SOME people will go to to entertain their kids without having to do it themselves!! my 2 kids play nice games together, have half an hour tv time in the morning and in the afternoon. they have watched the odd film trailer on the pc with daddy, but only disney films!

ds is happy to watch a disney film and i very much doubt he;ll be playing on the playstation etc for a long while, daddy has kept his old consoles for him to play with when he gets old enough but even then he'll be closly monitored and probably wont play it without one of us present!!

i agree with you geekymummy- i think it is unreasonable!!!

ah eys but he is 3
i agree that kid that age odnt need it but i DO htink tis imprtant for kdis to fit in
ours is 9 and he is getting one ofr xmas

obv htat is The Right Age

well yes we see about 9/10 being the right age (looking into the future with my glass ball).... we dont want him to be the odd one out at school but at the same time want to prolong his onnocence to these things as long as we possibly can!! haha!!

that should be innocence

Soem things I am adamant about like no TV/computer in bedrooms...TV guess I will eventually bend but computers no way...with all the predators out there I will be supervising computer use...as for consoles etc...I think kids are much more progressive than we give them credit because we did just NOT have the technology....as for doing it not to have to occupy them I think that is a little unfair...TBH I pay more attention when she is on computer/console/DS etc as I like to keep eye on what she is doing...when she is colouring/reading;/writing/playing I pay less attention IYKWIM....my DD is 6 and almost al her circle of friends (educated professional caring mums and nice polite well socialised kids) have Nintendo's - they mostly play with their virtual dogs/cats etc and seem to have quite a good little interaction going on...I would never spend the money on a console for a child this age (but it is the money rather than the principle)...but we have a PS2 (quite old now and was a xmas present for H before DD was born)...and I have a Wii which is actaully quite family friendly and energetic...but TBH none of play any of them all that much !

I think there's two issues being debated here really......ratings, and how much people should stick with them, and whether games consoles are a corrupting influence (and I know no one has actually said that directly, but talk of 'innocence' and protecting children from them as long as possible makes me feel like some of you consider them the technological equivalent of a Bacardi Breezer!)

I don't think anyone is saying that children watching or playing 15/18 games or films is a good thing. But, in some circumstances, there are going to be times when you as a parent are going to decide that for your child you are going to have a different view on how relevant they are. For example, I have a 4, 7 and and 9 YO. Do I blanket ban DS1 from playing things that are too old for DD, or do I look at it on a case by case basis? DD is always going to be doing things at a younger age than DS1 did, because I can't and won't isolate her from her older siblings.

What about the consoles themselves then? Now, I really can't see what the problem is here. They're a tool, no different than a book or a skipping rope. Playing games does not automatically make you insular or anti social and there's no obligation to play for hours at a time - I think that tends to be down to parents not setting limits, rather than the evil mind control capabilities of the PS2! I suppose for some people the problem is that it's all a bit of an unknown quantity - if you don't play games yourself, how can you judge whether the stories of children glued zombie-like to the screen are sad examples of the lack of parental control or an inevitable consequence of just playing the damn'd things? I've been bought up with games being a normal family thing to do, a legitimate alternative to reading a book or playing scrabble (my dad bought Pong in the 70's and we had a Spectrum to play games on from '82), so I've never had any desire to prevent my DCs from playing too.

ooh serenity
our kdis a rethe smae age

..............and oyu win sensibel psot of snisiblenss of he day from me

and I was just explaining you to DH, and telling him that I wanted an 'In cdo we tusrt' t-shirt (weirdly I'm not sure if I spelt that right!)

well eh si SO HUnky anyway isnt he?

ooh check out his pecks

Fab posts serenity

Having an older child, I have seen game phases come and go, if that's any reassurance to anyone. Just because a certain game is 'THE' big thing one month, does not mean it will stay the big thing for very long IME.

But the GTA games have been very popular for years and show no sign of slowing down. Of course, eventually, The Simpsons will die off but I can't imagine it will be any time now.

llpj, I meant in relation to my own son - he will have a phase of liking a game then go completely off it. We have a Simpsons game which was a favourite for a few months when he was 10 and is now untouched.

oh, oops!