Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto: Would you let your 6 year old play?

Flyonthewall

No

The_One_Who wrote: »

No one is getting killed from playing a video game, either. Although I will say that I have had many bruises in my time from a NERF gun, those yellow foam balls can hurt, even from a distance!

I killed many things in my video gaming history, some when I was a small child playing an "age-appropriate" game, what's the difference? That Mickey Mouse is killing them, rather than a man?

We played 'war', we played soldiers, we played at being pirates with plastic or foam swords. I know children who attend shooting clubs and fencing clubs and archery clubs and are essentially playing with weapons that can and do hurt others, albeit under strict adult supervision. With the right supervision and education, a game should be just that.

Violence is all around us, so shield to a certain extent, sure, but teach them about it as well. Teach the child that in-game violence isn't real, nor is it 'good'. Children aren't playing lovely, innocent games all the time. They play cops and robbers (who wants to be the cop all the time?), cowboys and Indians, and there are certainly some versions of tag I've seen that look like they hurt.

You can see death on a video game. You can see the blood and the pain. You see characters suffering as they bleed to death in front of you because you just stabbed/shot them for (often) no reason.

Worse, many have emotional violent storylines that, for a child, may be too much for them to handle.

If someone shoots you with a water gun you see someone standing there alive, grinning and slightly dripping with water. With a nerf gun you may get an odd bruise or an automatic ouch as the foam hits them, but there's no blood or suffering. Also will add, I wouldn't let a younger child use them and older ones should be supervised.

Archery is aiming at a target. It's not about killing or violence.

When children play pretend they don't cause pain to each other, they don't see blood, sex or hear bad language. There's no emotional story to it either. They sometimes don't even have any "weapon". If someone is "shot" they can just get straight back up, unharmed. It's not like that on a game. You don't see people on GTA lying on the floor giggling after being shot or denying that they got shot, you see a guy bleeding to death. Worse still, there's very realistic sound effects of the whole event on a game, it's not some kid going bang, bang or a plastic gun making a clicking sound.

Sparhawke

mttylad wrote: »

Well Tornik, what you started as what you thought a good idea.... is now lots of disagreement etc.

Better luck next time mate

This is why I hate these kind of compilation topics, they always seem like a good idea at the time but setting yourself up as a sole expert never is...why can't people just post single topics as and when?

Even if these topics didn't inevitably descend into bickering, it gets so no one can find the answers they want.

Flyonthewall

No

mttylad wrote: »

Well Tornik, what you started as what you thought a good idea.... is now lots of disagreement etc.

Better luck next time mate

lol somehow this happens with almost every topic. Anyhow, it might make people think if they read it (not everyone will know about age ratings/warnings/graphics etc) and there's nothing to stop people asking other questions.

The_One_Who

Flyonthewall wrote: »

You can see death on a video game. You can see the blood and the pain. You see characters suffering as they bleed to death in front of you because you just stabbed/shot them for (often) no reason.

Worse, many have emotional violent storylines that, for a child, may be too much for them to handle.

If someone shoots you with a water gun you see someone standing there alive, grinning and slightly dripping with water. With a nerf gun you may get an odd bruise or an automatic ouch as the foam hits them, but there's no blood or suffering. Also will add, I wouldn't let a younger child use them and older ones should be supervised.

Archery is aiming at a target. It's not about killing or violence.

When children play pretend they don't cause pain to each other, they don't see blood, sex or hear bad language. There's no emotional story to it either. They sometimes don't even have any "weapon". If someone is "shot" they can just get straight back up, unharmed. It's not like that on a game. You don't see people on GTA lying on the floor giggling after being shot or denying that they got shot, you see a guy bleeding to death. Worse still, there's very realistic sound effects of the whole event on a game, it's not some kid going bang, bang or a plastic gun making a clicking sound.

No, but they are imagining it! Images that they are getting from somewhere, even if not from games. I have watched news clips with people lying in bits on the ground after an explosion, with blood spattering walls, and you can definitely see the pain and suffering. It's real. Similarly with car crashes; there have been some pretty graphic adverts released showing results of poor driving/drunk driving. Should children be watching that? Perhaps not. But then should you shield them from their world, and in turn shield them from knowing just how privileged they are?

Or what about books, and fairy tales? Not all sweetness and light in those, in fact most of them are quite gruesome!

It's not necessarily the result (some blood, something they'll get in cartoons!), but the action that they are carrying out. With toy guns and swords they are 'killing' people just the same - they are pretending. And as long as the children are supervised and educated properly, I would have no problem with them driving around or walking around in GTA. Nor would I be too concerned with them watching me play such a game, as long as it was explained to them beforehand and during.

Flyonthewall

No

The_One_Who wrote: »

No, but they are imagining it! Images that they are getting from somewhere, even if not from games. I have watched news clips with people lying in bits on the ground after an explosion, with blood spattering walls, and you can definitely see the pain and suffering. It's real. Similarly with car crashes; there have been some pretty graphic adverts released showing results of poor driving/drunk driving. Should children be watching that? Perhaps not. But then should you shield them from their world, and in turn shield them from knowing just how privileged they are?

Or what about books, and fairy tales? Not all sweetness and light in those, in fact most of them are quite gruesome!

It's not necessarily the result (some blood, something they'll get in cartoons!), but the action that they are carrying out. With toy guns and swords they are 'killing' people just the same - they are pretending. And as long as the children are supervised and educated properly, I would have no problem with them driving around or walking around in GTA. Nor would I be too concerned with them watching me play such a game, as long as it was explained to them beforehand and during.

I never used to imagine anything like that despite having a really good imagination as a kid...

Perhaps to end this disagreement and continue with the threads purpose, we can all agree that age ratings and warnings on games are very important, parents should know what is in a game before giving it to a child and that there should be careful consideration before buying such a game.

Regardless of the rest and how much violence is around, it doesn't mean that children are all fine to be playing such games (and the same goes for any other forms of media really).

Tornik

mttylad wrote: »

Well Tornik, what you started as what you thought a good idea.... is now lots of disagreement etc.

Better luck next time mate

Yeah, it seems like a couple of people have derailed the thread almost from the off and turned it into yet another argument about the evils (or lack thereof) of gaming and how other childish pursuits are inherently better/worse/the same (delete as appropriate).

Sparhawke wrote: »

This is why I hate these kind of compilation topics, they always seem like a good idea at the time but setting yourself up as a sole expert never is...why can't people just post single topics as and when?

Even if these topics didn't inevitably descend into bickering, it gets so no one can find the answers they want.

I don't recall implying that I was anything like a 'sole expert', just someone who wanted to offer some advice in a place I thought it might be needed.

RichL74

No

The_One_Who wrote: »

No. A good parent will allow a child to play such a game with supervision, and only if they deem the child to be mature enough to understand that it isn't real, it's a game, and that it is not to be copied in the playground.

Hell, I'd rather my neighbour let their child play GTA than roam the streets at night acting like a feral dog.

Whatever. Do what you like.

Lip_Stick

Hmmm I've a son who is 6, and I'm going to allow him to have a little go on the game. Before anyone jumps on me, I'm quite aware of games and their ratings. I'll make sure he's completely supervised, sitting on my knee and only let him do particular activities, i.e. tennis, running around the woods, biking in the mountains, picking outfits, wasting my money on a yellow car...that kind of thing.

He won't see me playing any missions, and I'm going to scout it out and make sure I avoid certain areas and radio stations (now I've been reminded of that). I guess I'll be doing most of the driving too.

Most of his mates play COD, but he's useless at it so we mainly stick to lego games. I don't see any harm in him seeing filtered bits of the gta game.

Sparhawke

kjmtidea wrote: »

I can't believe some of the replies to this thread! Surely this is a wind up? Who in their right mind would let a 6 year old play gta or cod?????

Anyone who didn't hear about this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/27/marie-smothers-grand-theft-auto_n_3821879.html

I have been playing computer games my entire life, when I was 8 I think I was playing Elite.

Kids that young should not be playing these games; but a lot of parents do not care at all. It is just like those that let kids habitually watch horror or murder films, when I was 8 Macgyver came out but he barely ever even looked at a gun.

Flyonthewall

No

Lip_Stick wrote: »

Hmmm I've a son who is 6, and I'm going to allow him to have a little go on the game. Before anyone jumps on me, I'm quite aware of games and their ratings. I'll make sure he's completely supervised, sitting on my knee and only let him do particular activities, i.e. tennis, running around the woods, biking in the mountains, picking outfits, wasting my money on a yellow car...that kind of thing.

He won't see me playing any missions, and I'm going to scout it out and make sure I avoid certain areas and radio stations (now I've been reminded of that). I guess I'll be doing most of the driving too.

Most of his mates play COD, but he's useless at it so we mainly stick to lego games. I don't see any harm in him seeing filtered bits of the gta game.

See that's a bit different. You know the game, you're supervising your kid and you're avoiding all the adult parts of the game. I still personally wouldn't do that as characters can still be heard swearing or be seen being violent. Even if driving if you have an accident it can lead to other things. However, there are the nicer areas and places with no other people, no story if you're just wandering etc.

It's people who don't know the game, ignore warnings, don't filter it and so on.

The lego games are great for all ages. COD on the other hand, isn't.