Why M games are overrated

[SkylerOcon]

Link to original post: [drupal=547]Why M games are overrated [/drupal]



Firstly, let me make it clear that this essay is not about M-rated games being overrated in the sense that they

 

[Solaris1110]

I agree with most of this, but I'm not worried about it. I doubt its going to be like this much longer, since it's mainly the older generation that work at ESRB. These folks were raised in a time where saying "darn" was a serious offense. As soon as the newer generation takes over, some huge changes are bound to happen. No worries.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Um... There is nothing wrong with the M-rating. You are free to alter your personal perception. Just live life telling yourself M-rated games are acceptable. The ESRB rates the games correctly. Your little comment about being unable to say that Halo is rated M only points out your own desensitized nature. It says nothing about the M-rating being "wrong".

From there, the rest of the world doesn't share your perception of "M-rated games aren't that bad". Most people (myself included) appreciate the honesty in these ratings and will use them to make decisions about games.

 

[Firus]

Skyler, you make a great point and bring up something that is not often brought up. People are always arguing about how video game ratings aren't strict enough or are not enforced well, but the ratings are ridiculous. Smash Bros is rated Teen. It's cartoon violence! You could go watch Tom & Jerry and see the same kind of stuff. And while I think it's really immature and stupid, I don't think a fart attack entitles a T rating either. You're fighting and that's it. And the fighting that's done in Smash Bros is hardly violent enough for even an E10+.

Then you've got every FPS and its sequel rated M. As you pointed out, you see worse stuff on the news. You can see everything that's contained in an M game in a PG-13 movie -- in fact, you can hardly find a single PG-13 movie anymore that doesn't have some sort of sex scene or brief nudity. Yet for some blood and shooting a game receives a rating which makes it impossible for anyone to buy the game unless they're four years older than they needed to be to see the movie without supervision. You can argue that in the game you're actually doing it, whatever. Then why does blood come into it? That's a visual thing. You're causing the blood to appear, but what's the difference between shooting someone and blood not coming out and shooting someone and blood coming out? It's like the more realistic a game is, the worse rating it gets. I mean, GOD, Twilight Princess got a T rating for Animated Blood. Apparently, that dark purple-ish substance that appears after you kill an enemy counts as blood.

They're so bloody sensitive about everything. And people are convinced STILL that video games are dangerous, need more harsh ratings, etc. I love the games classified as "dangerous". Like MMORPGs in particular. Bull. If games were so dangerous, I would be a psychotic killer at this point in my life.

Um... There is nothing wrong with the M-rating. You are free to alter your personal perception. Just live life telling yourself M-rated games are acceptable. The ESRB rates the games correctly. Your little comment about being unable to say that Halo is rated M only points out your own desensitized nature. It says nothing about the M-rating being "wrong".

From there, the rest of the world doesn't share your perception of "M-rated games aren't that bad". Most people (myself included) appreciate the honesty in these ratings and will use them to make decisions about games.

Except ratings aren't just recommendations...

And um...honestly, why does Halo deserve an M rating? It's clearly not completely honest, because look at other games -- what about Star Wars: Battlefront 2? That's rated T. What's the difference? Probably, there's blood in Halo and not in Battlefront 2. As he pointed out, you see blood all of the time in real life. So why does the rating get bumped up for a little thing like blood?

And he never said there was anything wrong with the M rating. Just that a lot of M-rated games are overrated.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

You are underplaying things in this world that have serious effects on people. Blood is not a big deal to you, but I guarantee that there are people that are extremely sensitive to the mere portrayal of blood. When you see a family member covered in blood die, it tends to alter your perception of blood permanently. As a result, blood justifies bumping the game up to the M rating. If blood doesn't bother you, then buy the game. You think Smash Bros. isn't that violent? Well, believe it or not, it has serious effects on many very young children. It is not implying that every child who plays smash will become twisted.

You are attempting to undermine the rating system using various social stigmas. "Everyone sees blood." "There's more violence in Tom & Jerry." Get over yourself and accept that many people in the world do not take kindly to those things. That is why the rating system is there. You are being incredibly insensitive to very sensitive topics for many people.

 

[Firus]

You are underplaying things in this world that have serious effects on people. Blood is not a big deal to you, but I guarantee that there are people that are extremely sensitive to the mere portrayal of blood. When you see a family member covered in blood die, it tends to alter your perception of blood permanently. As a result, blood justifies bumping the game up to the M rating. If blood doesn't bother you, then buy the game. You think Smash Bros. isn't that violent? Well, believe it or not, it has serious effects on many very young children. It is not implying that every child who plays smash will become twisted.

You are attempting to undermine the rating system using various social stigmas. "Everyone sees blood." "There's more violence in Tom & Jerry." Get over yourself and accept that many people in the world do not take kindly to those things. That is why the rating system is there. You are being incredibly insensitive to very sensitive topics for many people.

Okay, look. Whether you like it or not, blood is NOT a big deal. It can upset people, yes, but is it something that only people 17 years and older should be able to see? No! Other people can already see it! So why should that impact the overall rating? By all means, add "Animated Blood" on the rating so you know what's in it. But don't limit it so only people of 17 years and older can see the blood. It's a natural thing. Yes, when you die, depending on how you die, you can bleed. Yes, it generally has a bad connotation. And honestly, blood makes me feel queasy (anyone's but my own) -- but in video games, it doesn't affect me. If someone has a problem with blood, don't buy the god**** game, don't limit when other people can get it.

Meanwhile, there's blood all over the place in PG 13 movies and I don't see a person complaining about it. There's a double standard for video games, and that's part of the problem.

Plus, I think there are some things that are more demanding of an M than blood. Like, Ivy's outfit in any Soul Calibur game? Yet I think that every Soul Calibur game is rated T. (Not sure about 4)

 

[SkylerOcon]

You are attempting to undermine the rating system using various social stigmas. "Everyone sees blood." "There's more violence in Tom & Jerry." Get over yourself and accept that many people in the world do not take kindly to those things. That is why the rating system is there. You are being incredibly insensitive to very sensitive topics for many people.

Actually, I was pointing out t he parallels between common things in real life and what entitles an M-rated game according to the ESRB.

You are entitled to your opinion, but please don't call me insensitive for stating mine.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

So, you're referring to the restriction of selling games to kids under 17? Just have your parent buy it. Parents won't buy it for you? Well, then we have a different problem entirely on our hands.

 

[SkylerOcon]

I'm just saying that most games that are rated M really don't deserve the M-rating. If you don't agree, that's fine.

I just don't get why playing Laser Tag and watching surgeries on YouTube aren't banned while shooting at people in a game are apparently only for people 17 and above. It really doesn't make sense. I understand that blood can be bad for some people, but nowhere near every person.

 

[Firus]

So, you're referring to the restriction of selling games to kids under 17? Just have your parent buy it. Parents won't buy it for you? Well, then we have a different problem entirely on our hands.

I'm not complaining personally, I'm saying it's ridiculous to put an age limit because of blood.
It's easier for someone offended by blood to not buy the game than for people not deemed of age to see blood to get the game.

That way it's a matter of choice rather than "I don't like blood, so I don't want people under 17 to be able to see it."

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I'm not complaining personally, I'm saying it's ridiculous to put an age limit because of blood.
It's easier for someone offended by blood to not buy the game than for people not deemed of age to see blood to get the game.

That way it's a matter of choice rather than "I don't like blood, so I don't want people under 17 to be able to see it."

But it still is a matter of choice. You sorta dodged my issue. Even though they "rank" it as mature, you can still get the game.

 

[Firus]

But it still is a matter of choice. You sorta dodged my issue. Even though they "rank" it as mature, you can still get the game.

I don't believe I dodged your issue at all. It is, FACT, more difficult for a 16 year-old or younger to obtain an M game than it is for a 17 year-old or older to simply avoid games that have blood, which they do not wish to see, in it. They're already doing it today. So why does it honestly matter whether it's got the 'M' or a 'T'? Seriously, if it has the same warnings on the rating section of the box, why does it matter so much to you that it have that M?

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I still don't understand your problem. You say it's "more difficult" to obtain these games. Am I correct in assuming that you want the game but your parents simply won't allow it?

 

[Vodage]

First of all, this argument is very tired, I've heard it many times before, and I don't feel like commenting directly on it. But it is interesting to note that while the original super Smash Bros for N64 got an "E" rating, Melee got a "Teen" rating. This would be to suggest that the ESRB has actually gotten more strict with their ratings over the years.

I remember once when I was twelve and my mom freaked out and took away my GoldenEye 64 and my Shadows of the Empire. LOL! I bet nowadays GoldenEye 64 would get an M rating instead of a T rating since small patches of blood are visible through the clothing of people who get hit.

But yeah I'm not getting into this argument. My opinion is the ESRB is doing its job which is to help parents that don't know anything about games stay ignorant and just follow whatever the little label says. But yeah personally I never followed those ratings. I was playing Doom II when I was like 10

 

[Firus]

I still don't understand your problem. You say it's "more difficult" to obtain these games. Am I correct in assuming that you want the game but your parents simply won't allow it?

We aren't talking about me here. I'm saying in general, I'm talking about the principle of the thing. This has nothing to do with me. Hell, I don't even own an M game to be honest (just never found one that appealed to me, though, granted, when I get my 360 that'll probably change, and if the Conduit is rated M that as well).

I'm talking about in general, people under age 17 have to get someone 17 or older to buy the game for them. It's a hassle to get their parents to come, or find a friend that's 17 or older, what if they're at the mall just with friends, whatever. It's inconvenient to get it, it is more difficult. I mean, granted, at 17 they can't card you, so if you look 17 they can't stop you, and honestly I don't see people young enough to not look old enough being in a situation where their parents couldn't buy it (assuming they consent). My point is, if it were a T rating, people offended by blood could just skip by it, and people who aren't old enough can pick it up on a whim if they want. If it's M, people offended by blood will still avoid it in the same way, but people who aren't old enough can't just pick it up on a whim, there HAS to be someone else there.

And if you don't see my point there, let's just forget EVERYTHING I said for a moment and think about this. If it says there's blood in the game on the label, why does it make a difference if it's M rated or T rated? Seriously, I really don't understand the difference. If the difference between a T rating and an M rating can indicate how bad the blood is, all that needs to fix that problem is more descriptive, like "Severe Blood".

 

[Zanoske]

I'm talking about in general, people under age 17 have to get someone 17 or older to buy the game for them. It's a hassle to get their parents to come, or find a friend that's 17 or older, what if they're at the mall just with friends, whatever. It's inconvenient to get it, it is more difficult. I mean, granted, at 17 they can't card you, so if you look 17 they can't stop you, and honestly I don't see people young enough to not look old enough being in a situation where their parents couldn't buy it (assuming they consent). My point is, if it were a T rating, people offended by blood could just skip by it, and people who aren't old enough can pick it up on a whim if they want. If it's M, people offended by blood will still avoid it in the same way, but people who aren't old enough can't just pick it up on a whim, there HAS to be someone else there.

If people below 17 aren't aloud to buy rated M games then why do game stores still sell it to them? I myself am 13 and went to Best Buy one day to buy Counter-Strike: Source and it was rated M, WITH BLOOD. Yet the clerk just kept selling the game to me.

I don't think anyone cares anymore if you buy an M rated game when your under 17. Unless your parents are strict and doesn't allot M rated games, thats reasonable. But you're right, even if the game stores still don't allow 17 or under to buy M rated games, they'll still find a way to get the game.

 

[Konuk]

1 name of Communication the "Media" <---- They take stupid things like games over board.

 

[Firus]

If people below 17 aren't aloud to buy rated M games then why do game stores still sell it to them? I myself am 13 and went to Best Buy one day to buy Counter-Strike: Source and it was rated M, WITH BLOOD. Yet the clerk just kept selling the game to me.

I don't think anyone cares anymore if you buy an M rated game when your under 17. Unless your parents are strict and doesn't allot M rated games, thats reasonable. But you're right, even if the game stores still don't allow 17 or under to buy M rated games, they'll still find a way to get the game.

They may not care, but they're still not supposed to, and I'm sure kids have been stopped.
Plus, I saw a thread on SmashBoards some time ago with another complaint of anti-video game people, about how violent games are and how clerks aren't stopping kids from buying M games enough. If they get their wish, then you won't be able to so easily.

And again, it's the principle of the thing.

1 name of Communication the "Media" <---- They take stupid over board.

Fixed.

 

[PD4FR]

Some games are rated wrong.
The ones that stand out the most to me are:

Perfect Dark should be Teen, not M.
Ratchet and Clank Games(all) should be E, maybe 10+, but certainly not Teen.
I think Halo should be Teen, not M.
Socom should be Teen, not M.
And Melee should NOT be rated Teen. It should be E.

These are some important ones.

 

[Zanoske]

Some games are rated wrong.
The ones that stand out the most to me are:

Perfect Dark should be Teen, not M.
Ratchet and Clank Games(all) should be E, maybe 10+, but certainly not Teen.
I think Halo should be Teen, not M.
Socom should be Teen, not M.
And Melee should NOT be rated Teen. It should be E.

These are some important ones.

Okay maybe they rated those games M BECAUSE! they all have, violence. Maybe they think The children might intimidate the games. Like Halo and Perfect Dark, what if children get a real gun and shoot someone because its cool like in the game? But how will they get a gun? I dont really know, just a possibility. Yet I'm sure Halo and Perfect Dark have something in common that rates them M.

Blood. As stated from the above posts. I don't really know about ratchet and clank because I've never played the games. Melee is rated Teen because of violence. Maybe the kids will probably mock the action moves Melee provides? Why would they mock the game? I don't know.

And i think all those games have something in common when it comes to rating of T to M.
Violence. Yes, violence. This is the main reason of most rated T and M games.

Perfect Dark for the N64 was a great game, I couldn't stop playing it.

 

[SkylerOcon]

Did you even read the post?

Buzz formulated opinion off of an actual opinion. You just sound like you skimmed the thread and read to comments, Zanoske.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

This thread is rated M for mature.

 

[SkylerOcon]

This thread is rated M for mature.

I'm not sure if I should laugh or take that as an insult.

:<

 

[RedPeppers]

I kind of agree with the OP, but some games(RE4 for instance) meet the criteria outlined in the OP as a teen game, and should be rated M(which it is). I'm sorry, but unless my kid is at least 15, I don't want him seeing the headshots you can pull off in that game.

 

[corhor]

Overration is an opinion.

 

[Omis]

Seriously, I really don't understand the difference. If the difference between a T rating and an M rating can indicate how bad the blood is, all that needs to fix that problem is more descriptive, like "Severe Blood".

There is a somewhat more severe form in blood and gore. The whole reason these games are rated M is to allow parents to raise their kids their way. There is almost nothing wrong with that. Unless I am mistaken no matter what age you are your able to buy a T game correct? Would you really feel confortible knowing that a seven year old is blasting Las Plagas's heads apart. In addition you may see a cut in real life but you almost never see the amount of bloud letting that is common in these games.

The only really legitamite arguement I find is the one regarding language. Honestly most "swear" words are just more powerful connotations of existing words.

 

[BrawlBro]

From there, the rest of the world doesn't share your perception of "M-rated games aren't that bad". Most people (myself included) appreciate the honesty in these ratings and will use them to make decisions about games.

ruined your post. you do not know what the rest of the world thinks. you do not know what "most people" think.

I personally believe appreciating the ratings is stupid, most people can figure out for themselves if a game is suitable for a kid or not. For example I know a disney movie spinoff game is suitable for a kid:; while house of the dead is probably not, I dont know the ratings of either...parents need to educate themselves on what their kids are doing and not rely on some organization to do it for them.

 

[RedPeppers]

Ratings help parents because they(as a general rule) fail at video games man.

 

[A_man13]

The ESRB is by far a very inacurate way to rate a video game. Anything opinionated will never be the answer for every person and, for the most part, the ESRB relys on the opinions of the reviewers to make a decision. This really is a double edged sword with this; a game that is reviewed by a more leniant person will likely get a lot lower rating than it deserves and vice versa. More often than not, it is accurite. But I've seen examples of games that really got the wrong rating (Halo, Shrek (but that was before E10)). But America has no choice in the matter; no person will like to be on either end of a description of what may be objectable in a game, how sevear it is, and how often does it come up.

 

[Super_Sonic8677]

If people below 17 aren't aloud to buy rated M games then why do game stores still sell it to them? I myself am 13 and went to Best Buy one day to buy Counter-Strike: Source and it was rated M, WITH BLOOD. Yet the clerk just kept selling the game to me.

I don't think anyone cares anymore if you buy an M rated game when your under 17.

liez. Yesterday I went to Walmart and I couldn't even get super glue to fix my bow quiver because I had no ID. Rediculous. My mom had to buy it. Same for M games.

ESRB can get it's ratings wrong but most of the time,I think they are right,or at least close.

Laser tag you simulate shooting people. In a fps video game,you actually "kill"them,often in a gorey way,how much so depending on the game F.E.A.R. or Call of Duty?

Language,most parents prefer not to have their childeren hear the "F-word" under the age of 14. a Teen rated game is available to ANYOne. Someone meantioned school and though what you said may be true,it's beyond a parent's control. So what they Can control they will,usually.

We as gamers are desensitized to it. We've killed way more Nazis in WWII games then ever were slain in real life. And that's just WWII games. Also designers are always thinking of new ways to do horrible things to "shock" us in the "scary game" genre. RE and F.E.A.R are the first ones to come off the top of my head.

I'd truely LOVE to see the looks on a person's face from 30 years ago if we showed him one of our "M" rated games. lol

Blood exists IRL. But the amount of blood and guts and decapitated body parts(all made to be as "Realistic" as possible) you'll see by the time you get through a "M" rated video game compared to real life will be much,MUCH greater. Unless you're a soldier then it could go either way but that would make you over 18 lol.

I don't think the ESRB should be stricter,but I don't think kids should play most "M" rated games either. Like I said in the begining,it's about(yes,"about") where I think it should be.

This thread is rated L for Lame.

fixed lol jk

 

[Johnknight1]

Some games are rated wrong.
The ones that stand out the most to me are:

Perfect Dark should be Teen, not M.
Ratchet and Clank Games(all) should be E, maybe 10+, but certainly not Teen.
I think Halo should be Teen, not M.
Socom should be Teen, not M.
And Melee should NOT be rated Teen. It should be E.

These are some important ones.

-Perfect Dark now would be a T-rated game (like Perfect Dark Zero is), but it was definitely a M game then.
-Ratchet & Clank should definitely be rated Teen. There's loads of cursing, mature content, and other "content" that goes WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY above the average 10 year old's head. If they got ride of all the sexual content and most of the swearing, then it would definitely be a E10 game, if not E.
-Halo should be M, with all that cursing, ridiculously overdone amounts of blood, tons of violence, loads gore, realistic sounds, effects, and weaponry (even if it is futurist), and for all the n00bs that play it. >_>
-Socom depends on the game. Some are rated Teen, and some are M. It really depends on the amount blood, gore, and so forth.
-Melee and Brawl should be E10, for cartoon violence and cartoon mischief. However, with Melee the K-A rating was dissolve, and it was either E or T, and with it's realistic graphics and sounds for the time, it definitely raises an interesting debate. Brawl on the other hand, should be E10. That is one of the few games most of us agree should be rated lower (along with Shadow the Hedgehog on the opposite end).

If people below 17 aren't aloud to buy rated M games then why do game stores still sell it to them?

Because the average gamer is about 35, and game stores and other companies don't want to lose MOST OF THEIR AUDIENCE in the biggest media in the world!!! If that's the case, why don't we ban unrated movies, R movies, and X movies from all video rental and video sells stores, and ban all music with cursing in it at record companies and on iTunes, and see how well their business does. Seriously, use logic. 10 to 15 year olds aren't the only audience you know, and the average audience in all these medias is like in their 30's or 40's. >_>

Then you've got every FPS and its sequel rated M. As you pointed out, you see worse stuff on the news. You can see everything that's contained in an M game in a PG-13 movie -- in fact, you can hardly find a single PG-13 movie anymore that doesn't have some sort of sex scene or brief nudity. Yet for some blood and shooting a game receives a rating which makes it impossible for anyone to buy the game unless they're four years older than they needed to be to see the movie without supervision. You can argue that in the game you're actually doing it, whatever. Then why does blood come into it? That's a visual thing. You're causing the blood to appear, but what's the difference between shooting someone and blood not coming out and shooting someone and blood coming out? It's like the more realistic a game is, the worse rating it gets. I mean, GOD, Twilight Princess got a T rating for Animated Blood. Apparently, that dark purple-ish substance that appears after you kill an enemy counts as blood.

Worse stuff on the news? LOL! Brief nudity and sex scenes in PG-13 movies? Unless you're counting cleavage, people stripping down to their last layer of clothing, and so forth, you're just BSing stuff. I've yet to see any, and I can name dozens of PG-13 movies these days without nudity. And besides, even if there WAS that, you don't justify bad behavior with more bad behavior.

And blood and gore is definitely a lot more visual then some women in a bra. Heavy amounts of blood is something you definitely don't see in the ordinary. Sure you might see some blood in a PG-13 movie (The Bourne Supremecy was the worse case of that in a PG-13 movie with a dead body in a car, and it wasn't THAT BAD). I don't have a clue what you're rambling on about with PG-13 movies and nudity and tons of gore, but you clearly are overexaggerating the visual contents.

And um...honestly, why does Halo deserve an M rating? It's clearly not completely honest, because look at other games -- what about Star Wars: Battlefront 2? That's rated T. What's the difference? Probably, there's blood in Halo and not in Battlefront 2. As he pointed out, you see blood all of the time in real life. So why does the rating get bumped up for a little thing like blood?

A litt cut, scras, or even a couple of liters of blood in a Teen game is fine (although a few liters in a E10 game would not be okay). But it's not just that. Halo has RIDICULOUS AMOUNTS of blood (the Hunters have like 100 gallons of blood in their systems that you can have spill out), a lot of gore, tons of violence, pretty realistic weapons (even if they are futurist), realistic sounds and effects, realistic graphics, has a ton of swearing, a very dark story, and also has a ton of n00bs. SW BF2 has tons of (childlike) violence, realistic graphics, unrealistic blaster fire and sounds (that sounds kiddish, yet awesome), and NO BLOOD and GORE! Heck, even when people die it looks fake (especially the heroes). There's absolutely no blood or realistic weapon fire in that game, and the worst and ONLY curse word is said twice.

And honestly, when do you see galloons of blood coming out of somebody in real life? Seriously. A little blood like a few streaks of blood coming out is okay (like in DBZ games), and we see that somewhat often in real life when we get scared, injured, bruised, and so forth. But when blood is coming out by the gallons (in multiple places oftenly), that calls for an M rating.And for the last time, stop pointing at bad behavior to justify more bad behavior.

As for me, personally I think there either needs to be a rating inbetween T and M, or M needs to be 15 or 16 on up. Other then that and a few game's ratings (MK64 getting K-A, SSBM getting T, SSBB getting T, and StH getting a E [should be higher]).

 

[Starscream]

Don’t get me wrong, I would never place Halo in the hands of an eight-year-old. But would I give it to a thirteen-year-old? Of course.

There are certainly enough idiots out there on Xbox Live without even more imMATURE 13 year old kids playing online.

 

[Firus]

Worse stuff on the news? LOL! Brief nudity and sex scenes in PG-13 movies? Unless you're counting cleavage, people stripping down to their last layer of clothing, and so forth, you're just BSing stuff. I've yet to see any, and I can name dozens of PG-13 movies these days without nudity. And besides, even if there WAS that, you don't justify bad behavior with more bad behavior.

And blood and gore is definitely a lot more visual then some women in a bra. Heavy amounts of blood is something you definitely don't see in the ordinary. Sure you might see some blood in a PG-13 movie (The Bourne Supremecy was the worse case of that in a PG-13 movie with a dead body in a car, and it wasn't THAT BAD). I don't have a clue what you're rambling on about with PG-13 movies and nudity and tons of gore, but you clearly are overexaggerating the visual contents.

I'm not BSing or making up anything. You can hardly pick up a movie these days without that kind of crap in them. I'm not doing this just to make a point, this is something I've felt for quite a while. You will see partial nudity (i.e. from the back) in PG-13 movies, I'm not making that up.

I'm not justifying bad behavior with more bad behavior, I'm saying that there's a double standard. If no one gives a crap if bad things are in movies, why should they give a crap about them in video games? Oh right, because video games are evil. But we can make over 9000 Saw movies and no one says anything about those. People ***** and moan about video games being violent, but when you have something that you watch where in each movie they find a creative way to torture/kill the people in said movie, no one says a word.

I don't know how I was "rambling". It seems like you're casting insults for no good reason. If you disagree or think I'm wrong, say so, you don't have to add insults.

Because the average gamer is about 35, and game stores and other companies don't want to lose MOST OF THEIR AUDIENCE in the biggest media in the world!!! If that's the case, why don't we ban unrated movies, R movies, and X movies from all video rental and video sells stores, and ban all music with cursing in it at record companies and on iTunes, and see how well their business does. Seriously, use logic. 10 to 15 year olds aren't the only audience you know, and the average audience in all these medias is like in their 30's or 40's. >_>

...No...you misunderstood him. Completely.

He said, if M games are only supposed to be sold to 17 year-olds, then why is it that a 13 year-old is able to walk into a store and buy it without being stopped? That was his point. Not that they should be banned...

I find it funny how this thread was dead for a week, got bumped up, and now all of a sudden it's got a ton of responses...not directing that as an insult or anything, just an interesting side-note.

 

[fallenangemon0]

Very good read!