|
Subject: See, now
that's just asking for it.
Sweet
merciful christ. I sincerely hope that Sen. Lieberman and
his merry band don't catch wind of this one.
Consider that
the entire gaming press is arguing that it's a parent's
responsibility to restrict their kids' access to violent
material, as opposed to governments banning "violent"
media outright. It's a good argument, and it's the one I
agree with. But now you get this guy bragging (in one of
the most widely read online gaming magazines, no less) about
how he has his 3-year-old son playing Quake II. Doesn't
this completely undermine the gaming industry's position?
3 years old?
Hell, developmental psychologists are still divided on whether
kids should be watching TV at that age. But teaching them
to play PC games designed for people aged 18 and up? Radpipe's
just asking for it.
Grey
I don't advocate
a blanket restriction on games with violent material. I
do think parents need to watch their kids closely to see
how they react to them, and how they behave after having
played them. Show me a homicidal kid who blames computer
games for who he is, and I'll show you a kid who had problems
long before he started playing the games. But I guess it's
far easier to use blanket restrictions. But whatever the
case, ignorant parents just don't care. Their kids will
play whatever they feel like.
Yeah I've
thought a lot about this issue, but I didn't want to get
into it in my column. I just wanted to talk about the joys
of playing with your kids, and this "next generation
gamer" thingy.
And, for the
record, my Zachary is a loving, caring, little boy. He has
no trouble at all separating the gaming world from his own
:)
Take care
--Rad
|
