By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Against the grain: 3-rated games, bias and fanboyism should GO!

Conegamer on 28 December 2010

As part of my ongoing quest to please Beuli2, I am going to be doing a regular series of threads called "against the grain", bringing up news stories which are either overlooked or too big to miss...

However, I have received many messages from users who have commented on how much they enjoy this series. If I can just do that with this writing, then that's important to me. One day, I am to become a writer for this site, or another. I didn't really enjoy it beforehand, but I've been getting quite into it now!

Truly awesome ad campaign made me want to play Mario Kart again. Fail

 

So, I was looking back at this site and I realised something. I seem to have turned into a Nintendo-fanboy. Sorry people, but this isn't the case. I love all of my consoles equally, but I find the Wii-exclusive games to be slightly better.

 

 

The issue is, to many people, including many of my friends, games rated PEGI 3 or 7 are bad and kiddy. Is this true? I'm gonna take 2 big titles from this year, and see if you agree. Do you see a 3 year old happily finishing this?

 

 

 

 

 

Or this?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Because, if you do, then you must not have played these games. These two games are rock solid. I mean, OLD SCHOOL difficult. So, i doubt that any 3-year old could easily finish these games, if finish them at all! The rating system, as it stands, reflects on the context of the games, and if they're incriminating in any form, NOT the difficulty or play style.

 

 

Of course, what if you were to change this rating system to base the games on difficulty? Then you could find games which are very easy, but not suited to a younger audience, such as COD. So, what should be done? That's where my idea comes in.

 

 

I think games certificates should GO. It's doing nothing. Everyone knows that 10 year olds play COD. I played Duke Nukem 3D when I was 4, and I turned out fine! Other people played games such as GTA or Medal Of honour at a young age, so what's the point of these ratings? The only thing it does is gives fanboys ammunition to call certain consoles "for kiddies" or "far too easy and not grown up"

 

 

My second point is that, I don't think gamers should be ashamed of what games they play. Who cares if its Just Dance, or COD, or Monster Hunter, or Galaxy? No-one will judge anyone differently, so I believe it should draw to a close. 

 

 

Finally, if you like a certain console, fine. I do too. I like them all. But, I don't see why people need to get so wound up and start disrespecting other people due to what gaming console they play. I've noticed even this site has started to slide downhill due to fanboyism, and many other sites are now past the point of no return. Fanboyism should stop. Respecting other peoples opinions goes a long way, as I, sadly, learned the hard way...


 


Anyway, I've de-railed my own OP. Back on topic. Do you agree that Game ratings are a waste of time? If so, why? And if you disgree, just comment below, as always




 

If you'd like to read more of my series, then look no further! Links are below;

 

 1.  http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=120673&page=1 (statistical anomolies with Wii games)

2.  http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=120880&page=1&str=175262275#  (What Nintendo SHOULD have done with the Wii)

4.   
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=121479&page=7&str=58563204#3 (why the Wii is a toy and can't do mature games)
 
 
 
5. Sorry, number 5 is not alive. The computer died (Why Sony is, and always will be, doomed)
 
7. 
Sadly, this will no doubt be my last thread for a long time, as revision picks up, I won't be online as much. I therefore hope everyone had a nice Christmas, and wish them all the best in the new year!


 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Around the Network
Conegamer on 28 December 2010

Damned Google chrome messing up my thread...



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

homer on 28 December 2010

I most certainly disagree about game ratings being a waste of time. Parents need to have a way of knowing the type of content in a game without playing it extensively or researching it extensively. Of course, many parents do not care what types of games their children play or the content in them, but just like the movie industry, content ratings are definately needed for the other group of people who care about the content their children receives.



"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius

HappySqurriel on 28 December 2010
homer said:

I most certainly disagree about game ratings being a waste of time. Parents need to have a way of knowing the type of content in a game without playing it extensively or researching it extensively. Of course, many parents do not care what types of games their children play or the content in them, but just like the movie industry, content ratings are definately needed for the other group of people who care about the content their children receives.


I agree in general, but when it comes to content ratings I think the age based ratings tend to be misinterpreted ...

Many people seem to think that adults should play "Mature" games instend of "Teen" or "Everyone" rated games, but the "Teen" or "Everyone" game could actually be more appropriate for an adult.



homer on 28 December 2010
HappySqurriel said:
homer said:

I most certainly disagree about game ratings being a waste of time. Parents need to have a way of knowing the type of content in a game without playing it extensively or researching it extensively. Of course, many parents do not care what types of games their children play or the content in them, but just like the movie industry, content ratings are definately needed for the other group of people who care about the content their children receives.


I agree in general, but when it comes to content ratings I think the age based ratings tend to be misinterpreted ...

Many people seem to think that adults should play "Mature" games instend of "Teen" or "Everyone" rated games, but the "Teen" or "Everyone" game could actually be more appropriate for an adult.

I agree with you. Just because a game does not include blood and violence, doesn't mean it cannot be challenging, but game ratings should exist, to show the content in the game, just like movies and even to a lesser extent, music.



"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius

Around the Network
silicon on 28 December 2010
homer said:
HappySqurriel said:
homer said:

I most certainly disagree about game ratings being a waste of time. Parents need to have a way of knowing the type of content in a game without playing it extensively or researching it extensively. Of course, many parents do not care what types of games their children play or the content in them, but just like the movie industry, content ratings are definately needed for the other group of people who care about the content their children receives.


I agree in general, but when it comes to content ratings I think the age based ratings tend to be misinterpreted ...

Many people seem to think that adults should play "Mature" games instend of "Teen" or "Everyone" rated games, but the "Teen" or "Everyone" game could actually be more appropriate for an adult.

I agree with you. Just because a game does not include blood and violence, doesn't mean it cannot be challenging, but game ratings should exist, to show the content in the game, just like movies and even to a lesser extent, music.

I agree with this. Regardless of whether the content negatively effects the child, rating systems will let the consumer know what to expect from the game in terms of violence, sex, and vulgarity.



Icyedge on 28 December 2010

Personally, the solo game I choose to play is not really related to violence/blood or difficulty. Its more about getting a mature storyline and experience. Mario gameplay is great, but the story is far from being immersive, let alone interesting.



LordTheNightKnight on 29 December 2010
Icyedge said:

Personally, the solo game I choose to play is not really related to violence/blood or difficulty. Its more about getting a mature storyline and experience. Mario gameplay is great, but the story is far from being immersive, let alone interesting.


Then you might as well watch more movies, TV shows, or read more books. Okay, the really good ones aren't that common, but you'll get a lot more of those than out of a typical story heavy game. Most game developers are simply not practiced or skilled in storytelling or writing (some exceptions though). Plus those aren't really mature stories for the most part, but that's for another thread.

That's an honest recommendation.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

dante on 29 December 2010

idk if your joking or not but while the rating system has for the most part failed to serve its purpose of making sure kids don't buy inappropriate games, we shouldn't  just eliminate it. Parents have the right to see if the games they are buying their kids are appropriate even if many of them dont bother to. Also i never heard of people interpreting the ratings as difficulty of the game so im not sure what your getting at



LordTheNightKnight on 29 December 2010
dante said:

idk if your joking or not but while the rating system has for the most part failed to serve its purpose of making sure kids don't buy inappropriate games, we shouldn't  just eliminate it. Parents have the right to see if the games they are buying their kids are appropriate even if many of them dont bother to. Also i never heard of people interpreting the ratings as difficulty of the game so im not sure what your getting at


Hang around boards like neogaf, or G4's site.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs