By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kantor said:
the_dengle said:
Max King of the Wild said:

Should be more like this...

Study: 89% of parents believe violent video games are a problem. Upon answering this survey 100% of those 89% went out and bought the brand new Halo for their child. One parent said while waiting in line, "This world needs more heros like Master Cheif to stand up for what is right."

Found out over Christmas my 9-year-old cousin plays Halo. Wanted to punch somebody. My uncle should know better, too, he's a gamer.

Of course, the kid also plays Kinect Sports, Mario Kart, and Pokémon. I'm sure he'll be fine. But come on... Halo? Really?

Am I missing something about Halo which is especially traumatising or disturbing?

At no point do you even shoot at anything resembling a human. You fire energy weapons at bizarre-looking aliens. The tone is fairly light, the story never gets especially dark, it's not scary, and it's not ultra-violent like, say, Gears of War.

So what is so awful about Halo that a nine-year old can't play it?

I do accept that I have a considerably more liberal view of this than most people, but there is literally zero correlation between video game and real world violence, and the only reason I can see to keep a game from a child is if it will cause them mental trauma. Halo will not.

If you disagree, you should take it up with the ESRB. They're the ones who give all the games M ratings for "blood, language, violence," and let's not forget the "online features that may expose players to unrated user-generated content." The M-rating meaning "don't sell this game to customers under 17."