Which "Mature" titles are actually immature?

[bdbdbd]

rocketpig said:
Not in my opinion. Entertainment is created for very different reasons. If the games aspires to be nothing more than an adrenaline rush and plays with depth and great controls, it's not "immature" per se, it's just going for a different feel.

The same way I wouldn't call the original Spider-Man movie immature, I won't call Halo immature. They're both well done entertainment vehicles... They just don't challenge the grey matter too heavily. Nothing wrong with that.

I'll take that attitude any day over a game that jumps into a story where the developer shows himself completely incapable of handling properly or intelligently, instead giving us a half-assed story that's insulting to anyone with a brain... I would call that immature much more quickly than something that aspires to be nothing more than good ol' fashioned fun.

But "fun" and "mature" doesn't mean the same thing or count each other out. No, i wouldn't call the Spider-Man movie mature by any means, but it was surprisingly well made and maybe you could call it "good" or atleast "decent" entertainment, but it was immature with it's childish plot. Although, it didn't pretend to be anything else. Now, this is the point where we run into problems, as BK noted, high rating doesn't tell you if the game is mature or not, as in terms the content being for mature taste, it just tells you that the content isn't appropriate for immature people, to who the "mature" games usually are targeted at. Of course, the rating exists only for one reason, which is to indicate to who the content is appropriate to.