Parokki said: Andrew said: I tend tothink of a mature game based on what you are fighting. In Mario (for example) you are fighting comical carachters who don't really do anythingapart from moving up and down, you never feel they want to kill you and pee on your body. Well at least we would hope so. A teen game the bad guys look like humans and they will shoot you and try to trick you. A mature based game, aka gears of war. You know the grunts will do anything they can to kill you. I also think the maturity level is how you kill them, mario is stomping, GRAW is shooting them. Gears of war is tearing them apart. I personally think that Teen games are the funnest because they can devlop deep charachters. Well I think i'm done that post So you're basically defining mature as violent, or rather containing realistic violence? Not flaming you here, this is a vague term and yours seems to be a common definition.

 

Well um I guess so, but if you've ever played gears of war you kinda find out quick the diffrence between a Mature game and a Everyone game, and it is kinda the situation that you are put in that could define it.

kber81 have you ever played pokemon? There's just as much depth and challenge in a pokemon game as there is in many of the games you rate as "mature" games. The truth is that you call something mature based on art style rather than content. There are plenty of mature games on DS and Wii but people can't see it just for the "image" of the game.

Andrew said: I tend tothink of a mature game based on what you are fighting. In Mario (for example) you are fighting comical carachters who don't really do anythingapart from moving up and down, you never feel they want to kill you and pee on your body. Well at least we would hope so. A teen game the bad guys look like humans and they will shoot you and try to trick you. A mature based game, aka gears of war. You know the grunts will do anything they can to kill you. I also think the maturity level is how you kill them, mario is stomping, GRAW is shooting them. Gears of war is tearing them apart. I personally think that Teen games are the funnest because they can devlop deep charachters. Well I think i'm done that post

So you are saying that "mature" games can be defined by enemies that want to kill and pee on you and the fact that you can shoot or "tear apart" enemies?  I'm sure you'll understand if I disagree.

Games that appeal to adults, and I speak from experience here, are ones that are both quickly fun and complex.  Hence the wide appeal of things like Tetris, Brain Age, The Sims (though I don't see what's so fun about the last one there personally).  Sure, this doesn't mean that FPS aren't possibly fun, but you are providing a very narrow definition.  Do you think adults can't have fun with Katamari Damacy, for example? 

Pretty interesting debate about what makes a game mature.

I agree with naznatips on the gameplay. It should be challenging, unique, and immersive. However, I'm a fan of a deep and complex storyline, and characters I actually want to care about. I find the MGS series to be the best combination of gameplay/storyline/graphics, and hence its my favorite franchise.

However, as naznatips also plunged into, graphics don't make an experience mature by itself. As long as it provides a good challenge, and in some instances just incredibly fun, it can be leagues better then your average button masher.

Andrew said: Parokki said: Andrew said: I tend tothink of a mature game based on what you are fighting. In Mario (for example) you are fighting comical carachters who don't really do anythingapart from moving up and down, you never feel they want to kill you and pee on your body. Well at least we would hope so. A teen game the bad guys look like humans and they will shoot you and try to trick you. A mature based game, aka gears of war. You know the grunts will do anything they can to kill you. I also think the maturity level is how you kill them, mario is stomping, GRAW is shooting them. Gears of war is tearing them apart. I personally think that Teen games are the funnest because they can devlop deep charachters. Well I think i'm done that post So you're basically defining mature as violent, or rather containing realistic violence? Not flaming you here, this is a vague term and yours seems to be a common definition.   Well um I guess so, but if you've ever played gears of war you kinda find out quick the diffrence between a Mature game and a Everyone game, and it is kinda the situation that you are put in that could define it.

I think I see the confusion here, Andrew. When you say "mature," you apparently mean "something that gets an M rating from the ESRB," which is a valid and reasonable definition of the term, and I think most of us would agree that violence is the main concern when using such a definition. However, I think many of us are intending "mature" to mean "played by adults," and I don't think adults actually think that games are automatically more appealing the more violent they get -- in fact, I might claim it's often the reverse.

Great. More arguments about what is "mature" and what is "childish" in video games. Let's set the record straight - Maturity is not about violence, blood, sex, cursing, dirty jokes, or darkly oppressive graphics. That is an adolescent's concept of "mature," and so a childish idea in its own right. I for one am all for violence, blood, sex, cursing, dirty jokes and darkly oppressive graphics in some games, but I never for one moment delude myself into thinking that playing such a game is a more mature endeavor than playing Pikmin. Maturity is about getting a job, paying bills, cleaning the house, and having some damned responsibility for your life. So if you want to play a mature game, go play The Sims.

Not this "mature" vs "childish" semantics again. Listen, there is no point in using such vague terminology as "mature" or "childish", as each somehow mysteriously changes in meaning depending on the person using it which that only makes it all the more frustrating when anyone tries to use it objectively like this to define any aspect of gaming. Honestly, who decides what is "mature"? Is it you? Is it me? Is it the content? Is it the play value or the amount of blood and guts? Is it the most games with a M rating? Or is it whatever the company tells you? I don't honestly see the pride in claiming "Mature" to begin with and in this case it just seems like its being used as an excuse to justify a poor selling system's increasingly limited gaming demographic, "We don't have the best selling system but we're still the most hard core system!", like that's worth anything. Since when was "Mature" the measure of any standard of a better system or a better gaming experience? If "Mature" games are really so "Mature" then why do they seem to appeal more to 13 year old boys than adults? Why does "Mature" typically equate to flashy visuals and blood & guts over any other aspect of the game? All in all, "Mature" just seems like an excuse here for a system selling less and its fans needing a reason, any reason to still think they're the best.

omgwtfbbq said: There are plenty of mature games on DS and Wii but people can't see it just for the "image" of the game.

This is the problem though.

Just like the PSP gets the "no good games" image.  The DS and now the Wii, get the "typical Nintendo kiddy console" image.  Once a system gets a badge, it's hard to get rid of it.

The Wii will find it hard to get rid of a "kiddish" image and it may very well take years to do.  But the main problem is solely at Nintendo's feet.  If they started widening their production to more "mature" and a bit more risky levels, then they may very well get rid of the image that their systems have.  3rd party companies can try and by producing games to cater, but in the end it is solely at Nintendo's feet.

And I reckon they are just plain scared to do this incase it sends people away.

davygee said: omgwtfbbq said: There are plenty of mature games on DS and Wii but people can't see it just for the "image" of the game. This is the problem though. Just like the PSP gets the "no good games" image. The DS and now the Wii, get the "typical Nintendo kiddy console" image. Once a system gets a badge, it's hard to get rid of it. The Wii will find it hard to get rid of a "kiddish" image and it may very well take years to do. But the main problem is solely at Nintendo's feet. If they started widening their production to more "mature" and a bit more risky levels, then they may very well get rid of the image that their systems have. 3rd party companies can try and by producing games to cater, but in the end it is solely at Nintendo's feet. And I reckon they are just plain scared to do this incase it sends people away.

Well, actually, I think the immaturity argument has pretty much entirely disappeared from all but the sony and microsoft fanboys, who won't buy a Wii anyway.  To every system gamers who actually take the time to check out the Wii and it's game library there isn't really even a debate.  Nor is it a question to casual gamers.  I know quite a few adults who have purchased Wiis for themselves.  As far as Nintendo trying to deal with the image they actually are not targeting kids this generation as per popular opinion.  80% of their $200 million marketing budget for the Wii is spent towards targeting adults.  Most Wii commercials have many more adults in them than kids.  Some have only adults.  They are not focusing on the so called "kiddy" audience as offensive fanboys would like everyone to believe.  http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/12/nintendo-wii-marketing-to-exceed-200-million/

naznatips said: Well, actually, I think the immaturity argument has pretty much entirely disappeared from all but the sony and microsoft fanboys, who won't buy a Wii anyway. To every system gamers who actually take the time to check out the Wii and it's game library there isn't really even a debate. Nor is it a question to casual gamers. I know quite a few adults who have purchased Wiis for themselves. As far as Nintendo trying to deal with the image they actually are not targeting kids this generation as per popular opinion. 80% of their $200 million marketing budget for the Wii is spent towards targeting adults. Most Wii commercials have many more adults in them than kids. Some have only adults. They are not focusing on the so called "kiddy" audience as offensive fanboys would like everyone to believe. http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/12/nintendo-wii-marketing-to-exceed-200-million/

 Adults may be playing the Wii and DS, but that doesn't deter from the fact that Nintendo games systems still ooze "kiddy console".  Although IMHO, there is nothing wrong with that.  It's just there will be a portion of the gaming public that will not go down this avenue purely because the Wii and DS has a badge and they don't like it!

You talk about the Wii's game library though....what exactly in the library means that there is no debate with regards to have a less "kiddy" and a more "adult" console?