http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8342589.stm have to say, it's nice to see parliament supporting the games industry here (see the embedded video) after one mp scaremongers that children shouldn't be subjected to such violence, the reply from everyone else basically being "but it's 18-rated so it's not actually for kids and is illegal to be sold to kids, you fucking dumbass"

Politicians are quirky, dependable creatures .... especially when they know reporters are watching.

As always, expect them to publicly make grand statements toward the goal of getting re-elected.

These headliner statements usually have absolutely nothing to do with the actual bills or they way the politician will actually vote at the end of the process. Instead they are all about what they think the voters want to hear.

If you want the real information you have to look at the records and broadcasts from the meetings, hearings, debates, and committee reports. You need to look at the actual bills being discussed, and watch as they change. Those are easy to find online.


In this particular article, Mr Vaz is following the forumla exactly: "The MP for Leicester East pledged to raise the issue in Parliament on the day prior to the release." He isn't sponsoring a bill. He isn't implementing or affecting a policy change. He is just going to stand on the podium in front of a mostly-empty room and try to add a feather to his cap.

All Mr Vaz is doing is using money and resources so that he can tell voters that he made a stand to help their children.

As we know it's very popular to demonise the whole games industry, the pairing of the words "games" and "violent" conjures up images of kids covered in blood or whatever, and the debates/questions in parliament are always filmed anyway, I think the guy at the end is actually very sincere



In this particular article, Mr Vaz is following the forumla exactly: "The MP for Leicester East pledged to raise the issue in Parliament on the day prior to the release." He isn't sponsoring a bill. He isn't implementing or affecting a policy change. He is just going to stand on the podium in front of a mostly-empty room and try to add a feather to his cap.

All Mr Vaz is doing is using money and resources so that he can tell voters that he made a stand to help their children.

yeah totally, he's jumping on the tried and tested bandwagon which one mp rightly attributes to the style of the daily mail

Quote: "but it's 18-rated so it's not actually for kids and is illegal to be sold to kids, you fucking dumbass"

news flash - (google surveys) most wanted (and no doubt played) game for boys under the age of 18 this xmas is surprise surprise, that R18 game :)

Quote: Original post by zedz

Quote: "but it's 18-rated so it's not actually for kids and is illegal to be sold to kids, you fucking dumbass"

news flash - (google surveys) most wanted (and no doubt played) game for boys under the age of 18 this xmas is surprise surprise, that R18 game :)

Then that is the fault of the parents, not the developers!

Won't someone please think of the developers!?

Maybe it's just me, but if a parent can't figure out what a game titled "Modern Warfare" is about just by the fucking name alone, and then decide if it's appropriate for their preschooler, maybe they shouldn't be having kids in the first place. Because they're probably retarded.

That said, 18 limit is usually too high for most games. I'd have no problem letting a 13 year old play a game like Modern Warfare. A 9 year old maybe not.

18 should be reserved for really sick games. (And the limit would be more respected if it was.)

Quote: Original post by Mantrid
the pairing of the words "games" and "violent" conjures up images of kids covered in blood or whatever,

So you mean I'm not supposed to be covered in blood after playing GTA4 ? Hmm. Strange.

Quote: Original post by Beyond_Repair
That said, 18 limit is usually too high for most games. I'd have no problem letting a 13 year old play a game like Modern Warfare. A 9 year old maybe not.

Then you, as the parent, are stil able to purchase a copy of Modern Warefare for your 13-year-old child if you like. I disagree with you that it would be OK for a 13-year-old to play that game, but the point is that it should definitely be up to the parents to choose whether they want their children playing it or not (rather than the government or some other third-party).

Just be thankful you don't live here... In Australia, R18+ games are illegal and you can only legally purchase MA15+ rated games (even if you're a 29-year-old adult).

When is this going to end? Decades ago when violence first started showing up in movies, the same debates were going on but now it is just accepted that rating them and restricting minors from viewing them works just fine. Will video games ever reach that point?