It's Christmas time again, which means many hefty sales flyers in the local newspapers. Lately, I've been seeing many video games on sale, just in time for the holidays. I've noticed a couple of things about these items: They are not cheap, and they sound violent, even macabre. Not knowing a heck of a lot about these technological miracles, I did a little research to see exactly what these games entail.
With names like "Left 4 Dead 2" and "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare" (shouldn't it be Call to Duty?) I assumed that these entertainment vehicles are not for the faint of heart. Others I saw advertised are called "Borderlands" and "Dragon Age". According to Gamespot, all but Dragon Age are of the genre called "first-person shooter". These products seem to be marketed to kids, and I don't see adults finding much appeal in these games. These games, however, are big, big business. Gamespot reports the Call of Duty franchise made $3 billion as of this year, and a recent AP news article stated that "Modern Warfare 2" made $550 million all by itself, with around 9 million copies sold. That's a lot of children actively shooting at targets that look an awful lot like people.
The rating system for motion pictures has, for many years, purported to help parents decide whether or not a particular film is fit for their children to view. Of course, reading a movie review would give these parents the information they need, but the rating system does serve a purpose. The idea is that children, unlike adults, are not mature enough to separate fact from fiction. Violence, sex and drug use are all taboo subjects for very young viewers. Recently, DVDs even come equipped with warnings regarding "some language" and "smoking". Really, who would want to watch a movie without some language? Seriously, will watching an adult light up a cigarette really traumatize a child? If so, how about shooting at enemies (people) and zombies (former people) with blood, guts and brain matter spewing everywhere? How is this wholesome entertainment?
These games do come with some ratings, and the first-person shooters are generally labeled, "Mature". Since they are directly marketed to children, though, this seems an exercise in futility. At $60 a pop, these games are expensive. Even a sale price of $44 is steep for a kid, heck, it's steep for me. Presumably, parents are buying these for their kids. Surely they know what they are getting, yet there is no outcry. Why do parents think that merely watching people getting shot is worse than having your child actively doing the shooting?
I'm waiting for the holiday action game whereby kids get to shoot at Santa and his reindeer to keep their friends from receiving more Xbox games for Christmas than they themselves have. I wonder how many parents scooping up these little treasures don't allow their kids to play with toy guns?
With names like "Left 4 Dead 2" and "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare" (shouldn't it be Call to Duty?) I assumed that these entertainment vehicles are not for the faint of heart. Others I saw advertised are called "Borderlands" and "Dragon Age". According to Gamespot, all but Dragon Age are of the genre called "first-person shooter". These products seem to be marketed to kids, and I don't see adults finding much appeal in these games. These games, however, are big, big business. Gamespot reports the Call of Duty franchise made $3 billion as of this year, and a recent AP news article stated that "Modern Warfare 2" made $550 million all by itself, with around 9 million copies sold. That's a lot of children actively shooting at targets that look an awful lot like people.
The rating system for motion pictures has, for many years, purported to help parents decide whether or not a particular film is fit for their children to view. Of course, reading a movie review would give these parents the information they need, but the rating system does serve a purpose. The idea is that children, unlike adults, are not mature enough to separate fact from fiction. Violence, sex and drug use are all taboo subjects for very young viewers. Recently, DVDs even come equipped with warnings regarding "some language" and "smoking". Really, who would want to watch a movie without some language? Seriously, will watching an adult light up a cigarette really traumatize a child? If so, how about shooting at enemies (people) and zombies (former people) with blood, guts and brain matter spewing everywhere? How is this wholesome entertainment?
These games do come with some ratings, and the first-person shooters are generally labeled, "Mature". Since they are directly marketed to children, though, this seems an exercise in futility. At $60 a pop, these games are expensive. Even a sale price of $44 is steep for a kid, heck, it's steep for me. Presumably, parents are buying these for their kids. Surely they know what they are getting, yet there is no outcry. Why do parents think that merely watching people getting shot is worse than having your child actively doing the shooting?
I'm waiting for the holiday action game whereby kids get to shoot at Santa and his reindeer to keep their friends from receiving more Xbox games for Christmas than they themselves have. I wonder how many parents scooping up these little treasures don't allow their kids to play with toy guns?
No comments:
Post a Comment