AX:No playing video games online for people under 13

21 posts

Flag Post

Every video game with an online aspect will now be sold in two versions, one with online, and one without. The with can only be sold, even with parent’s permission, to those over 15. The one without can be sold to any age with parent’s permission.
Do you think this is a good idea, or a bad one? Please explain why.

 
Flag Post

I will reserve judgement till you explain a few things.

First, what is your reasoning. You give a seemingly arbitrary age that a person can play online games. What is special about 15?
Next, what benefit, or purpose, do you see this having?
Further, how can you justify the added cost to game developers to force them to develop solo content. Consider Final Fantasy online games, that have only ever been online.
Finally, who do you propose will enforce this, and what will be the penalty for not abiding by this law?

Thanks.

 
Flag Post

you mean hypothetically, right?

so, why would you do this? what are you protecting these kids from?

you’re also taking away a source of socialisation, of experience from children. bad idea.

 
Flag Post

I think you should sell online video games to every bozo who walks into the shop, with or without parent’s permission and regardless of age. As long as they pay up I don’t see any harm.

Also this bears signs of a troll thread…

 
Flag Post

This is stupid. Why would you do this?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Immortal7777:

This is stupid. Why would you do this?

Above:cutting through the crap.

 
Flag Post

Lets go ahead and do it the way I would: Remove all internet access for people under the age of 16. Only allow internet access from primarily English-speaking countries. Remove all internet access from Australia. Make an “Internet License” that requires a basic intelligence and spelling/grammar test to get.

Yay… Yay.

 
Flag Post

Should be tagged with AX and also a bad idea

 
Flag Post

Mortal Kombat is banned in Australia for being too violent, yet the government allowed Underbelly, a graphically violent tv series about gangs to be aired at 8:30pm. They banned the Human Centipede but people can easily get it off Bit Torrent or The Pirate Bay i guess. Point is, before you ban something for being too violent or sexual, remember people can see worse on their computers or on tv.

 
Flag Post

Horrible idea. I find video games to be one of the few things that actually make me happy (I’m fourteen.). And then you end up with a bunch of very unhappy kids because you took away their games.

And anyway, I remember playing a video game on a playstation that was just about tele-tubbies… I think I was about six at the time. Are you saying that’s too mature for under fifteen too? A lot of games are aimed at that age group, after all.

 
Flag Post

Do you think this is a good idea, or a bad one? Please explain why.

You start. Why should this be implemented? What’s so bad about being online for a kid?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

Lets go ahead and do it the way I would: Remove all internet access for people under the age of 16. Only allow internet access from primarily English-speaking countries. Remove all internet access from Australia. Make an “Internet License” that requires a basic intelligence and spelling/grammar test to get.

Yay… Yay.

Sounds good. Except “Only allow internet access from primarily English-speaking countries. Remove all internet access from Australia.”
There are good people in Finland too.
(Like me :3)

 
Flag Post

To clarify:
Single player doesn’t matter, anyone can play it.
And the age can be lower to 13 if you want.
And any games that are online only are retarded anyway.
The benefit is making so there are less annoying children on PS3 and XBOX screaming swears into the mike.
Any developer that only cares about multiplayer is retarded. Multiplayer is always an added bonus, not the main point of the game.
Yes this is hypothetically.
I really don’t care what they play single player. Just multiplayer where others have to be annoyed by them.

Make an “Internet License” that requires a basic intelligence and spelling/grammar test to get.

That actually sounds amazing.
Screw this thread, that is what needs to happen.

Originally posted by WanderingHero:

Should be tagged with AX and also a bad idea

and explain why

The point isn’t content, it making xbox live and PS3 less annoying
Everyone is assuming I’m against kids playing video games.
I’m not, I’m against them playing them online.
Also, title changed slightly

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Moderated:

Every video game with an online aspect will now be sold in two versions, one with online, and one without. The with can only be sold, even with parent’s permission, to those over 15. The one without can be sold to any age with parent’s permission.
Do you think this is a good idea, or a bad one? Please explain why.

you wanna know why because kids should be able to have on or off line for just people 15 or up it would’nt be fair to the others

 
Flag Post

Moderated, and what about the mature, smart children on PS3 and XBOX talking in a calm, sensitive way and generally acting like a polite adult? Are you going to pull them off too?

If you want to prevent swear screamers(I have encountered those too), simply carry out C_C’s idea of an internet license. The internet license may be taken and received regardless of age. It comprises simple grammar, spelling and punctuation tests. It also gives you simple logic equations so you don’t go spamming “OBAMA WASTES MONEY BECAUSE OF MEDICARE” on SD.

You don’t need a license to go onto the internet, but you can set your site so that it may only be accessed by people with one unless an admin allows a certain person to be an exception.

 
Flag Post

I do not see the point with this law. If the game has Well , You know, Naked woman, 18 years or older people may only buy it. Online, People of all ages can buy it any way Becuase no one can really enforce. Of corse the kids parents, But the police Enforceing and Trowing the kid in jail? Only some Law like SOPA Can Really enforce some thing like that.

 
Flag Post

I would not see a point to this. Some video games are for 17+, but yet young kids still play them. Without their parents even knowing nessecairly. There would be absolutely no way to moniter this. Anymore then the government already is. Or restrictions would have to be as tight as SOPA, and no one is going to pass that.

 
Flag Post

Lol people under 15 are so mad. They think they are mature enough but OP thinks not.

 
Flag Post

This is stupid.

 
Flag Post
And the age can be lower to 13 if you want.

an arbitrary line is always an arbitrary line, whereever you put it.

And any games that are online only are retarded anyway.

certainly not. there is nothing retarded about Dominions 3.

The benefit is making so there are less annoying children on PS3 and XBOX screaming swears into the mike.

make different age servers to do that. that would be a good idea.

Any developer that only cares about multiplayer is retarded. Multiplayer is always an added bonus, not the main point of the game.

absolutely not. in many games, the single player is relaly just a tutorial for the multiplayer. Call of Duty is an example, which is what it sounds like you are talking about.
just because there didn’t used to be internet doesn’t mean it’s necessarily only an additional.

multiplayer is essentially THE perfect way for unlimited original gameplay, FLAWLESS AI enemies, etc. FAR superior to singleplayer. the only reason they didn’t do it before is because the option wasn’t there.

it making xbox live and PS3 less annoying
Everyone is assuming I’m against kids playing video games.
I’m not, I’m against them playing them online.

took you a whlie to get your point across. you’re just annoyed by people you perceive as slightly younger than you. what you really should be asking for is a seperate server with an age-limit.

that or you should just try to play games that don’t incude kids (of the age you have a problem with) in their target audiance.

 
Flag Post

I feel this “law” would be assuming quite a lot of things.
One your assuming that people under a certain age are annoying and all above it are mature enough to deal with, up until 18 I think it should be a parents job to judge whether or not one’s children are mature enough to play. The gov’t shouldn’t raise our children as this leads to large gov’t and hence less liberty, think about the lengths they would go to to enforce this. Secondly whatever they are doing is not hurting you in any way, and as such they have as much right to play as you. What some people view as annoying others do not and the opposite is true, so how is it fair to enforce your view on what is acceptable on a national basis?
So no… I am 14 though ;p