Are parents ultimately responsible for what their kids play?

[aerodynamik]

What do you think on this subject? Are parents responsible for what their kids play? We all know a game has a parental guidance rating, do you think parents are responsible for checking this ?

[Empire]

Not all, those that live there kids dand have had there perents goo to them it maybe passed down the lines with there kids. But with how social network media is nowdays it making people brain dead. But in gaming point of view, Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhh

[The Blackangel]

Yes they are. Parents are the ones who buy the games for the kid up to a certain point. Once they're teenagers, they can buy the games themselves assuming they have a way of making their own money. Now there's some games that can't be legally sold to anyone under 18, but most game stores like GameStop don't exactly ask for an ID. After all, it ain't beer they're selling. They ring the game(s) up and send you on your way so they can help the next customer.

But especially when the kids are younger, parents are entirely responsible for what their kids are playing. They need to buy age appropriate games, so the child doesn't pick up any bad habits. For example, I have no civil words for a parent that would let their 5 year old child play RDR2, or any GTA games. Also, kids of that age don't have the emotional maturity to understand the kind of game they're playing when it comes to adult themed games.

Edited December 11, 2022 by The Blackangel

[Shagger]

Of course they are. Video games are not toys like they were back in the 80's and 90's, they are in entertainment medium, just like movies, music, books and TV. And like the any entertainment medium, any work within it will be aimed at a target audience. If that target audience are adults and/or older teens, there's a good chance there will be content that, for reason or another, may not suitable for young children. Just like movies, video games are rated to help parents determine whether or not a game is suitable for their children. If they decide to buy a game with a more mature rating for a young kid to play, that's thier choice and I would never question it, but any responsibility for that child being exposed to something they would consider inappropriate, whether it be a violence, bad language, sexual themes, drug/alcohol use or whatever, the responsibility for that lies solely with the parents. Any parent unwilling to take responsibility shouldn't be one.

 

Edited December 11, 2022 by Shagger

[Kane99]

Of course. Parents are responsible for anything their child has access to, whether it be movies, tv, gaming, access to a PC, etc. Growing up, I always tried to watch R rated movies, play M rated games and so on. And for the most part, my parents allowed it. I don't think it had any affect on me mentally, or made me want to do bad things like the news outlets try to paint gamers as, or have in the past.

But as I have gotten older, there are some games I played and movies I saw as a kid, that I probably wouldn't suggest kids play or watch. 

 

[Grungie]

If you don't want your kids to be playing certain games, you should look into the game before you get it for the kid. That's part of the reason why the ratings systems exist. Maybe research why that M rated game is rated M, or just make it easier if they're under a specific age to just say no to M rated games.

[Kyng]

Up to a certain point, yes. If they're young children, then the parents should be the ones buying the games - and it's up to them to make sure the games they do buy are age-appropriate (or, if they go over to their friends' houses to play games, they can always try to make sure they aren't playing anything too mature there). 

But, if they're teenagers? At that point, I just don't think it's realistic to hold parents responsible for their children's gaming choices. Their teenage children will probably be buying their own games by that point (without their parents necessarily knowing) - and even if the parents do try to stop them from making unwise choices, they're just going to rebel against it. If anything, the outcome might even be worse than if the parents had done nothing.

In England, the age of criminal responsibility (i.e. the age at which children, rather than their parents, are held responsible for crimes they commit) is 10. At that age, I think it makes sense to say that children are at least partially responsible for their own gaming choices (rather than it being 100% the parents' responsibility). 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Kyng

[Shortie]

Yes, definitely, Games have a rating on them to help protect the children and I really do think that parents should always be looking at this and making their own decision as to whether or not their child should be playing it. As a gamer myself I play majority of the games that my children have an interest in so I will have an insight into whether my kids can play it or not or whether I feel it would be suitable for them. 

[Smokey]

Of course. Depending on the age of the kid that is. Once the kid is able to purchase the games on their own with their own money, then not so much. However, growing up, my dad bought me all my games, I think he stopped when I was around 12 or so. The PS2 era being the last few games he purchased for me.  I bought everything after that, bought the PS3 on my own with my own money and so on. However, My parents were more lax with what I was playing. Hell, I was 4 or 5 playing Mortal Kombat 😛  I turned out fine, for the most part. 😛

[killamch89]

Parents do because they can limit what their child can and cannot get. I mean, I wouldn't have played Mortal Kombat as a kid if my parents didn't allow me to.

[Scorpion]

Absolutely, parents should be responsible for their kids' gaming choices. Checking ratings helps guide appropriate content and promotes healthier gaming habits.