安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
该主题的作者已标记一个回帖作为问题的解答。
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
Your kid (especially if in middle school and beyond) is already playing those games. They either ordered the game themselves, play it at a friends house, etc. Your kid cannot be stopped for enjoying whatever content they want. Your kid will also resent you from being unable to play the games all their friends are playing, which will only cause friction with your relationship with them. The best COA is to teach your kid that games are fantasy, not to be mimicked, and raise them with good values. Then you don't have to worry about the games they play.
Controlling the content is not a good strat to win hearts or minds. All it does is make the forbiddent even more attractive. And with so many venues for them to get the content you deem unacceptable, what purpose is there in caring about the rating?
Nope, gonna keep this one!
Those present real harms. Playing video games, reading books, watching movies does not.
https://the-artifice.com/video-game-content-ratings-anyone-care-anymore/
66% is a strong majority. Overwhelmingly 66% beats 33%. Also, there are THOUSANDS of articles echoing the same fact: Most parents don't care about the rating and get the game for Timmy anyway.
About the article you link, first of all it was released in 2014, 6 years ago. That's a huge timeframe for data to change, and the article itself references what I assume to be some sort of article, that was published in the year 2000. They reference data that was 14 years old at the time. Please explain to me how journalism is not a joke.
Everything else is pointless. The ESRB should even handle ratings as little as possible, not expand them.
The link I posted was just the first one out of 100s. I could've linked every ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ one of them, but inevitably some halfwit who doesn't agree will say the same ♥♥♥♥ over and over again.
I'd rather have the current system in place to prevent people whining even further about the content in games. At least if there's a problem, we can say "well the game was rated M, you were warned about the content", versus if there was no system in place, people would be pooping themselves with fury about some stuff.
For example Conker's Bad Fur Day has loads of foul language and mature content in general, but it looks like a kid game, for the most part, with the cartoonish animals and artistic style. If someone bought the game for their kids based on the cartooony nature of it, without any rating in place, they'd be surprised when their kid learns every bad word in the book and start saying them all the time.
It can't exactly stop them from making a purchase if little Billy cries enough at the local Gamestop.