GamerDad Relaunches

[Phil_Stein]

http://www.gamerdad.com/

Congrats to Andrew and co (is there a co?) for getting this back up and going. Good site - I hope you do well and spawn imitators (or at least more recognition of this kind of stuff in mainstream gaming press).

Not a personal plug - I don't know Andrew other than one interview from a few years back. But it is a good site - check it out.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

It's the first place I send colleagues who ask about games for their kids. I know of no other resource for parents that covers electronic media as well as GamerDad and his sidekicks.

Troy

[Dave Long]

Yeah, there's an "and co." there. I write a mostly weekly hardcore gamer column (that I just happened to not get done this week) for the site and I'm also the copy editor now. I do reviews and previews as games and time permits. My review of TimeSplitters Future Perfect is over there as of Wednesday.

Thanks for the compliments. I know Andrew appreciates it and so do I. Keep an eye on the news there. The guy we have doing some offbeat news stuff finds some cool stuff. He had those Pac-Man hats posted before I saw them anywhere else.

The rest of the writers are very capable and we try to make sure we cover all the games parents would be wondering about. You'd be surprised how often the ESRB ratings are off the mark.

--Dave

[Igor Muravyev]

Very cool, I like how GamerDad rates the games more fairly than the ESRB in terms of content.

[Jose Liz]

This happened a while ago didn't it? I remember posting a press release on it a while back...

[extarbags]

Very cool, I like how GamerDad rates the games more fairly than the ESRB in terms of content.

That's what happens when people actually play the games before they rate them.

[Dave Long]

Very cool, I like how GamerDad rates the games more fairly than the ESRB in terms of content.

That's what happens when people actually play the games before they rate them.

Yeah, that's pretty much the idea. We've hit on a few really egregious things in certain games that you wouldn't expect. The one that stands out for me is R-Type Final where it's pretty clear a man and woman are "coupling" in the background of the final stage (as silhouettes at least). The game is rated E - Everyone.

I think someone forgot to mention that to the ESRB.

Most things aren't that bad, but we at least let you know what's in an M or T rated game that might be objectionable in more specific terms than you get on the back of the box so you can decide for yourselves what's tolerable for your kids. We're just trying to give more info along with a rather standard game review.

That's a key. If you just want good reviews of games, there are published writers like myself, Bub, Bernie Dy and others writing for the site. We review the games just as we would for a CGM, CGW or console mag. The only difference is the added "Kid Factor" at the bottom. The rest of the review is standard stuff with a five star scale for rating. So regular Joes shouldn't think it's a site only for parents or kids or whatever. It's tough to get people to understand that, unfortunately. They see the site's name and think they're not welcome unless they're a Dad (or Mom) and that's just not the way it's structured. It helps, but anyone can read it and get a lot out of it.

Anyway, thanks again. It's good to know people are reading!

--Dave

[Dave Long]

This happened a while ago didn't it? I remember posting a press release on it a while back...

It's been a few weeks now, yeah.

--Dave

[Anders Hallin]

Most things aren't that bad, but we at least let you know what's in an M or T rated game that might be objectionable in more specific terms than you get on the back of the box so you can decide for yourselves what's tolerable for your kids. We're just trying to give more info along with a rather standard game review.
You're like a gamer's version of capalert.com ;)

[EvilIdler]

You're like a gamer's version of capalert.com ;)

No hits below the belt! They're not that zealous at GamerDad ;)

I see no RSS feed icon. This RSS addict needs feed! Any work planned
on that?

[Alan Au]

They're not that zealous at GamerDad ;)
Well, not usually. ;)

- Alan

[Phil_Stein]

For parents out there, there's another site here:

http://commonsensemedia.org/

That does age ratings and parent-oriented reviews of all kinds of media (i.e. movies, TV, games, etc). Less focused than Gamerdad, but broader.

[Brian Minsker]

GamerDad's one of my daily stops. My only complaint about the new format is that the age suggestions say something like "Approved by the GamerDad Authority 6+" which, while it means suitable for those over 6, actually sounds like they're approving of the game (especially since it's similar to their old format approval thing). When you read the review, you find out that the game is horrible.

[EvilIdler]

When you read the review, you find out that the game is horrible.

Some kids can play games for hours, even if their parents find them terrible ;)

[shang]

Yeah, that's pretty much the idea. We've hit on a few really egregious things in certain games that you wouldn't expect. The one that stands out for me is R-Type Final where it's pretty clear a man and woman are "coupling" in the background of the final stage (as silhouettes at least). The game is rated E - Everyone.

Er.. some background silhouette of a coupling couple is explicit and harmful.. how? I know this is a tired old argument and views differ and all that, but this seems pretty mild for a "really egregious thing". Maybe it wasn't a question of the ESBR board not knowing about it, maybe they (like I) just didn't think it was a big deal?

[Squirrel Killer]

Er.. some background silhouette of a coupling couple is explicit and harmful.. how? I know this is a tired old argument and views differ and all that, but this seems pretty mild for a "really egregious thing". Maybe it wasn't a question of the ESBR board not knowing about it, maybe they (like I) just didn't think it was a big deal?

"Everyone" includes 5 year olds. I know European mores are a tad different, but I'd prefer to keep depictions of sex acts, even silhouettes of such acts, from my daughter until she's, say, 10 or so.

[Tyjenks]

Er.. some background silhouette of a coupling couple is explicit and harmful.. how? I know this is a tired old argument and views differ and all that, but this seems pretty mild for a "really egregious thing". Maybe it wasn't a question of the ESBR board not knowing about it, maybe they (like I) just didn't think it was a big deal?

"Everyone" includes 5 year olds. I know European mores are a tad different, but I'd prefer to keep depictions of sex acts, even silhouettes of such acts, from my daughter until she's, say, 10 or so.

10! You old-fashioned guy, you. Surely 8 is OK now.

Are there countries in this world where kids get their sex education before ten years of age and can process what it all means? Yes, a silhouette has to receive the same explanation when a kid asks "what are they doing?" just as any other scene that depicts the beautiful act of making love (as my wife and I call it). I do not think kids are remotely ready for that sort of imagery in their single digit years.

[Bullhajj]

I think ten is two digits. I think we should wait until they are well into their twenties.

[Rob_Merritt]

Some kids can play games for hours, even if their parents find them terrible ;)

That is very very true.

[Tyjenks]

I think we should wait until they are well into their twenties.

I am counting on my daughter agreeing with that. :wink:

[CustodianV131]

Will check it out.

[Moore]

Yeah, that's pretty much the idea. We've hit on a few really egregious things in certain games that you wouldn't expect. The one that stands out for me is R-Type Final where it's pretty clear a man and woman are "coupling" in the background of the final stage (as silhouettes at least). The game is rated E - Everyone.

Er.. some background silhouette of a coupling couple is explicit and harmful.. how? I know this is a tired old argument and views differ and all that, but this seems pretty mild for a "really egregious thing". Maybe it wasn't a question of the ESBR board not knowing about it, maybe they (like I) just didn't think it was a big deal?

iirc ESRB never ever plays the games, they view a portion by video, or something, if that, and the pub or whoever says 'yes that is representative of the gameplay' and thats it. So no way would they see anything on the last level of any game. I think.

[extarbags]

Yeah, that's pretty much the idea. We've hit on a few really egregious things in certain games that you wouldn't expect. The one that stands out for me is R-Type Final where it's pretty clear a man and woman are "coupling" in the background of the final stage (as silhouettes at least). The game is rated E - Everyone.

Er.. some background silhouette of a coupling couple is explicit and harmful.. how? I know this is a tired old argument and views differ and all that, but this seems pretty mild for a "really egregious thing". Maybe it wasn't a question of the ESBR board not knowing about it, maybe they (like I) just didn't think it was a big deal?

iirc ESRB never ever plays the games, they view a portion by video, or something, if that, and the pub or whoever says 'yes that is representative of the gameplay' and thats it. So no way would they see anything on the last level of any game. I think.

Yes, that's correct.

[shang]

"Everyone" includes 5 year olds. I know European mores are a tad different, but I'd prefer to keep depictions of sex acts, even silhouettes of such acts, from my daughter until she's, say, 10 or so.

I guess where I'm coming from is that if such acts are decipted in an vague enough way, someone 5 years who doesn't have any context for such things probably won't even make the connection between the silhouettes and sexuality. On the other hand, if the kid does know enough to understand what's going on in the background, it probably won't confuse him much, no? (well, except for the fact that wtf does it have anything to do with a shooter)

i guess what i'm really interested to hear is where you'd draw the line for an E rating ("E" meaning for everyone, from 5 year olds girls, to 64 year old retirees) i mean, if depictions (even vague one) of sex acts are acceptable for 8 year old boys, why have ratings in the first place?

I think we agree on why have ratings in the first place: to prevent kids from seeing something that would be harmful for them. We just seem to have different opinions on what kind of content is harmful. I'd be protective about frightening and overly violent/gory stuff, the kind of things that might cause nightmares to the kid.

Things related to sexuality I see more as a cultural taboo than anything that would cause actual "harm" to young kid. I think, for exampe, that tasteful nudity in a non-sexual context is absolutely a-ok for people of any age. Tasteful sexual acts? I'd say that pre-puberty kids are more likely to be uninterested than disturbed.

I must admit that I'm going with a pure gut feeling here. I haven't actually seen any studies about the effects of sexual material on kids. I just feel that while giving sex-ed to 5 years olds wouldn't make much sense, the opposite is also true. I imagine that a person who doesn't encounter nudity and sexuality before the age of 16 or 18 will be ill-equipped to deal with their own sexuality and will have more anxiety and stress about the stuff than someone exposed to nudity and sex in their early years.

What do I think is the right age for a kid to know about sex? I'd say depends entirely on the kid. As soon as they begin to show interest in such things, I guess.

Um, I hope I answered your question somewhat. I really suck at keeping longer posts cohesive.

[Hanzii]

[quote="Squirrel KillerUm, I hope I answered your question somewhat. I really suck at keeping longer posts cohesive.

No, It made perfect sense and I agree.
While a site like Gamerdad makes perfect sense and is a great idea - I'd never suggest it as a guide in the magazine I write for (which is very family oriented), simply because cultural taboos are so different.
Nudity? No problem.
Secual content? Depends on the context and age of the kid?
Violence? It's a problem.
In the US this is reversed. Ie violence is greatly accepted while any hint of nudity is a big nono.

The PEGI ratings (www.pegi.info)are better than the ESRB-ratings and they're still not really good because they're made for the entire EU (with your country neing the odd one out ;-) ) and EU is not a cohessive unit.
The rating guidelines were decided by meetings between representives from all countries and compromises were made. Ie the most lenient countries compromised to please the prudes.
For example Sweden and Germany has a great problem with violence and gore, Norway and England has problems with nudity and sexual content, while England has a great problem with language, that the other countries didn't share (one reason being that many games are in English, if ypu're old enough to understand the word 'fuck' you're probably also old enough to handle hearing it... a sentiment not shared by the British).

[EvilIdler]

Norway and England has problems with nudity and sexual content,

There are some ad posters plastered around Oslo nowadays, with unclad
couples clinging to eachother. Some positions are *almost* sexual, but
I think it's perfectly OK. They're funny. We only see nekkid backsides,
anyway. The consumer rights organisation (!) found it "revolting, discriminating
to human worth"..and put small, black bars over the butts on the posters.

Images of the ads pre-censorship here:
Dagbladet (in Norwegian, but you only want to see the naked flesh!) (http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2005/02/01/422056.html)

[Nellie]

Is this the same Oslo with the park full of sculptures of....erm....Erotica? :D

[EvilIdler]

Is this the same Oslo with the park full of sculptures of....erm....Erotica? :D

That's the one :)
(Which makes it even more ridiculous)

[Kalle]

If we are discussing Norwegian censorship I think it should be mentioned that they banned "Life of Brian" way back. Yes, the Monty Python movie. In Sweden it was marketed as the movie that was "so funny it was banned in Norway". :)

[Hanzii]

I was just using Norway as an example on how hard it was to make an European rating everyone could agree on, not starting a 'let's make fun of Norway'-thread.
... not that there's any lack of things to poke fun at ;-)

[Kalle]

It's a lame attempt at a thread hijack but it needed to be said. And replying again ups my post count. So now the score is Me 1, Norway 0. I win!

[Bill Dungsroman]

"I'm from Norvay. Isn't dat veerd?"