English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The reason why im asking this is well my friends and i keep getting in trouble for playing Quake 3 Arena in school.. We don;t go to your average school.. We go to a computer based school.. We do our homework and then we wait patiently to play then we get yelled at.. But besides that what you people feel about killing games.. Like is 17 old enough for mature games.. or should we go older or younger.. Just whats your opinion.. Im a 17 year old mature guy, i can tell the diffrence between reality and computer world.

2007-01-12 09:06:27 · 11 answers · asked by eighty dee 3 in Games & Recreation Other - Games & Recreation

11 answers

I'm not sure if its just an age thing. Personally, I was raised old-school, which meant no TV and no video games until I could buy that kind of stuff for myself. Warnings are put on those types of games for a reason, and i don't see any reason why it shouldn't be followed. Ultimately, its up to the parents, which can be a scary thought. But, I think there are much better things to do with time than play video games.

2007-01-12 09:11:14 · answer #1 · answered by Living for today and a good wine 4 · 0 0

I'm 15 and I can tell the difference. I knew that video games weren't reality when I was 10 or so and that's when I began playing video games. There isn't anything wrong with bloody video games. I've been playing Duke Nukem since I was 5 or so. My family had a computer and I learned how to use it and there was Duke Nukem on it. That game is most certainly for a mature audience but it did not affect me in any way except that I got scared many, many times while playing.

2007-01-12 09:10:49 · answer #2 · answered by Zikro 5 · 0 0

I personally don't think that video game violence is as much of an issue as people put it out to be. There has been violence long before there were video games. I think that we need to focus more on social reform in America, rather than pointing to video games as the source of every other crime. My biggest question is why do people such as senator Jack Thompson and Hilliary Clinton (who obviously have nothing better to with their pointless careers) stand around pointing fingers at the video game industry without any proof of their absurd claims. Perhaps putting more children in stable enviorments, giving them decent education, and aiding them in their perception of right and wrong would do more good vs. making up bogus excuses in order to gain a greater political standing.

2007-01-12 09:24:48 · answer #3 · answered by marksman11011 4 · 0 0

Violent video games are not what differences a new child's habit. maximum infants understand the version between a video game and real existence. on the different hand, the protection stress has been commonplace to help very violent video games and use them in recruitment because of the fact they are in a position to desensitize a new child to violence and killing. mothers and dads play a huge function in a new child studying approximately violence. A violent ascertain makes a new child greater probable to be violent, no longer a violent video game. as an occasion, my husband performed violent video games maximum of his existence yet he's no longer a violent individual because of the fact his mothers and dads weren't violent. My brother, on the different hand, is a violent individual and he's purely been taking part in violent video games for the previous 2 years. His father might beat us and his mom and he fashions that. video games could have advantages. video games sell hand eye coordination and concern fixing skills. they are in a position to additionally strengthen spatial expertise and math skills. i opt to advise non violent video games to even infants as long as they do no longer play greater effective than an hour an afternoon.

2016-10-07 01:48:16 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I think at that age is ok. See, my younger brother who is 8 plays games like Halo and such and I think those games mess him up. They are too violent, and i don't think violence should be given so freely to kids younger than 14. 17 is different since you are almost an adult, and clearly able to think for yourself.

2007-01-12 09:14:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

My way I don't like it because when your child gets older he/she may do all of that in real life and may some day you will have to get them out of JAIL!!
Thats just my opion.

2007-01-12 09:10:44 · answer #6 · answered by ILoveHimm. 2 · 0 0

You're an exception for most people your age can't tell the difference.

2007-01-12 09:14:22 · answer #7 · answered by will 4 · 0 0

whas thebig deal? killin games are just like regular games. i thought of something, DONT PLAY THE GAME IN SCHOOL!

2007-01-12 09:12:50 · answer #8 · answered by ? 1 · 0 0

Be prepared for real life!

2007-01-12 09:14:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

who cares
just let them

2007-01-12 09:10:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers