GTA IV is released, people who don't understand it cry

I've made the point here before that one of the major reasons I have an Xbox 360 and not a Wii is because of Microsoft's stable of games.

As someone who grew up with video games, my tastes have changed and I respect the fact that Sony and Microsoft can respect that. Not to knock the Wii, but it makes games for families and younger gamers and that's where they've found the ground to kill the other two systems in sales.

That said, as an adult, if I want to play violent games with zero redeeming social qualities, leave me the hell alone.

Still, whenever a new game comes out, people get upset and cry and holler about the need to protect our children and their delicate little minds. Considering GTA is marketed to older gamers, and is tagged as a "Mature" title - meaning no one under 17 is supposed to be allowed to buy or rent it, the whole argument seems pretty stupid.

This is just the current generation's battle ground for rebellion and a need for a ounce of parental interest and intervention. Where kids in my age group grew up with movies that were off limits, while others did not, video games are playing out in much the same manner.

I realized that I was part of the country's problem with language and violence while playing the last generation of GTA when I was shocked by the language and not the violence after playing for a little while. I decided I'd never let any of my kids play a game like that, if for no reason than to keep them from dropping N-bombs on the playground.

While that would take a degree of interest in a child's life and enough street smarts to realize that a child shouldn't be allowed to play any video game they can afford, I think it's practically the least a parent can do to help police their children's intake of mature content.

With a need to supervise kids online as well as what they can access on cable television, it shouldn't be that much to ask. Oh, and there's the parental warning labels on the game as mentioned above. It really can't be much simpler.

Here's the bottom line - while op-ed pieces like this one just recycle the "think of the children" company line from years past, no one discusses the fact that no one from the gaming industry of the publisher, Rockstar, says that kids should be involved with the game.

It's the equivalent of wondering what's being done to protect kids from the evil clutches of AARP. Neither is designed with kids in mind.

(As a side note, in amongst the foul language and senseless violence, there is actually a pretty solid storyline. This is light years ahead of games less than a decade ago, which makes arguments that draw parallels between movies and games that much stronger. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of violence and awful behavior, but not at the expense of a solid gaming experience. While I realize that anyone railing on against the game won't care, it's still worth throwing out there. It's also worth noting that the game lets you decide your path with regards to saving people that the crimelords send you out to kill. Make a judgment call and you get a different in-game plot depending on which way you choose to go.)

From the Star-Trib opinion piece:

Research confirms that violent media increase young people's aggressive thoughts and behavior and decrease their self-control and the inclination to help others. Adolescents who play violent video games tend to be more hostile, to argue more with teachers, to get into more physical fights, and to do more poorly in school, one national study reports.

Really? Kids who somehow get access to violent and wildly inappropriate video games don't do well in school? No kidding. I wonder if you find those same types of behaviors and grades at the intersection of populations of kids who have parents who aren't around the house much and those that have parents who want to be buddies and buy them whatever they want.

I'm betting there's some correlation there.

(Image from: IGN.com)