NIMF report card lauds retailers, chastises parents
by Kyle Orland 
{ Nov 30th 2006 at 12:25PM }
Most people know the National Institute on Media and the Family's annual video game report card for its list of ten games for children to avoid during the holidays. But the full report offers some interesting research and opinions on the industry as a whole.Most of NIMF's scorn this year is directed at parents, who "do not seem to exercise enough control" over their children's game-playing habits, according to the report. NIMF's surveys found a large discrepancy between the gaming limits parents say they enforce and the limits their children report.
For example, 68 percent of parents said their family had rules about when video games can be played, while only 36 percent of children said the same. NIMF suggests that parents are eager to give the more socially acceptable answers in these surveys, a factor that might skew similar statistics by the ESA.
While parents got a rap on the fingers, retailers got generally good marks from NIMF this year. NIMF reported increases in employee training, in-store parent education, and retailer ratings enforcement in the stores they surveyed. The improvement led the group to give an A rating to big box retailers -- a bit of a shock since retailers as a whole received a D- in last year's report card, which described the ratings system as a whole as "beyond repair." Specialty retailers lagged behind, though, getting an F because "it is still far too easy for kids to purchase inappropriate games at such stores."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
32_Footsteps @ Nov 30th 2006 1:43PM
Odd, I noticed people being much more lenient about carding and the like at EB than at Target.
Also, I suspect that the discrepancy between parents and kids in the answers is from one of two things: either kids think more games would qualify as objectionable than parents, or kids are just really good at sneaking behind their parents' backs.
Besides, a better question is how necessary are those rules. My mom was always of the belief that as long as I got good grades and didn't get in trouble (which translated to that I wasn't to get injured, arrested, and/or anything destroyed), she wasn't concerned with what I did. And since the worst trouble I ever did was get covered in clay or stay out past curfew without calling, she let me go pretty much at will.
So I had no rules about video game playing growing up. Maybe NIMF would call that bad parenting. But I graduated with honors, got a degree, and am currently married. With a clean record to boot. So with the right kid, that's good parenting.
martin @ Nov 30th 2006 1:07PM
Finally they point out the real problem!!!!!!!!! Though the retailers should tell the parents something.. And the reason places like EB and gamestop get low scores is because they think selling an M rated game to a kid makes them look cool. Honestly, worrying about if a 12 year old thinks you are cool or not is just sad and a good reason to just end your life!
ackmondual @ Nov 30th 2006 1:10PM
While I'd like to say it's about time someone told the parents off, I'm guessing it can't be easy to watch after kids in an age when both parents work all day and are not around to supervise. Kids still manage to try drugs, sneak out the house, etc. Getting a copy of GTA or whatever the dickens kids play these days isn't that much more farfetched.
You can't ALWAYS be there to watch after them, but the very least could be done to set reasonable ground rules and ENFORCE THEM. Growing up with a Famicom (the Japanese NES), I wasn't allowed to play on school nights, which made me miserable, but I feel it did make me a slightly better person in the end.
martin @ Nov 30th 2006 1:58PM
I have nothing against parents who let their kids play games, or even M rated games... My problem is how parents put the blame on everyone else, and like the case showed, don't admit to what they do to look more socially acceptable. I am sick of developers and publishers getting blamed because parents let their kids play these games. Parents have every right and obligation in truth to know what their kids have. Search their rooms, look their their e-mails. Whatever. TALK TO YOUR KID AND PLAY THE GAMES, or watch them play the games.... take a part in parenting, don't make everyone else parent your kid or pay for the fact that you decided to reproduice!!!!
crono141 @ Nov 30th 2006 2:00PM
Same here ackmondual. Playing through Zelda II was a bitch when you could only do it friday after 6 until bedtime sunday.
Judd @ Nov 30th 2006 4:13PM
Martin you have no idea what you're talking about, and neither does this study. Please tell me where you've seen an Gamestop/EB employee selling an M rated title to a minor with parental supervision. Because where I used to work we would've gotten fired. It's not technically illegal to sell M rated games to minors but we adopt that policy. In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if more parents learned about game ratings from game retailers than: politicians, report cards, and ESRB commercials combined. Anytime we sell an M rated game to a minor with an approving parent, we explain the content of the games. Many parents would never have looked at the box, and I've stopped many parents from buying a game for their kid by telling them the content.
Some of the stuff in this study is really suspect. NIMF just assumes that parents must be lying, and kids must be telling the truth. When I was a kid I would never tell people that my parents gave me strict gaming rules. I'd try to act cool and say I could do whatever I want. But if most parents say they implement rules, and most kids say that they could do whatever they want ,the study decides to trust the kids. This is not research, this is just disguisting.
I can't stand the fact that they refer to these surveys as "report cards", as if it represents the industry as a whole. I just can't believe that the difference between big box retailers (whose many employees have no idea about the rating system), and specialty retailers is an "A" and an "F". They probably just visit two stores and base their whole judgement on that. To put it simply, they have no idea what the fuck they are talking about.
Dag @ Nov 30th 2006 2:51PM
NiMF is full of shit and this study is extremely dubious. For example:
# Screen time and school performance. We found the amount of time kids spend playing video games is correlated with poorer grades in school and attention problems.
# Violent video games and aggression. Scientific research shows that violent video game play increases aggression in young players in the short term. Additional studies show these effects last.
I'd like to see some figures to back up those claims, and I'd like to know exactly what kind of methodology they used. I will admit that I haven't read the whole article (don't have time) so it's possible that they do go into detail on these things, but I wasn't able to find any such citations as I skimmed.
Anyone can claim that "studies show xyz," but without figures to back it up, those claims should be taken with a very, very large grain of salt.
Jarrett @ Nov 30th 2006 2:19PM
@ 32_Footsteps-
With all due respect... I think it is not aimed at people or parents such as ourselves. It's for those parents that use Video Games and TV as a baby sitter. I am the opposite of my parents...I got to play whenever I wanted to as well....but my sons...not so lucky. I think games have evolved to a more violent tone and need more parent supervision. I think the most violent game out back in the day was what Mortal Kombat and the fatalities....other than that...there was no GTA franchise. To me games have changed so much .... parents have to take a more active role in gaming and enforcing household rules when it comes to certain games....
Kish @ Nov 30th 2006 3:04PM
Ech, for us it was "gun" games. You know, games with slowly moving beige dots going across the screen, and then some vaguely head like thing dissapears. Cause, you know, that was pretty violent. Could of scarred me for life.
Of course now my little Bro's get to play Halo. So not fair. :)
S'alright. I agree, I think I am a slightly better person for my mothers loving efforts. Go Mom!
How are "gun games" more violent than Mario though? I was friggin CRUSHING SKULL'S and doing drugs! That is less violent than slowly moving beige dots?
Earthworm Jim? First game that just shot bullets that you didn't have to watch go across the screen? SO COOL! Now that was violent. :) (why do bullets you don't see seem so much more violent than bullets you do see?).
SuicideNinja @ Nov 30th 2006 2:28PM
"So I had no rules about video game playing growing up. Maybe NIMF would call that bad parenting. But I graduated with honors, got a degree, and am currently married. With a clean record to boot. So with the right kid, that's good parenting."
My parents were the same way. I also ended up in the exact same boat (minus the married part...we've got to wait a year lol).
One thing I noticed with parents comparatively growing up is that my parents were very willing to show me what's out there, and talk to me about it (instead of hiding it). With Rated R movies, they watch a couple with me (in grade school), and explained how it wasn't real and what was bad/good.
I think it made all the difference in the world. I think a lot of parents get too busy and dismiss their children's concerns and try to hide or ignore the real world from them. Talking to them probably helps as well.
Linkreincarnate @ Nov 30th 2006 7:12PM
Even with both parents working every game system now has parental controls built in so there really is no excuse...
sploy @ Nov 30th 2006 3:22PM
I've been playing violent video games since the age of about 8 or 9. Same as my little brother. In my entire life I have been in one fight... and that was like 10 seconds long, in my first year of high school.
I also logged over 200 hours of in game time on one of my oblivion saves on the xbox 360, yet still managed to get three As in my A-levels, and even got full UMS marks on one of my maths tests.
So personally I find it very hard to believe that gaming makes people violent or makes their grades drop.
From personal experience these things are caused by emotional instability and laziness (respectively).
DeShaun @ Nov 30th 2006 4:44PM
The problem is that people are trying to generalize something that CAN'T be generalized. Everyone is different. I think education is more important than restriction. I'll make a comparison: sex.
People who are educated by sex are probably less likely to end up all STDed up, pregnant, and unhappy. Doesn't mean they'll abstain, just means they'll use discretion. Kids who understand that there's a line between blowing a guy's head off in GoW and doing it in real life probably won't be compelled to take the game arena to real life.
Hell, I'd argue that hardcore gamers are too busy GAMING to be violent to anyone else. If I were a CS addict, I'd be more obsessed with my next headshot in the game, than trying to seriously do it to someone on the street.
Studies like this always accuse the gamers, their parents, etc. It's always "people who play games are more likely to be violent" and I think that's false. I think the relationship is in the wrong direction.
It's like this: All drunks drink alcohol, but not all people who drink alcohol are drunks. So yeah, maybe some people who shot up their classmates were also obsessed with violent gaming, but it doesn't go both ways. Sorry, but I've never had a violent influence from a game, because there is always a goal to the killing, or a role being played, not "OMG GUYS KILLING ROCKS GO DO IT!" and even when it was (Duke Nukem), it was done comically.
Studies need to calm the fuck down.
Judd @ Nov 30th 2006 4:29PM
correction: "to a minor withOUT parental supervision"
Mr. Khan @ Nov 30th 2006 4:38PM
I agree that the correlation between playtime and Grades is a load of crap
My parents steadily increased my allowed playtime until about age 12, when they ended all restrictions, and my grades have stayed consistent throughout,
I let my 4.2 something GPA and recent 750 Reading score on my SAT attribute to that (although i'm still average in math)
This sounds suspiciously like that German-American Psychologist who went around in the 1950's and found a "correlation" between reading comic books and being in Juvenile Hall