As people who make their living off of a video game blog, we tend to think that everyone should always be playing games (you know, when they're not reading about games on blogs, or diligently supporting the advertisers of said blogs). But we understand that some children are just too young, and some controllers are just far too susceptible to baby drool.
MTV's currently trying to answer the question of "How old is old enough for games?" by interviewing some parents of gaming kids. But we're curious what you, the gaming population have to say: What's the youngest age at which kids should be playing games?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
LaughingTarget @ Jan 28th 2008 8:07PM
I figure 5-6. That's when I started and it hasn't harmed me any.
rv @ Jan 28th 2008 8:27PM
Or so you think...
LaughingTarget @ Jan 28th 2008 8:30PM
Well, the guards give me internet access, so I think all turned out alright.
mike @ Jan 28th 2008 9:20PM
I started playing games when I was 2 years old. Im 23 now. My first game was super mario on the NES and I still remember beating it. Your never too young to start gaming.
Evan @ Jan 28th 2008 8:07PM
My little sister started playing those kiddie technology games when she was two. She is six now, and has a DS. As long as she isn't playing Halo, I think there is a lot she can learn and develop from video games.
The Artist formally known as Jesus @ Jan 28th 2008 8:07PM
Trying to be first in a blog post comment is like trying to be first in the special Olympics when all the other athletes don't give a sh*t
Moving on
I voted 3-4 because it's a nice treat for the kids and it's a good time to try and teach them self control
Though I don't have any evidence that can support my vote
John S @ Jan 28th 2008 8:08PM
I can remember my father sitting me in his lap while he played Heretic at the age of three, possibly younger. I wish I knew what happened to that game. A short while after that I started playing Lemmings on our PC and Sonic the Hedgehog on the family Genesis. Ah, nostalgia.
JerJer @ Jan 28th 2008 8:09PM
lol all those millionaires in the world play videogames for fun....oh wait? later than 9. internet even later.
Sam @ Jan 28th 2008 9:13PM
yeah, even though I played games at friends houses earlier I think 7-9 is the best range, so they're eyes finish developing and they don't end up a four-eyes like me.
ALH @ Jan 28th 2008 8:09PM
Getting kids into gaming young will help them with their reading,problem solving and hand-eye coordination skills. I dont see how this can be a bad thing.
Of course WHICH games kids are given is another matter entirely...
mayank @ Jan 28th 2008 9:52PM
I dunno guys..i grew up playing outdoor games, never got to play video games when i was a kid coz my folks couldn't afford one. I got my xbox360 when i got a job myself (and now i play constantly). Looking back, i still think kids should play outdoors. Not trying to imply that games will harm them or something, but its such a beautiful world outside :)
ALH @ Jan 28th 2008 10:52PM
I dont understand why people think the both cant exist simultaneously. When i was a kid there were games coming out of every corner- i wasnt allowed a console til i was 8 or so- but that didnt stop me from going round to friends's and playing with them on theirs. Gaming supplemented going outside, it didnt replace it.
If you (or parents in general)want to point fingers at why kids dont play outside, just look at the current state of society and the media which feeds it terror sensationalism. Everyone is paranoid about pedos and terrists- moreso than when we were kids- and parents are more than happy to sue the minute their precious snowflake scrapes a knee.
It doesnt help that the minute a kid goes outside he or she is demonised as being up to no good. In the movie 'stand by me' a bunch of kids in the 1950s go out on an epic journey across train tracks and bogs to poke a dead body. If a bunch of kids were seen hanging near railway tracks- or fuck, even in a park, today they would be slapped with an ASBO ( or whatever the american equivalent of ' you damn kids up to no good get out of here' is) JUST for being in a group of more than 3.
BeckRokk @ Jan 28th 2008 8:11PM
I started playing games when I was one, watching my older cousins play Mario and He-Man and they gave me the occasional turn. My mom saw that I had an interest in it, and she got me an NES soon after. I did have seizures when I was that age which was affecting my mental development, and the doctor thought that my playing games would actually help me with problem solving and simple math to try and keep my brain in shape. I got Little Nemo and a few Sesame Street games soon after to help me further. To be honest, video games are a major part of my life because they did help me through what could have been a life long affliction. Without being able to play games from a young age, I don't think I'd be the person I am today.
Shignami @ Jan 28th 2008 8:11PM
Me and my 3-year old nephew play Excite Truck and Rayman: Raving Rabbids all the time on my Wii
AP @ Jan 28th 2008 8:12PM
I thought Koreans were given battlenet accounts as soon as they are born...
kekekekekekekekekekeke
Brad Mecoli @ Jan 28th 2008 11:24PM
HAHAHAHAHAA, that's golden XD
The Aggie CEO @ Jan 28th 2008 8:16PM
so ummmmmmm yea
my daughters are going on 2 and 3 years old..........
they play bowling with me on Wii........
so yea........
2-3 years old....lol
Thank You Nintendo!!
Michael @ Jan 28th 2008 8:16PM
5-6 for games.... after they reach puberty for Xbox Live...
rv @ Jan 28th 2008 8:27PM
Or just don't use the mic.
TWIMTBP @ Jan 28th 2008 9:40PM
They should put some tech in the xbox 360 mic that would strangle the wearer if it detects that the wearer is below 14 and talks a lot
vgxtremist @ Jan 28th 2008 8:17PM
I got my NES when I was 3 and I've been playing ever since and haven't killed a man/blamed video games for my problems yet, so yeah 2-3 sounds alright to me.
Michael @ Jan 28th 2008 8:18PM
I think there really isn't an age too young for a child to start playing, or at least start watching, video games providing of course the content in the game is appropriate for their age (thats right no Postal for 2 years olds:(). In fact playing games may even help children if its an educational game like Brain Age or those Leap Frog games.
NeverSage @ Jan 28th 2008 8:19PM
As soon as they are able to. I don't see any reason they shouldn't be allowed to play when they have the ability to.
Beryan @ Jan 28th 2008 8:19PM
Yeah, my 4 year old sister is constantly playing Wii Sports and Mario Kart.
MJ @ Jan 28th 2008 8:22PM
I think a better question is:
How old is old enough to comment on Joystiq posts? :D
Superstar90 @ Jan 28th 2008 9:56PM
Considering the people here... I'd say 1-2. Some are trolling even from the womb.
Rob Accomando @ Jan 28th 2008 8:26PM
my daughter was able to hold the wiimote at 1 yr old but didn't do anything... yet. Still trying. :)
Kendall B @ Jan 28th 2008 8:28PM
I rocked out on some Atari 800XL at the ripe age of 4. Some of my fondest gaming-related memories still are playing Centipede, Joust, and Pac Man with my mother and father.
And attempting (in vain) to make sense of Star Raiders, which was obviously a little too complicated for a 4 year old.
kungfusoccer @ Jan 28th 2008 8:33PM
I let my 4 year old play, but only games without shooting/punching/blood etc. However, his favorite game involves a gun. The Portal gun. I am blown away by his ability to complete levels in Portal and believe (rationalize?) that it must be doing good things for his brain. My only fear is that the game will create an unhealthy desire for cake.
vanuslux @ Jan 28th 2008 8:36PM
I don't see any problem with gaming at any age, so long as the games are age appropriate and parents don't let them spend so much time playing games that they aren't finding stimulation from other things.
Alistair @ Jan 28th 2008 8:39PM
I picked up the Wiimote after dinner tonight and my three-year-old perked up and said "Can we play Ratatouille? Please Daddy?" So we did -- we had a great time :) I voted 3-4 -- he hasn't grasped mouse or Wiimote usage yet, but he loves to watch me play Peggle...
Twist @ Jan 28th 2008 8:39PM
Age shouldn't really be an issue here. I have no idea when I started gaming (my dad bought an Atari 2600 before I was born), but I can remember playing games when I was 4. A line of Baby Einstein gaming products would probably sell really well and be a good thing for kids and parents alike. It might make it easier to talk the wife into getting that new console if you could say it was primarily for the baby ;)
Joshua @ Jan 28th 2008 8:42PM
I first played Zelda and Mario on the NES when I was two or three. I said 1-2 for the poll, because it doesn't really matter when kids start playing. I mean, they'll start playing when they want to, or if their parents offer to let them play and they take to it (like my dad, who was a gamer at the time).
BigD145 @ Jan 28th 2008 8:44PM
I would prefer getting kids into board games at young ages. Not only do you encourage critical thinking but the parents are pretty much forced into interacting with their kids as well. It's a win-win situation.
Saria the Cat @ Jan 29th 2008 11:38PM
Board games are definitely the win! They require real-life, real-time human interaction with people in close proximity (not over a Live or WoW account). Besides, kids shouldn't be so spoiled with advanced entertainment like video games so early on in their life. I think Candyland, Monopoly, etc., running around outside, and having an imagination are good enough until you at least get to be 9. I can't imagine how much of a nightmare it'd be to introduce games so young and already have your kid be spoiled and always want "VIDEO GAMES, not board games or baseballs or yo-yos!"
Joop @ Jan 28th 2008 8:55PM
Honestly, 7-8, maybe earlier in very limited amounts. However, it has nothing to do with whether or not the content is appropriate. A recent study showed that all that Baby Einstein stuff doesn't hold a candle to old fashion building blocks because simple tactile interaction is the most effective way children learn. There's a lot that games can teach kids, but I think that having too much of their learning come from activities that are entirely virtual (in interaction and rewards) can have some lasting, and ultimately negative, effects.
Saria the Cat @ Jan 29th 2008 11:30PM
I picked 7-8 because I started playing games at 9 and I think it really helped me to have been without the addiction for the first years of my life. Lots of playing outdoors and building basic skills using other forms, including interaction. I can also see the video game becoming the new TV "babysitter," and bad parents neglecting their kids and leaving them on the couch to play games instead of actually trying to talk and play with them.
Joop @ Jan 29th 2008 11:54PM
Exactly, Saria. I think anyone would consider allowing a 5 year old to watch 5-6 hours of TV straight, every day, a bad thing. Granted, there's a lot more cerebral activity going on when playing games, but aside from educational titles, I really wonder how much of it is actually learning. It seems like sudoku. Yeah you can say it teaches logic and rational problem solving, but all it really does it teach you to play sudoku better.
Easo @ Jan 28th 2008 8:56PM
I think that question depends on whether or not your talking about online multiplayer or single player games. I think for single player "E" rated games 6-7 is an acceptable age range as long as education and social interactions come first. After that, as long as the parents buy age approiate games, gaming is a fine time killer.
As for online multiplayer, I say no younger than 14 for any game (MMOs and such) and 17 and older for any game that has guns. Not because I believe that guns are bad, but because I believe in the greater internet fuckwad theory.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19
Snap Count @ Jan 28th 2008 8:57PM
My daughter started at the age of 2 and a half. She was quite interested in the DS I had. In my opinion, I believe it has drastically improved her hand eye co-ordination and the like. She was only allowed to play for about 15 minutes a day and some days she never bothered. Now she plays to relax and unwind before she goes to bed(she's four now)
When she was three she broke the one that I had bought, but she learned she had to respect her toys and other things, as the only way she could play again is if she bought one with the money she had saved since she was born.
Grimmus @ Jan 28th 2008 8:57PM
That one's a bit harder to judge nowadays; It would be easy to say at the same age I started at, but all I knew when I was five or six was the NES, while my little brother started up on the Gamecube at that age. I think it depends on the kid as well as the family, and it's up to them to make decisions on a case-by-case basis. He's eight now, and I know nobody would let him get his hands on something like Manhunt anytime soon, but he couldn't care less because he's still highly entertained with Mario Kart, Lego Star Wars, and Animal Crossing.
Mr.ESC @ Jan 28th 2008 9:00PM
I played games when I was 3-4,I remember playing Doom when I was 5 or 6 (GOD MODE FTW) and Prince of Persia when I was 4,again cheats FTW.
Now games are more explicit back then I remember playing the first 2 GTA titles and Carmageddon and they were ridiculous but now that I played that same game again I never released you actually killed prostitutes in Carmageddon (which made it even more ridiculous) until now.
kojo87 @ Jan 28th 2008 9:02PM
i didnt really get to play any games until i was about 11. thats when i got my gamecube. and now brothers got to start when they where about 5. i had to be the friggin experiment child. i kid you not i was dropped on my head (THAT IS NOT A JOKE!) im gonna take out my frustration from lack of childhood and overprotective parents on the next generation. NO GAMES FOR YOU UNTIL YOU HIT PUBERTY!!!
32_Footsteps @ Jan 28th 2008 9:03PM
I started around when I was 2, and I turned out just fine.
The only thing keeping me from saying any younger is that the kid is too likely to destroy the controller that young.
alps @ Jan 28th 2008 9:05PM
I didn't vote cause I really think it depends on the video game.
playwhutyalike (needs to quit being a d@k) @ Jan 28th 2008 9:06PM
I let my 5 year old play Manhunt 2. It's a good way for him to keep busy while I'm out scoring some blow.
teenagertc @ Jan 29th 2008 12:34AM
Regarding your comment, I'm laughing...cautiously.
Farseer (GDI) @ Jan 29th 2008 8:08AM
You make your child play Manhunt 2?
Damn, you're harsh. I usually put mine in the corner or give him a good whoopin' when he's bad, but dude, making him play Manhunt 2... that's just mean.
Captain Obvious @ Jan 28th 2008 9:10PM
I think some time around 12-13 is probably best. Anything earlier than that just feels wrong. Besides, kids have too much energy. They need to be out playing in order to be in bed by 7:30.
Iridium @ Jan 28th 2008 9:14PM
Wow, I guess the average age of posters is pretty young.
I was pressing one flipper on a pinball machine when I was a few months old, so I have been told. When I was really young the only games I could play were in the arcade. I remember Asteroids and Space Invaders as my first games.
I didn't start playing games heavily until my Atari 5200 when I was 4 since I could play at home. I think games like Pac-Man, Breakout, and Space Invaders are much better for hand eye coordination and development than the complex games of today.
Or maybe it was all the Legos, I don't know.