DeletedUser13682
4557
*yawn*
PG-13 as defined how? The country where the forum servers are located, country where majority of users are from, some random country, other?
*yawn*
PG-13 as defined how? The country where the forum servers are located, country where majority of users are from, some random country, other?
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser35120
4555
DeletedUser13682
4554
*yawn*
Ladies and Gentlemen, a palindrome.
*yawn*
Ladies and Gentlemen, a palindrome.
DeletedUser31931
4553
I'm going to assume the country in which the forums are based, so seeing as this is the English branch of Inno, I'm going to go with England, however, it may well just be Germany. Any forum mods care to share light on this issue?
Also, tiger, were there any bikes on said bike rack?
I'm going to assume the country in which the forums are based, so seeing as this is the English branch of Inno, I'm going to go with England, however, it may well just be Germany. Any forum mods care to share light on this issue?
Also, tiger, were there any bikes on said bike rack?
DeletedUser
4552
Nope. Nothing and nobody around. Grass. No damage whatsoever.
Nope. Nothing and nobody around. Grass. No damage whatsoever.
DeletedUser31931
4551
Oh, ok, well then that's not entirely cool, if there were bikes I could understand (but would've expected you to have had the same thought) because if you slipped then you might damage the bikes (as well as yourself) but if it was empty... Idiot.
Oh, ok, well then that's not entirely cool, if there were bikes I could understand (but would've expected you to have had the same thought) because if you slipped then you might damage the bikes (as well as yourself) but if it was empty... Idiot.
DeletedUser28032
4549
I've always found PG-13 to be a bit wishy washy neither here nor there, if its not suitable to be PG then make it a 15 and be done with it instead of having a classification where nobody is quite sure what it entails.
I have strong memories about going to see the first LotR's film and having a small child crying because Gandalf shouted at Bilbo so TBH he shouldn't have been there.
As for Tigers "criminal damage" I wouldn't worry unless it was a copper who said it as the police aren't liable to be interested. They have more important things to do than worry about someone doing Parkour on a bike rack.
I've always found PG-13 to be a bit wishy washy neither here nor there, if its not suitable to be PG then make it a 15 and be done with it instead of having a classification where nobody is quite sure what it entails.
I have strong memories about going to see the first LotR's film and having a small child crying because Gandalf shouted at Bilbo so TBH he shouldn't have been there.
As for Tigers "criminal damage" I wouldn't worry unless it was a copper who said it as the police aren't liable to be interested. They have more important things to do than worry about someone doing Parkour on a bike rack.
Deleted User - 819397
4547
Don't forget though Braet that other countries (the US being one) has nothing between PG 13 and R (17+), so for us it makes more sense.
Don't forget though Braet that other countries (the US being one) has nothing between PG 13 and R (17+), so for us it makes more sense.
DeletedUser13682
4546
*yawn*
I don't know what to think about ratings. They seem strange and bad but other times it seems sensible but done wrong.
*yawn*
I don't know what to think about ratings. They seem strange and bad but other times it seems sensible but done wrong.
DeletedUser31931
4545
Example of ratings done well: BBFC, I'd agree with most of the ratings BBFC give, Assassin's Creed E.G. should not be a 12, but is not deserving of an 18 rating either, the 15 rating sits comfortably in the middle and serves as a good benchmark.
Example of ratings done badly: PEGI, where if: THIS GAME HAS SOMETHING THAT MIGHT HAVE ONCE REFERENCE SOMEONE'S FRIEND WHO PROCREATED?! 18 RATING!!!!!! Even games which shove Quadruple Space down your throat (Look it up) and contain nothing explict apart from maybe the occasional bad word (which these days seems to be able to hold a steady 12 rating from BBFC and others) can get an 18 if you're under PEGI, which is why it's a shame that BBFC stopped doing game ratings.
Example of ratings done well: BBFC, I'd agree with most of the ratings BBFC give, Assassin's Creed E.G. should not be a 12, but is not deserving of an 18 rating either, the 15 rating sits comfortably in the middle and serves as a good benchmark.
Example of ratings done badly: PEGI, where if: THIS GAME HAS SOMETHING THAT MIGHT HAVE ONCE REFERENCE SOMEONE'S FRIEND WHO PROCREATED?! 18 RATING!!!!!! Even games which shove Quadruple Space down your throat (Look it up) and contain nothing explict apart from maybe the occasional bad word (which these days seems to be able to hold a steady 12 rating from BBFC and others) can get an 18 if you're under PEGI, which is why it's a shame that BBFC stopped doing game ratings.
Deleted User - 819397
4544
Just because the rating system was good doesn't mean it'll continue to be so…look at the ESRB (The US game rating service). A lot of games that are complete remakes, the one I'm thinking of specifically being Ocarina of Time (ported to 3DS) the ESRB gave a higher rating to it…
Note: To my knowledge they don't have anything earlier than GC for Nintendo platforms online, thus why the N64 original isn't there…the GC/Wii game is exactly the same, not even a graphical update.
And the full "rating summary" for 3D:
All these things were just as viable in the original game, yet now they decided to harp on it. Kids see worse things going through school/walking around in public…this just really bugs me...
Just because the rating system was good doesn't mean it'll continue to be so…look at the ESRB (The US game rating service). A lot of games that are complete remakes, the one I'm thinking of specifically being Ocarina of Time (ported to 3DS) the ESRB gave a higher rating to it…
Note: To my knowledge they don't have anything earlier than GC for Nintendo platforms online, thus why the N64 original isn't there…the GC/Wii game is exactly the same, not even a graphical update.
And the full "rating summary" for 3D:
ESRB said:
All these things were just as viable in the original game, yet now they decided to harp on it. Kids see worse things going through school/walking around in public…this just really bugs me...
DeletedUser13682
4543
*yawn*
[sarcasm]Not sure what school you went to, but the worst thing I saw in my school when there was a battle was red blood. None of this ultra violent grunting and lights.[/sarcasm]
*yawn*
[sarcasm]Not sure what school you went to, but the worst thing I saw in my school when there was a battle was red blood. None of this ultra violent grunting and lights.[/sarcasm]
DeletedUser31931
4541
(OOC: I did some googling, checked the regulations and as far as I'm aware this post is PG-13, and it's definitely something that kids should know about, I had most of this taught to me when I was around 10 in terms of explicit content that I talk about)
Kids'll see and be in fights, however, johan and they'll see cleavage and heck, they'll even swear. I knew pretty much every swear-word in the book by the time I was seven and there was only one I didn't ever use (due to it's legendary bad word reputation, and obviously I can't say what it is here) and therefore I think that it's ridiculous to restrict teens from seeing or doing things in a video-game which they can do in almost all other walks of life, unfortunately it seems that we are progressively wrapping our children up in more and more layers of cotton wool in a desperate attempt to protect them from the dangers of the outside world, so we just hide them away from it completely, not realising that they are going to have to join it at some point and the longer we shy away from the topic then the harder it becomes for them when they eventually discover the truth about things in life, also by wrapping them up in cotton wool, you worsen their chances as that'll shape their social understanding which will effect relationships with the majority of the population.
An example of something we used to shy away from that we really shouldn't is things like sex-ed, because the unfortunate truth is that (especially with the people I live with) most of them will have lost their virginity before they reach the age of consent, this being the norm amongst many of them to see who can do it first. Of course therefore if you leave sex-ed training until the age of consent, firstly due to the varying times at which people reach it, by the time you have that lesson, someone in the class could have reached said age and lost their virginity already and the information comes too late, and in an age where rape culture is being progressively stamped out by the increase in laws and teaching to help stop it, it's important to teach people about consent, what it is and why it is important before all these things happen to teenagers, so that they don't end up making mistakes that are easily preventable.
(On a side note, how much the consent seems to have to come from the woman worries me, firstly male rape is a thing that happens and should be taken very seriously and secondly it worries me how you can have someone give consent all the way up to and through the act and yet if they change their minds afterwards and decide they didn't want to, now all they have to do is say that they didn't give consent and you have just raped someone, which is really scary to me and I hope that never happens)
The point that this leads to, however, is that like it or not, teens are going to do things, there is a world out there, filled with wonders and delight and other human beings for them to explore, and they will, whether you like it or not, try as you might you can not stop them, unless you're going to home-school them and lock them in the house, only letting them out under guard on pre-determined visits which only occur when completely necessary (and tbh who's going to do that) then your teenage-son is going to do things. He will discover and learn things about the world, whether it be at parties or over the internet, he will learn things, and if you try and stop him then if he's your average human being, he'll just try harder (psychologically proven that we don't like being told what we can and can't do) and the fallout will be even worse because if you then do try and advise him, he'll just ignore you. So instead, we ought to talk about these things, talk about life and educate children to what is out there, because if you go it alone, it's a big scary world, but if you go it with knowledge, having been taught a few things about it and what's important beforehand, then you might just stand a chance.
(OOC: I did some googling, checked the regulations and as far as I'm aware this post is PG-13, and it's definitely something that kids should know about, I had most of this taught to me when I was around 10 in terms of explicit content that I talk about)
Kids'll see and be in fights, however, johan and they'll see cleavage and heck, they'll even swear. I knew pretty much every swear-word in the book by the time I was seven and there was only one I didn't ever use (due to it's legendary bad word reputation, and obviously I can't say what it is here) and therefore I think that it's ridiculous to restrict teens from seeing or doing things in a video-game which they can do in almost all other walks of life, unfortunately it seems that we are progressively wrapping our children up in more and more layers of cotton wool in a desperate attempt to protect them from the dangers of the outside world, so we just hide them away from it completely, not realising that they are going to have to join it at some point and the longer we shy away from the topic then the harder it becomes for them when they eventually discover the truth about things in life, also by wrapping them up in cotton wool, you worsen their chances as that'll shape their social understanding which will effect relationships with the majority of the population.
An example of something we used to shy away from that we really shouldn't is things like sex-ed, because the unfortunate truth is that (especially with the people I live with) most of them will have lost their virginity before they reach the age of consent, this being the norm amongst many of them to see who can do it first. Of course therefore if you leave sex-ed training until the age of consent, firstly due to the varying times at which people reach it, by the time you have that lesson, someone in the class could have reached said age and lost their virginity already and the information comes too late, and in an age where rape culture is being progressively stamped out by the increase in laws and teaching to help stop it, it's important to teach people about consent, what it is and why it is important before all these things happen to teenagers, so that they don't end up making mistakes that are easily preventable.
(On a side note, how much the consent seems to have to come from the woman worries me, firstly male rape is a thing that happens and should be taken very seriously and secondly it worries me how you can have someone give consent all the way up to and through the act and yet if they change their minds afterwards and decide they didn't want to, now all they have to do is say that they didn't give consent and you have just raped someone, which is really scary to me and I hope that never happens)
The point that this leads to, however, is that like it or not, teens are going to do things, there is a world out there, filled with wonders and delight and other human beings for them to explore, and they will, whether you like it or not, try as you might you can not stop them, unless you're going to home-school them and lock them in the house, only letting them out under guard on pre-determined visits which only occur when completely necessary (and tbh who's going to do that) then your teenage-son is going to do things. He will discover and learn things about the world, whether it be at parties or over the internet, he will learn things, and if you try and stop him then if he's your average human being, he'll just try harder (psychologically proven that we don't like being told what we can and can't do) and the fallout will be even worse because if you then do try and advise him, he'll just ignore you. So instead, we ought to talk about these things, talk about life and educate children to what is out there, because if you go it alone, it's a big scary world, but if you go it with knowledge, having been taught a few things about it and what's important beforehand, then you might just stand a chance.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
4540
Well that was a long post.
Well that was a long post.
DeletedUser13682
4539
*yawn*
But some very good points raised. Teenagers should learn the facts of life soon as it becomes relevant. But who is to determine when such things become relevant? I know that people don't mature at the same rates. Some take years longer than others to become mature. So how do we determine when someone is ready to learn of such things?
*yawn*
But some very good points raised. Teenagers should learn the facts of life soon as it becomes relevant. But who is to determine when such things become relevant? I know that people don't mature at the same rates. Some take years longer than others to become mature. So how do we determine when someone is ready to learn of such things?