Follow up

In my last post, I mentioned about the UK game ratings system:

In order to convey this article to the various citizens of the UK, the Daily Mail, covered the article with an entire page, summarizing - in their own 'special' way - the issues raised in the 220-page report. I get a distinct impression that the editors at the Daily Mail don't play video games, and are especially good at picking scapegoats.

This is all acceptable to me, what with the 'freedom of speech' thing, so ce la vie - however, the thing that made me laugh and glow red with rage was Anne Diamond's section on that page (yeah, who??) Clearly qualified to write crap about videogames, on account of the fact that she is a 'mother of four', so, move over PCGamer and Gamespy/IGN, it looks like your game-reviewing days are over.

Of course, we gamers know to take the words of anyone not in the industry with a bowl of salt, but the thing that disheartens me about this, is that the people who relate most to Anne are probably going to be mothers, who, having read this article, are now going to be more vigilant over the games their children consume.

"Oh, its not that horrible game Anne Diamond warned everyone about??"

I remember the feeling I felt when, having been playing the original Grand Theft Auto for a couple of years, my mum refused to buy me GTA2, 'cos it had 'a man pointing a gun' on the back. I don't resent her decision now, but I did then - I appreciate that its up to the parents to make decisions about the games their children consume, but getting their knowledge off Anne-bloody-Diamond, in the rag of a paper that the Daily Mail is, is going to prevent younger people playing good, quality video-games - who gives a crap about the age ratings on media.

If I was young(er), and my mum refused to buy me Halo 3, simply because she had been mis-informed, I would be livid. But I would also be young, and destined to live a better life. Touché.

(/epicrant)

JB