Saw a very young kid being sold a copy of MW3 in Gamestop today.

Andy!!

Was not impressed to visit Gamestop today to find a 8-9 year old boy being sold MW3. The clerk warned his mother of the graphic nature of the game, however they should have been flat out denied a copy by the sales assistant, it was very clear it was for a very young boy as he brought the game to the till while his mother paid. I'm surprised by Gamestops policy of only issuing a warning; but I guess it comes down to the money at the end of the day. Shame on the mother as well.:mad:

Am I just getting old or is Gamestops policy just not cool? When I was 8-9 I was playing Super Mario Land 2 on the Gameboy, not watching a child be blown apart in a gas attack that halves Europe's population... Not to mention what happens at the end of the SP!

DarkJager

Andy!! wrote: »

Was not impressed to visit Gamestop today to find a 8-9 year old boy being sold MW3. The clerk warned his mother of the graphic nature of the game, however they should have been flat out denied a copy by the sales assistant, it was very clear it was for a very young boy as he brought the game to the till while his mother paid. I'm surprised by Gamestops policy of only issuing a warning; but I guess it comes down to the money at the end of the day. Shame on the mother as well.:mad:

Am I just getting old or is Gamestops policy just not cool? When I was 8-9 I was playing Super Mario Land 2 on the Gameboy, not watching a child be blown apart in a gas attack that halves Europe's population... Not to mention what happens at the end of the SP!

Totally agree with you, it's the exact reason we have all these ****ing moaners against violent games. It's an adult rated product for an adult audience. I wonder does she log him on to redtube while he's waiting for his dinner as well?

p.s the ending is balls tinglingly epic

Local-womanizer

If the mother was with him what can be done? It was most likely her money. If the sales assistant did cause a fuss about it the mother could just tell the young fella to stand away from her while she bought it.

If he was on his own he would not have been sold the game.

Andy!!

Local-womanizer wrote: »

If the sales assistant did cause a fuss about it the mother could just tell the young fella to stand away from her while she bought it.

By sales assistant I mean the guy at the till, sorry.

jaykhunter

Whilst i completely agree with you, kids should not be playing a game (18s?) so far out of their age range, I blame the mother. It's her job to raise the child and if she cares not for the content despite it being labelled as unsuitable, and a warning being given by staff, it's her (and by that I mean the kid's) loss.

It's no different than her waiting in line and buying an 18s DVDs. It's her choice, even if I completely disagree with it. It sucks, but sure it's not up to us.

Are these PEGI ratings not upheld in the same light as the IFC ratings aswell; or are they kind of impotent?

byhookorbycrook

Mother paid, so she bought the game,shop can't stop this.

Local-womanizer

Andy!! wrote: »

By sales assistant I mean the guy at the till, sorry.

Yea but as it has been pointed out the mother bought the game. Nothing illegal in what happened here, just bad parenting.

Young'uns get turned away from Gamestop all the time trying to buy 18 rated games. The staff are not going to risk the hassle selling to an blatantly under-aged punter.

whiskeyman

It's only an advised age anyway and all they can do is give a warning.
They'd probably be able to see a lot worse on tv / the interwebz.

Andy!!

What's with this 'what can be done' attitude? The clerk should have said flat out no way! It was incredibly clear to all involved who it was for. They were a Malaysian family with little english apart from a daughter that was there, and the clerk had to explain to her the graphic content (the bomb bit) and she had to translate for the mother, who then conferred with the son, and then agreed to buy it anyway! Sales clerk should have said no way. He wouldn't be able to sell a 9 year old a porn DVD would he? What's the difference.

krudler

used to annoy the sh1t out of me when I worked in hmv and every time a GTA game or something violent would come out and people would buy it for kids for christmas, remember telling some dope of a mother that San Andreas was an 18s rated game and gave her some examples, murder by baseball bat, hookers, etc didnt blink an eye just looked at the kid who was 10 at the most and bought it, stupid bitch. wasnt much we could do though, cant refuse to sell something to an adult based on the fact they're an idiotic parent.

Local-womanizer

Andy!! wrote: »

He wouldn't be able to sell a 9 year old a porn DVD would he? What's the difference.

He was selling it to the mother. She was the one handing over the money. The contract was between herself and the store. It's that simple. Legally there is nothing that the sales assistant could do.

It is bad parenting, everyone agrees.

Professey Chin

Andy!! wrote: »

What's with this 'what can be done' attitude? The clerk should have said flat out no way! It was incredibly clear to all involved who it was for. They were a Malaysian family with little english apart from a daughter that was there, and the clerk had to explain to her the graphic content (the bomb bit) and she had to translate for the mother, who then conferred with the son, and then agreed to buy it anyway! Sales clerk should have said no way. He wouldn't be able to sell a 9 year old a porn DVD would he? What's the difference.

The difference is it isnt porn?
Its the mothers call. Sales assistant can only advise.

Sabre0001

Andy!! wrote: »

What's with this 'what can be done' attitude? The clerk should have said flat out no way! It was incredibly clear to all involved who it was for. They were a Malaysian family with little english apart from a daughter that was there, and the clerk had to explain to her the graphic content (the bomb bit) and she had to translate for the mother, who then conferred with the son, and then agreed to buy it anyway! Sales clerk should have said no way. He wouldn't be able to sell a 9 year old a porn DVD would he? What's the difference.

That's not how it works. If its the parent paying then it is their purchase essentially. The warning has been given (which is more than they need to do), so it's up to the parent from there.

Haven't worked in an Adult movie store so can't say what the general practice is there. Sorry.

However, the law on video games is above. Parents can buy it. Kid / teenager on their own cannot buy it.

krudler

Andy!! wrote: »

What's with this 'what can be done' attitude? The clerk should have said flat out no way! It was incredibly clear to all involved who it was for. They were a Malaysian family with little english apart from a daughter that was there, and the clerk had to explain to her the graphic content (the bomb bit) and she had to translate for the mother, who then conferred with the son, and then agreed to buy it anyway! Sales clerk should have said no way. He wouldn't be able to sell a 9 year old a porn DVD would he? What's the difference.

he's not selling the game to the kid though the parent is giving him the money.

megaten

Yeah if the parent insists on buying it there's nothing they can do.

CORaven

Bad parenting through and through. Yet it is those kind that we hear on the radio complaining about the content of the games they buy for little Johny.

On the flip side, why does the kid want the game? I know that is is Call of Duty and all, but is there not any decent games that would be suitable for his age?

krudler

CORaven wrote: »

Bad parenting through and through. Yet it is those kind that we hear on the radio complaining about the content of the games they buy for little Johny.

On the flip side, why does the kid want the game? I know that is is Call of Duty and all, but is there not any decent games that would be suitable for his age?

he's 9, thats 75% of COD's demographic right there :pac:

Ostrom

How does the law work on this - does the offence extend only to the sale of items to those below stated age restrictions, or is it an offence to facilitate someone viewing?

Blowfish

efla wrote: »

How does the law work on this - does the offence extend only to the sale of items to those below stated age restrictions, or is it an offence to facilitate someone viewing?

Interestingly, there is no law on it.

Gamestop could have sold it directly to the 9 year old perfectly legally.

The Video Recording act of 1989 (which is the legal basis for clasifying films) explicitly exempts games from clasification, other than for instances where the game is banned for sale completely. The only game this has happened to is Manhunt 2. Any other game can be legally bought or sold to anyone of any age.

marco_polo

efla wrote: »

How does the law work on this - does the offence extend only to the sale of items to those below stated age restrictions, or is it an offence to facilitate someone viewing?

The censor has the power to ban games, but PEGI ratings don't actually have any legal force whatsoever.

Damokc

I happened to be behind two kids exchanging games for cash lately.A boy about 10 and girl about 8. The girl was given a piece of paper to sign,I presume to say that they accepted money for their games. Is this some some of a contract that GameStop made with this little 8 yr old girl?:rolleyes:

And don't get me started on the SHÌTE exchange rates they give!

Sl!mCharles

Blowfish wrote: »

Interestingly, there is no law on it.

Gamestop could have sold it directly to the 9 year old perfectly legally.

The Video Recording act of 1989 (which is the legal basis for clasifying films) explicitly exempts games from clasification, other than for instances where the game is banned for sale completely. The only game this has happened to is Manhunt 2. Any other game can be legally bought or sold to anyone of any age.

:eek::eek::eek:

If only I knew this a few years ago

Blowfish

Sl!mCharles wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek:

If only I knew this a few years ago

The games industry is self regulating though with PEGI. It's not in the interests of either the game studios or the game shops to piss off parents so they do tend to stick to the regulation even though they don't have to.

Danonino.

Ive been in that situation too many times to count. Its rare that you can convince the Buyer that the game just flat out isnt suitable for the kid. Most parents just cannot get their heads around the idea that a game can be graphically violent. They are convinced games are just that, games. Many dont pay attention to the age rating untill its pointed out, many many more will go "oh really.... but its just a game though isnt it".

Honestly its so hard trying to explain that there is Foul language, blood, violence and in some games sex and drug refrences/scenes to some of these kids parents. Its a hell of a lot easier if they have seen BlackHawk Down, Rambo, The Predator, the Care Bears or whatever movie is closest to the game

I remember selling Vice City (ouch I feel old) to a guy who asked why was it over 18s. I replied that it was like playing an over the top version of Scarface. Turns out it was a christmas present for his 10 year old kid

I canceled Christmas

sorry bout the ramble, just wanted to add that its a LOT harder than you think to try persuade parents that the game shouldnt be bought. The have to listen to the brat on the way home afterall.... but yeah, at the end of the day its Parenting.

corcaigh07

I think Gamestop did very well here OP, I doubt every shop would stop an underager buying cigerettes or a cinema stopping every underager from seeing a movie they are too young to see.

Helix

Sabre0001 wrote: »

Kid / teenager on their own cannot buy it.

yes they can

its not a law, its a suggestion

GreenWolfe

Helix wrote: »

yes they can

its not a law, its a suggestion

I don't like posting friend of a friend type stories, but anyways......

I was told by an acquaintance who worked in a large electronics retailer that if they did that not only would the shop/company be liable, also the employee who did this would be personally liable too for any damages.

Zapp Brannigan

In GAME, it's store policy to not sell minors 18+ games. They say it's against the law (which it isn't) because they're an English company and apparently it is law there because BBFC rate them.

(this is how it was when I worked for them anyways)

GreenWolfe

Andy!! wrote: »

Am I just getting old or is Gamestops policy just not cool? When I was 8-9 I was playing Super Mario Land 2 on the Gameboy, not watching a child be blown apart in a gas attack that halves Europe's population... Not to mention what happens at the end of the SP!

My younger brother who was about the same age at the time, wanted to get the original Mafia game. The guy at the till told my Dad that it wasn't suitable because of the violence etc. Dad bought it for him and that was the end of that. This was almost a decade ago.

It's a parenting thing. The hypocrisy of some of them does get to me sometimes. My parents were much more worried about how much time we'd spend inside the house, getting exercise and fresh air - not the thought of their young children killing virtual gangsters with virtual machine guns!

aN.Droid

EarthlyPangaea wrote: »

I don't like posting friend of a friend type stories, but anyways......

I was told by an acquaintance who worked in a large electronics retailer that if they did that not only would the shop/company be liable, also the employee who did this would be personally liable too for any damages.

Totally incorrect. Like what has been posted here already the PEGI ratings system has no legal baring whatsoever. The only game that was illegal to be bought here by anyone was manhunt 2 and that is no longer the case (allthough a sorta-censored version replaced it)

GreenWolfe

As I said that's what I was told, had no idea whether it was correct or not. It may have been just to scare the bejaysus out of the shop staff, I really don't know. Said company was based in England too.

Lets face it, if you hear of a games store selling a game over the age rating of the customer, you can bet there'll be the usual type of scandal with Joe Duffy. Bad PR, no matter how sensationalist or misdirected is still bad PR.

Until parents put their foot down, kids will continue to play wildly age-inappropriate games.

ShadowHearth

Bejesus andy, you really overreact much. First second hand sales, now they sale game to mother. Do you work for game? As i can see you campaign vs GameStop lol .

In all fairness fair play to salesman for warning and saying that it is a game for mature gamers. It was up to mother to buy it or not. The fella and at the till did his job.
This is the problem with nanny state in Ireland. "How dare you sale me the game, which I am buying for my 8 year old son! How dare you not taking responsibility for my own child and sell me this game!"

Parents can't think and take responsibility for theyr own spawns and expect others to do it for them. Parents need to have finger out and start doing theyr own parenting and not blame salesperson who already did theyr job with flying colors.

Krusader

Think you should change your title of the threat OP, it's misleading

Saw a mother being sold a copy of MW3 in Gamestop today.

that would be more appropriate

Sabre0001

Helix wrote: »

yes they can

its not a law, its a suggestion

Fair enough. When I was working in retail last year we couldn't. They prob just didn't want parents storming in angrily.

Mitch Connor

at the end of the day...... it is just a freaking game. You aren't actually killing people, it is sprites on a screen.

I've always played 'violent' games and it has never caused me any issues. GTA 1 to whatever, GoldenEye, Doom etc - all violent games and I played them all when they came out (GTA was a christmas present when I was in 1st year).

They are just games - as long as the kid is being properly raised in terms of being taught right from wrong and moral obligations and the like, there shouldn't be an issue. I'd have no problem letting a 10 year old play COD, as long as I don't plan on it being their teacher and moral compass.

Krusader

Danonino. wrote: »

I remember selling Vice City (ouch I feel old) to a guy who asked why was it over 18s. I replied that it was like playing an over the top version of Scarface. Turns out it was a christmas present for his 10 year old kid

I canceled Christmas

He probably bought it for himself then.

My 4 yr old nephew plays Left 4 Dead with me sometimes, he loves it and knows it's just a game and zombies aren't real YET!!

penev10

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I've always played 'violent' games and it has never caused me any issues.

My grandfather smoked 40 a day til he was 92, don't see why there's all this fuss about smoking!

Andy!!

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Bejesus andy, you really overreact much. First second hand sales, now they sale game to mother. Do you work for game? As i can see you campaign vs GameStop lol .

Actually I very rarely shop in GAME, I prefer Gamestop, they are always a fiver cheaper etc. If it was GAME I saw this happen in, I would be less surprised at their ethics, but it turns out the tables are turned on this one!

Mitch Connor wrote: »

at the end of the day...... it is just a freaking game. You aren't actually killing people, it is sprites on a screen.

Until the kid tries and re-inacts what happens in the last few minutes of the SP on his sister cause it was SOOO cool in the game, and he thought he was only playing with her, he didn't mean to hurt her after all.

Mitch Connor

Andy!! wrote: »

Until the kid tries and re-inacts what happens in the last few minutes of the SP on his sister cause it was SOOO cool in the game, and he thought he was only playing with her, he didn't mean to hurt her after all.

Horsecrap. Absolute crap.

I didn't kill or maim my brother when I was younger - you know why - cause I was taught, regardless of what I see in a video game, that shooting or stabbing someone is very much a 'no-no'. I was taught to treat others with respect and be careful of my actions. I was taught about the dangers of injuring people, and how easy it can be done. If a kid hurts or kills someone reinacting what they have seen in a game, or on TV, it is because the parent has massively failed them in far bigger aspects of their upbringing than letting them play a violent computer game.

Again, I'd have no problem letting my younger brother play Call of Duty, because they are aware it is just a game and that actions carried out within it are not suitable for real life - that is part of the reason we play games - to do things not possible or appropriate in real life.

wes

Its not the responsibility of a shop to parent other people children. The guy at the till did his job by telling the mother about the violent context, and that where there respobsibility on the matter ends. People really need to look after there own children, and not expect others to do so.

Dcully

My young lad plays BF3 and mw2,he only plays multiplayer as the cinematic nature of single player is a lot more graphic than running around shooting guys in multiplayer.
He is fully aware the golden rule is no single player.
He has enough cop on to understand its a game,ask him what his favourite game is and which he plays most he will answer "minecraft" everytime,infact he hasnt touched bf3 or mw2 since he dicovered minecraft.
I supervise his gametime as his pc and console are set up close to mine and we allow him about 60-90 mins per evening on the evenings he has no soccer or gaa training/matches and usually the same time id be at my pc which allows me to see whats going on.

Parents blindly buying the likes of mw3 etc and letting the kid play unsupervised is totally different imho.

Wossack

guess they could refuse to sell on the basis of 'store reserves the right to refuse service' type clause, but tbh, she could just go somewhere else, have the kid wait outside

bottom line really, is the kid was going to be playing mw3 christmas morning, no matter what

jester77

It could also be that the mother doesn't know any better.

My mother still says "are you not a bit old to be playing games". She still thinks games are something for children.

penev10

The fact that alot of parents don't take an active interest in their children's hobbies and interests is an unfortunate one and sees games/TV/DVDs etc. being used as a babysitting service in lieu of proper supervision/engagement.

Pure laziness that no amount of legislation can fix let alone one that is merely a recommendation.

Age ratings aren't just some arbitrary measure dreamed up to appease the liberal bleeding hearts. Children shouldn't be witness to violence whether it is "only make-believe" via actors or realistic CGI. It's not only common sense it's backed up by research. Monkey See - Monkey Do.

Tipsy McSwagger

The fact that the mother was there with the kid and the salesperson warned her it was a violent game makes this thread into a vendetta against Gamestop. To tell you the truth I honestly think the OP is making this story up, probably because he got 12 euro credit for trading in MW3.

Andy!!

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

The fact that the mother was there with the kid and the salesperson warned her it was a violent game makes this thread into a vendetta against Gamestop. To tell you the truth I honestly think the OP is making this story up, probably because he got 12 euro credit for trading in MW3.

What a load of horse****. Firstly, I have already said I prefer GS as a retailer and pick up ALL my software there.

Secondly, I bought MW3 on PC. And rather enjoyed it. You can't trade in PC titles, and I'll be playing MP for the next year at least.

And the fact that the mother was there does not make it a vendetta, stop talking BS.

ShadowHearth

This was a cartoon in 80s, i just wonder where did we all lost our balls and became a big bunch of pussies...

MW3 looks like ( and is ) a walk in a park compared to this lovely cartoon. and it WAS a cartoon for children!

Antar Bolaeisk

wes wrote: »

Its not the responsibility of a shop to parent other people children. The guy at the till did his job by telling the mother about the violent context, and that where there respobsibility on the matter ends. People really need to look after there own children, and not expect others to do so.

This exactly. The certification system is there as a guideline letting people know the level of content within a product. If a parent chooses to expose their child to mature content deemed, by an appointed and approved certification board, suitable only for adults then, sadly, that is the parents choice and responsibility.

If the child had been sold the game himself with no parent present this would be a different matter

CiDeRmAn

Andy!! wrote: »

Was not impressed to visit Gamestop today to find a 8-9 year old boy being sold MW3. The clerk warned his mother of the graphic nature of the game, however they should have been flat out denied a copy by the sales assistant, it was very clear it was for a very young boy as he brought the game to the till while his mother paid. I'm surprised by Gamestops policy of only issuing a warning; but I guess it comes down to the money at the end of the day. Shame on the mother as well.:mad:

Am I just getting old or is Gamestops policy just not cool? When I was 8-9 I was playing Super Mario Land 2 on the Gameboy, not watching a child be blown apart in a gas attack that halves Europe's population... Not to mention what happens at the end of the SP!

As said, if the mother bought it the store had no right to deny her the game, if they did they'd end up in court, at least the minion explained the problem to the mother, who went ahead and bought it.
So Kudos to Gamestop for doing the right thing and not so much to the mammy.

tomred1

I don't see the what Gamestop have done wrong. They sold a game to an adult with a warning about its graphic content. You must work for the DailyMail OP.

Da Bounca

This thread was resolved in the third post.