When Are Kids Old Enough to Play Videogames? 503
A piece at the MTV Multiplayer blog is exploring the issue of kids and gaming, wondering aloud how old is 'old enough'. A recent CES talk indicated that you should wait until at least seven to introduce your children to Mario, and we've talked in the past about the educational role games can have. MTV's Tracey John spoke to a pair of mothers who offered their own opinions on this topic: "When I asked Alisa why she thought that games weren't imaginative and explained that many games have challenging, puzzle-solving elements, she conceded a little but remained skeptical. 'Honestly, I haven't really explored video games thoroughly, and I'm sure there are video games that fit more the bill of something that I'd be interested in, but I'm kind of hard-pressed to find a game that's like reading a book or something like that. I understand the kids like it, so I allow them to do it; it's monitored but it's not my favorite thing for them to be doing.'" What's the right age for a kid to start playing games? Do you see games as more or less acceptable than traditional kid pastimes like TV or reading? Does it matter if the parents are gaming-savvy?
Edubuntu (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a one of the $20 multi game things. Mr PacMan, Pole Pos, Xevious, Mappy, Galaga.
My kids like to watch me and my wife play.
My two year old thinks he is the ghosts when he plays Ms. Pacman, and he also seems to like Xevious.
I should note my kids don't know how to work the VCR, DVD, or TV remote and are have a very limited TV schedule and game time is even less then that.
So I guess, when they are able to physically play let them play. It is now part of our culture.
I expect to get a wii sometime this year just need to save my pennies.
TV (Score:5, Interesting)
My kids did not "start" it has just always been... (Score:5, Interesting)
There was no "start" I played games with the kids in my lap from the first day they were born. It is part of their life, part of their culture, part of their education.
It is like asking how old they should be before they are allowed to listen to a conversation...
hmm... (Score:4, Interesting)
For me personally, I would want my kid to play things like an Atari 2600, old NES games, old arcade games like Galaga, etc. The purpose behind this is to improve their hand/eye coordination and reaction time, two things that would benefit them in every day life. While every child is different, if pressed to pick an average I would say sometime between the ages of 4-6, depending on the intelligence level and how quickly they developed.
3-4 for Wii sports games (Score:4, Interesting)
I know I was a Pac-man player around age 5-6, but with the Wii being so engaging I can see kids taking off using it sooner. Plus in areas with terrible weather it is a nice way to keep kids moving when outdoor play is not available.
Re:They are old enough when... (Score:5, Interesting)
From the sumary:
'Honestly, I haven't really explored video games thoroughly, and I'm sure there are video games that fit more the bill of something that I'd be interested in, but I'm kind of hard-pressed to find a game that's like reading a book or something like that. I understand the kids like it, so I allow them to do it; it's monitored but it's not my favorite thing for them to be doing
Parents should know what they're letting their kids do before they let them do it. I was playing arcade games long befpre I had any kids, the quoted parent should do a little research, both on child development and the games themselves.
I sought out videogames for my kids. Sesame Street games when they were Sesame Street age, Carmen Santiago later, etc. When they were teens we had a couple of PCs networked and played Road Rash and Quake II together.
Oddly, my ex-wife came to hate video games after enjoying the arcades earlier and the daughters became "daddy's girls" (I played whiffleball with them, as well as playing their "girl things" with them since their mom wouldn't, too. Evil-X wasn't a very good mom). My youngest turns 21 in March, she's manager of a Gamestop store now.
But what would you expect from the daughter of the guy who started the Springfield Fragfest Quake site?
But more freom the ignorant parent quoted above: I'm kind of hard-pressed to find a game that's like reading a book
Hear that, game developers? How about some old fashioned early 80s text adventures?
or something like that
Where in the world is Carmen Santiago? My kids loved that game. IIRC they were in grade school, but honestly I enjoyed it, too.
-mcgrew
Re:When you think they are (Score:4, Interesting)
I started my niece and nephew on games at an early age - but I kept it strictly limited to older and simpler games, primarily Atari 2600 ports. When they're 3-4 years old, they can't understand anything overly complicated and should focus primarily on movement and avoidance, as well as pursuit of obvious goals. The games should be fairly easy as well, until they begin to reach their second decade (or until they start to show real skill and need a challenge).
A younger kid can easily enjoy a primitive video game just as well as we could (back when those games were new). It's not until they're exposed to more modern games that the old games begin to show their age. Tempest, Galaga, Pac-Man, Space Invaders, Robotron, and other simple games are ideal for children. Save the modern console games for later, when their minds are hungry for more. Educational games are great, but entertainment is a goal in itself - and entertainment is the first priority of any game, with educational value being a secondary bonus in some cases. Do the education yourself, and let them learn to have fun with their games before you start turning them into work.
That said, educational games are extremely useful, and can form a major component of their learning. They have little value until the child can read well, though. Reading software is entertaining, but usually (from what I've experienced with my relatives) are susceptible to being bypassed by an imaginative child - my niece got through most of her "reading" games without bothering to actually read much.
The key issue, and the one that people usually seem to miss or be incapable of enforcing, is moderation. Limited video game time will not harm your child. Parents can maintain total control of any source of video games when their children are young, and can maintain significant control even into their teens. The primary mistake average parents make is the same one our parents usually made with TV - specifically, using it as a pacifier. If you hand your kid a console, show them how to use it on their own, and then provide very little supervision, the kid WILL spend hours upon hours on his games. Too much time spent in a virtual environment just plain isn't good - but that doesn't mean that limited and controlled time, especially when active parental interaction is involved, is in any way damaging.
Moderation is key, in almost all things. Especially when it comes to children and video games.
A Tale of Two Kiddies (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:They are old enough when... (Score:5, Interesting)
Which experts, the ones working for the games industry, or the ones sponsored by 'pro family' groups?
Expert advice is ok up to a point, that point being not very far on what should be a relatively simple issue.
Young kids need exercise to build themselves up, and they won't get it by sitting on their backsides playing games. If you can't figure that one out for yourself 'expert' advice won't do jack.
A mum in my street with exactly the same access to information as me has two horrendously overweight and unhealthy kids (seriously, adult weight at 13, thats serious, and they started off thin). My kid likes the games, but he gets plenty of exercise, and wasn't allowed to start playing computer games a lot until I was sure he had a decent amount of time running about/playing in his life occurring *without* a special effort being made.
Re:!TV (Score:3, Interesting)
I know I was personally quite a way ahead of my peers in things like algebra growing up, from little more than having to know the concepts in order to get anywhere on my old C64.
Re:What I haven't seen anyone mention yet... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:!TV (Score:3, Interesting)
Correct Dosage, like everything else. (Score:5, Interesting)
We try to approach this with a nerdly view, both Piaget and culture geek influenced. We balance things out with counter-activities and limits. If they want to watch the "idiot-box," they have to prove it won't make them idiots by doing some book research: just about anything, so long as they prove they're developing research skills. We don't have cable, but an excellent collection of video including documentaries. To play a couchpotato video game for an hour, they have to play hard outside for 20 minutes or bounce on the rebounder non-stop 300 times each.
Don't deprive, don't indulge, and be involved. In my home we want the kids to have the same fun and cultural reference as their peers, but develop in a non-alienated way. Two hours of screen time (tv or gaming) a day max, and we aim for less than 10 hours per week. We often read aloud or sitting next to each other. Plus, if they start to obsess, they wind up on a 'diet,' learning restraint and dosage (and better negotiation technique). We do see TV and gaming as consciousness-altering and physiologically risky.
Both parents teach media literacy workshops on the side, so we have to eat our own dog food! But the thing is that the kids rarely got introduced to a show or game without a parent ready to interject. Thus, they are pretty clear on the nature of advertising, product tie-in, and consumer choice, as well as ferreting out the values they're getting from a show or game. We introduced them to video games slowly, later for the girl (starting age 6) because she's a ferocious reader and didn't show much interest, earlier for the boy (starting @ 4) so that his peer pressure wasn't too awkward. Basically, we started with puzzle games, then moved to management games, then action games. It worked well to keep them focused on playing smart, so I recommend a staged method of introduction.
This approach works for us, because the primary entertainment around here is a book.
Moderation in all things (Score:3, Interesting)
I personally think that games are better than TV, but that both are bad if that's all the kid ever does. Five ours sitting in front of the tube is bad, regardless of whether the kid has a controller in his hands.
The other rule is that he plays games with us, not alone. (Well, me...my wife doesn't game.) Videogames aren't there to babysit the kid. They're a father-son bonding experience.
Re:Let me answer your question with a question. (Score:4, Interesting)
We recently got rid of the tv in our house, and we haven't let our kids (4 and 6 - those are ages, not names) get into video games.
We replaced the tv with more reading and audiobooks. They also have started to do a lot more imaginative play - dress up, pretending with their dolls, and tying knots in anything they can find. They seem much more aware of their surroundings now - much less zoned out. They don't seem to miss the tv.
Re:Correct Dosage, like everything else. (Score:3, Interesting)
My question is in regards to your asking your kids to do something physically active in exchange for time spent on the couch playing video games. Do you do the same thing for time spent on the couch reading?
Seems to me that if your goal is to encourage a mixture of physically active and physically passive activities, playing a video game and reading a book are about the same and so should be accompanied by a similar tradeoff (perhaps trading 1-to-1 for video games and 2-to-1 for books so as to encourage books over video games by requiring less time outside as a trade-off).
Also... Is it potentially a downside in that your children are learning that physical things are negative because they have to do that to get what is restricted (playing games, reading books, watching tv, etc.)?
ps... I'm so glad I'm not a parent and don't have to worry about these things!
Re:moderation and good sense (Score:3, Interesting)
Careful, you'll have every religious person cite their deity and their holy book.
That was a serious and honest observation. I wonder if it'll get modded troll.
Re: Let me answer your question with a question. (Score:5, Interesting)
But... TV and video games are two widely accepted social norms. They're your kids, so how you raise them is your business. But consider that perhaps allowing restricted TV watching and video games would yield a similar positive result, but also allow your children a solid frame of reference for social interaction with their peers.
Re:Correct Dosage, like everything else. (Score:4, Interesting)
And one last point. Books are better for social development than a video game? Last I checked people don't tend to get together to read books, but frequently get together to play games. Either in front of one TV or over the internet using voice chat to communicate, makes little difference.
Avast, ye philistine! Well, I guess it is /., so:
Look, I'm not saying there's no place for video games or that they don't work the brain. I'm saying that the socialization that comes from being well-read and the mental organization of having a good grasp of narrative is more important than what most people get out of video gaming. If a seriously shy nerd can get some collaborative skills and strategic reckoning from gaming, great (d00d)... but there are other ways to get those skills, too. What you get from being well-read is probably impossible to get any other way.
Re:Correct Dosage, like everything else. (Score:3, Interesting)
Um and books are not? I can assure you that reading Hunter S. Thompson's "Fearing and Loathing in Las Vegas" when I was 12 years old had a much greater impact on my life than countless hours of "Leave it Beaver" reruns.
Re:Let me answer your question with a question. (Score:5, Interesting)
Any improvement you see comes from striking the TV, not the games.
Video games ARE interactive. They DO encourage kids to try things, play with things, explore things.
Since our kid was old enough to manipulate a mouse (that's before age 2), he was allowed to play with things like poissonrouge.com (try it! Tell me how that would lead to a "zoned-out" kid) or things like starfall.com. He was a fluent reader before age 4. He got into second grade last summer (at age 5) and has the highest reading marks in his class. Because of the "interactive entertainment" (i.e. games) on Starfall -- And certainly not something you'd get from "listening to audiobooks" or "tying knots into things".
On the other hand, our TV was last tuned to an actual station back in 2001. It is used to watch a video or two per week. Which is perceived as a treat by all involved, not something that we'd do all the time.
I'd say what kids need is stimulation and activity; and video games can be as mentally active as any other game -- and then some. Quite frankly I consider some of the games at lego.com a lot more enriching to my son than the actual assembly of a lego model. The latter is passive entertainment as it merely follows some prescribed assembly instructions. Fortunately he's into modifying them immediately and creating cool spaceships out of cars and vice versa.
Computers are a new medium -- and a highly interactive medium at that. My child will be immersed in it his whole life. I certainly wouldn't want him to grow up without instinctual mastery of the concepts involved. Six-year-olds who don't know what a mouse is frighten me as much as six-year-olds who don't know what a pen is.