ScreenGurus Sam digs into the controversial age ratings debate, and offers his take.
The GTA 5 Agent Trevor DLC episode could have been a real treat for fans on PlayStation and Xbox, before it was scrubbed sometime before 2017.
With the amount of money they generated, I just don’t understand the scrubbing of this. It would’ve been fantastic for fans.
I really want to know who drove the decision to focus on multiplayer was it Rockstar or take two.
Because when online started taking off many of the studio leads began having falling outs and leading including a founder
One of the reason I believe once gta 6 release, most of us thoroughly play it, enjoy the world they crafted then after that no offline support, no dlc at all
Grand Theft Auto V was released on PC on the 14th of April 2015. That means the game will be nine years old in four days, and it’s still among the most-played titles on Steam. With a 24-hour peak of 145K players, it’s as popular as Baldur’s Gate 3, Apex: Legends, and Destiny 2.
The freedom to explore large areas, approach objectives in multiple ways, and stumble across amusing distractions will always be an excellent format for video games, but some do it better than others. To celebrate the formula and parse the best from the best, have a look at the best open-world games of all time so far.
I agree with the author regarding the World War 1 comment (kids don't know the event existed yet the game(s) involved are 16+ usually).
Here's one thought, make education-related games to help kids learn about certain events in history. I remember growing up on the Apple II computers in elementary school (Number Munchers, Word Munchers, and Oregon Trail), and as Macs were getting updated so was the games/educational software. There's ways to make education games, still bring in $, and have them more in a positive environment. Not all games related to war(s) have to be a shooter; make some point and click, or have them watch a video and answer questions at the end of the segment.
Back to the original topic at hand
The rating system is honestly a joke. The rating system should only tell what content is in the game, and let the parents decide if the game(s) is appropriate for their children. The rating system is nothing more than the same rating system for movies, books, TV shows, and/or music - ignored most of the time. Say what's in the game(s), let the parents do their job, done. Not this "Oh this game is M for Mature" yet 9 year olds are making inappropriate comments.
People should be able to play what they want to play, so yes video game restrictions are pointless.
For Consumers, YES
For Developers and Publisher, NO. It a thing that covered their asses legally.
They are pointless because, they are not enforced... It would be like the movie industry allowing 12 year old kids into rated R or NC-17 movies. It's nice for parents who understand the system and it gives them more insight into the content of the game and the appropriate age group that should be playing them. However, ultimately ratings on video games just don't matter, because no one has to show an ID to buy them. Meaning only very watchful and protective parents actually restrict what their children play.
Yes, because as much as developers and publishers claim that their games are intended for a mature audience, a significant portion of those that play their games are kids. And they're not trying to lose out on that revenue stream.