There’s no ‘one size fits all’ take when you’re dealing with millions of diverse gamers
It’s a good explanation on what is really going on with that. It’s not a good regulation, but it isn’t some Orwellian thing like I’ve been seeing people say either.
This doesn’t really make sense. It’s destroying an industry to prevent bad actors. Basically the same as banning driving to prevent drunk driving.
It’s really not impossible to have a competent rating system for games, especially for a country that spends so much on sanitizing the internet of whinny the poo =\
Has more? Adults. Spends more on games? Children. By far. Often by either harassing their parents until they give in (both parents tend to work long hours) or by outright stealing it.
That is kind of the point. More offline games is fine. There’s no ban on those now. Under the new regs there’s nothing preventing you from downloading and playing an offline game. Or installing MAME and playing a million classic video games. Or even hosting a LAN party at your home.
All that’s been lost is the Skinner Box games ruthlessly tuned with the assistance of psychologists and sociologists to target malleable minds with the generation of addictive personality disorders.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !gaming@lemmy.ml
Sub for any gaming related content!
Rules:
No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy “anti-woke” energy, you probably shouldn’t be posting it here.
Gamers really are the most oppressed…
deleted by creator
This is what makes it Orwellian IMO; They’re hunting with nukes. They really need to target micro-transactions and loot-boxes, not everyone under 18.
Yes. They should expend enormous time and effort identifying each possible iteration and evasion that these companies are going to try.
Or they can cut off the revenue streams at the knee and force the companies to either adapt into something less openly harmful or die.
This doesn’t really make sense. It’s destroying an industry to prevent bad actors. Basically the same as banning driving to prevent drunk driving. It’s really not impossible to have a competent rating system for games, especially for a country that spends so much on sanitizing the internet of whinny the poo =\
deleted by creator
…
What!?
We’re talking about the online games here. It’s not mostly adults spending money on them. It’s children and adults both.
deleted by creator
Has more? Adults. Spends more on games? Children. By far. Often by either harassing their parents until they give in (both parents tend to work long hours) or by outright stealing it.
Not to mention people will just use their mum’s ID.
I’m hopeful that no games means people will go outside and services will cater to that, but in reality I expect more singleplayer and offline games.
That is kind of the point. More offline games is fine. There’s no ban on those now. Under the new regs there’s nothing preventing you from downloading and playing an offline game. Or installing MAME and playing a million classic video games. Or even hosting a LAN party at your home.
All that’s been lost is the Skinner Box games ruthlessly tuned with the assistance of psychologists and sociologists to target malleable minds with the generation of addictive personality disorders.