digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at msnbc.msn.com

How young is too young for video games?

msnbc.msn.com — I can’t wait to play video games with my son. Of course, depending on who you ask, I don’t need to wait. Some believe that, at 2 years old, my boy is plenty old enough to pick up a controller in his miniature hands and take his place as my pint-sized co-op partner.

Who dugg this? Made popular Mar 30, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

187 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • LeviTheSmith, on 03/30/2009, -0/+66Wow new Pedobear
  • phpirate, on 03/30/2009, -5/+70***** that *****. My kid is going to be hardcore. Nothing but grand theft auto for him. He's got to learn what the real world is about. Which is stealing cars and killing hookers.
  • Rapter09, on 03/30/2009, -0/+54Wow, Pedobear got an upgrade.
  • Chadatron, on 03/30/2009, -5/+49In my opinion you are never too young to play video games and using technology to learn is something children can only benefit from at an early age. I think the problem comes when youngsters have no moral compass or set guidelines on the games they play and the times in which they play them. Lack of boundaries can have a negative effect in all areas of a person’s growth; video games included.
  • CoD4, on 03/30/2009, -0/+41Video games do have some effect on behavior, but it's the ***** parenting that ***** your kids up
  • Zcrubby, on 03/30/2009, -0/+39HD-Pedobear
  • inactive, on 03/30/2009, -1/+38and taking your cousin out to bowl.
  • fjsferreira, on 03/30/2009, -0/+30Does he really has to be this big? Anyway, nice to see pedobear 2.0
  • Jalh, on 03/30/2009, -0/+28pedobear 2.0 cooooool !
  • tacotomato, on 03/30/2009, -0/+27A generation grew up on Oregon Trail and we're fine. If you'll excuse me, I need to go hunt a very slow bear and carry 100 lbs. of food back for dinner.
  • WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -1/+19Speaking as a gamer, it's not a matter of "moral" compass, imo, so much as the fact that things like reading require a much more active participation from the brain than things like TV or video games. Reading (and even listening to a story being read to you) places images in your brain through the indirect medium of language; your brain then has to take the extra step of interpreting the spoken or written word and forming images to go with it.

    When those images are broadcast to you directly, on the other hand, they go right through the visual cortex. Your linguistic centers are much more narrowly employed as a result, and thus don't get as well-developed. Young children have been referred to as "linguistic geniuses," so they need to be exposed to language in all its forms as much as possible. Even at an older age, the best way to really get a feel for grammar is to read/speak that language consistently.

    I don't know what the answer is with regards to video games, but to me it's not a moral issue at all, but rather an educational/developmental one. When I have kids, they will have near-zero exposure to video games and TV until they're 6 or 7 - which will be a pain in the ass for me, since that means I'll have to severely curtail my own gaming time. But I'm firmly convinced from my experience with my circles of friends that kids who read more when they're younger tend to have a much more vivid imagination and much better grasp of language than kids who spend their childhood staring at the TV, or focusing almost exclusively on sports, or playing video games.
  • xanadu2113, on 03/30/2009, -2/+19as soon as I stuck my thumbs out of the womb i began pwning n00bs
  • jholden42, on 03/30/2009, -0/+15Watch out for dysentery!
  • TimtheTaxMan, on 03/30/2009, -0/+15Personally, I’d rather have my kids interacting with a video game than rotting away watching Teletubbies. At least video games require some problem solving skills and help teach kids how to navigate various interfaces.

    I started way back on a commodore PET when I was five or six (I think Miner! was the first game I ever played) and I turned out just fine.
  • Daemastrius, on 03/30/2009, -1/+15No. Just no. We are not going to do this ***** again.
  • s0nicfreak, on 03/30/2009, -0/+14I started playing games before I was a year old and I turned out... .... well, I'm still alive.
  • smacksaw, on 03/30/2009, -0/+13He makes it seem like he's making love to his wife where he "only plays after the kid is asleep"...hey...isn't that what you're supposed to do after you get the kid to bed?

    I'll say this much. I think the impetus for my youngest to learn to walk was so he could stand up and play Rock Band and mess with my laptop. He's 11 months and his three-year old brother both have to hold plastic guitars when we play Rock Band. We got them the vsmile stuff and whatever and they don't care one bit. But the laptop with Edubuntu? All over it. The Namco Pac-Man 6-in-1? All over it. The Little Tikes steering wheel game on TV they couldn't care less. The PS2 Mad Catz wheel was rocked so hard by the three-year-old (then two) that he ripped it off the base and split his ear open.

    They know what the real deal is and if they're interested, let 'em play. Even if they don't play what's on the screen right...that's what No Fail Mode is for on Rock Band. They sing, they dance, they play guitar...at that age it's not about structured development anyway. Just be careful as they're prone to getting in trouble with things that are not kid-proof or kid-safe.
  • inactive, on 03/30/2009, -0/+128O
  • prettyawesome, on 03/30/2009, -1/+12She named her son Oz? Seriously?
  • inactive, on 03/30/2009, -2/+13There's a reason why we have ESRB ratings.
  • ibeetle, on 03/30/2009, -0/+10You are partially right. A Leapfrog Tag book reader can be a lot of fun, but it is in no way meant to replace the parent sitting and reading with their child.
    Parents still need to be involved in their child's life and not try and let technology raise their children.

    However, your child will be missing out on a lot if there is no T.V. until 6 or 7. Mr. Rogers, Reading Rainbow, Sid the Science Kid, Electric Company, Cyberchase, Blues Clues, and many other programs have been proven to be quite beneficial to a child's development.

    My son and I have discovered many books because of his exposure to Between the Lions. We have recreated some of the science explained on Sid the Science Kid, and have used many examples first seen on television.

    While I would not let my 4 year old watch Gossip Girl and Supernatural there is age appropriate programing on television.
  • darkthomas, on 03/30/2009, -0/+9It depends on the game. Lumping all games together into one category uses the same mentality that people like Jack Thompson use. That would be like saying "how young is too young for movies?" when you have movies like the Sesame Street films, and then you have something like Reservoir Dogs. It just doesn't work to label them all as the same thing.
  • EggAndMuffin, on 03/30/2009, -1/+10Words from a 12-year old gamer:
    http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/7762/dontwronghim ...
  • Pillar007, on 03/30/2009, -0/+8When i was young (about 10) I got really into RTS games. I think these are the best for educating young minds. It requires short and long term tactics, managing resources, and your offensive/defensive balance. All of these things are relevant in the real world.
  • LeviTheSmith, on 03/30/2009, -2/+10WU TANG CLAN AIN'T NOTHIN' TO ***** WIT
  • jholden42, on 03/30/2009, -0/+7Yeah, that's 100% false. I grew up playing video games, and I was definitely interested in interacting with other kids - running around outside, bike-riding, y'know, maybe talking about video games.

    One doesn't replace the other.
  • techobo, on 03/30/2009, -0/+7Someone needs to make a magic eye pedobear.
  • Insolent, on 03/30/2009, -0/+7How long have you been waiting to roll that one out?
  • twertyto, on 03/30/2009, -1/+8"...and I turned out just fine."

    You're on Digg.
  • lutiana, on 03/30/2009, -0/+6I think this is all about quantity more than quality. Balance the kids growth.

    If you ban TV/games all together (or make it very limited) it will turn it into a taboo, something they will want to do at every available opportunity and this means you will lose control very quickly as they get older.

    On the flip side of that, allowing then exposure to age appropriate content on a regular basis, but balancing that with other activities would be far more effective. Let the kid watch TV for an hour or 2 during they day, then read him/her a story at night.

    I don't think TV or video games are a problem to development, in fact I think they can be used as extremely powerfull tools for this. Its when TV and videogames are used and baby-sitters with no control of content that the issues come in.
  • jholden42, on 03/30/2009, -0/+6I work at a store that sells very little OTHER than video games; and speaking personally, I would say that the minimum age is five to six years old. The reason for this has some to do with child development, but more to do with game developers: nobody makes games for children under that age.

    Please, parents, understand this simple rule: nobody. Makes. Games. For children under that age.

    I can't tell you how frustrating it is to deal with erstwhile parents who come in asking "Hi, can you help me find a game for my son? Oh, he's three." No, no I cannot help you find a game for your son, because there are almost zero video games that are simplistic enough for a three-year-old to enjoy. Wii Music might go over well, but that's darn near it - children that young don't get the structure and rules of _games_, they need _toys_.

    Except in rare cases, younger than five to six years old; that's how young is too young for video games.
  • HamatoKameko, on 03/30/2009, -0/+5Looks more to me like someone for whom English is a second language.
  • jholden42, on 03/30/2009, -1/+6Right, because your child is the only child ever to mime shooting a gun at another person, for fun.

    Wait: don't pretty much ALL male children do this at some point? Oh, right.
  • WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -0/+5You can read my full post above if you're interested, but the synopsis is that imo there is *definitely* such a thing as too young for TV; it has nothing to do w/ morality and everything to do w/ brain development.
  • thatnerdyguy, on 03/30/2009, -3/+8Plus, ADHD isn't real.
  • jer21, on 03/30/2009, -0/+5Too late. You have died of dysentery.
  • stk198323, on 03/30/2009, -0/+5Actually some people believe that whatever the ***** you do cause autism!

    Vacination? Autism!

    TV? Autism!

    Video games? Autism

    Playing too much sport? Autism!

    God damn the way they're going right now soon we will see autistic child because they breath air!
  • morningmatters, on 03/30/2009, -1/+6Looking at the responses my guess is that most of the posters here don't have kids? Now I don't care how others raise their own kids but I think before age of 6 it's much better to spend quality time with your kid so your kid can appreciate you, rather than you both appreciating video games. Once the kid goes to elementry school it's likely that the kid will be exposed to videogames. From that point videogames should be used as an incentive to reward good behavior rather than a way for parents to escape basic parenting. What is good and fun for parents may not be what's the best for the child.

    Also, as a parent you probably want to guide your child to learn essential skills which can help the kid later on in "real" life. Unless you are talking about the educational games which adults don't usually enjoy, your typical videogames simply don't help your child to learn these basic skills as well as having your kid to join some sports teams, or learning how to play instruments, or simple reading.

  • twertyto, on 03/30/2009, -0/+5Personal experience:

    I have a 2 and a half year old son and I've let him play video games from the moment he was interested enough. That was around 14 or 15 months using the Wii and a DS. I think both are great for really young kids. I don't think you could go that low for other button crunching consoles (however by now he can manage those well). It was funny the first time he played a non Wii/DS console. He was expecting a reaction by shaking the controller and it took a bit for him to realize that you just had to push buttons. I think he was a bit disappointed by that. Anyway, I think with the right games it can be very educational with kids but just like with anything else use it in moderation. I definitely have to limit how much time he plays, when he does play I always play with him, and I make sure to mix in plenty of outside time and play groups with other kids.

    My son learned to count to ten from playing Wii Boxing before he was two. He learned colors rather quickly playing from an assortment of games...among other things.

    I could go on, but I think since I managed his play time well and I spend lot of time with him video games have been a really good experience. I can see how it could go really bad if you are not doing those things.

  • RegalBegal, on 03/30/2009, -0/+5These people are stupid.
  • WiretapStudios, on 03/30/2009, -1/+6Make it stop.
  • DarrylWatts, on 03/30/2009, -1/+5See this is what we need, more parents who flex their parental muscle!
  • ibeetle, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4My 4 year old has a Leapfrog Clickstart and Leapster2. He plays Disney Friends, Mario Kart, Crayola Adventures, and other games both hand held and on the Wii (he really like Raving Rabbits) on a Nintendo DS he shares with the family.

    Age appropriate games can be entertaining, fun, educational; and can be as much a part of a child's life and playing soccer, swimming, ice skating/hockey, cycling and mixed martial arts (I named those as examples because that is all of which the kid does).
  • WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -1/+5ibeetle - I hear you, and that's certainly a perfectly valid approach. At the same time - and this is just personal opinion - most of the programming for children teaches material that a parent or grandparent could teach better. I'll admit to being biased - my family didn't move to the US until I was 9 years old (i.e., past the age group targeted by educational programming), so I never really "got it." But my parents and grandparents all spent time teaching me the "three Rs" and the basics of science; by the time I *started* first grade in the former USSR, I already knew things that American kids aren't taught until 3rd or 4th grade. Imo most children's programming is incredibly dumbed down; kids are capable of much, MUCH more than the current educational and entertainment systems (at least in the US) are willing to recognize. So - I respectfully disagree: whatever TV can teach my kids, I and my family can teach it better, faster, and more in-depth :)
  • FrederikNS, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4Not the best quality, but: http://www.easystereogrambuilder.com/Browser.aspx? ...
  • inactive, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4Puffy is cool, but Wu-tang is for the children.
  • inactive, on 03/30/2009, -2/+6Amen. Pedoburied.
  • pjpete, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4If you think that's bad, my future sister-in-law wants to name her kid Octavius so she can nickname him "Gus". I think she's seen Cinderella one to many times.
  • pjpete, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4"You have died of dysentery!" FTW
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 191 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.