News Chinese government to regulate amount of gameplay

[pendragon]

Originally Posted by Nature

Okay, do I really have to put a sarcastic smiley next to what I'm writing get what I'm really saying?? I thought I was being obviously sarcastic but allow me to be clear: "Freedom" is entitled to all life, as is peace, love, and respect.

Apparently you do, as it seemed to me your point was entirely opposed to the concepts - thus it was easy for me to take you literally... and shocking to believe as well. [shrugs]

[Nature]

Originally Posted by pendragon

Apparently you do, as it seemed to me your point was entirely opposed to the concepts - thus it was easy for me to take you literally... and shocking to believe as well. [shrugs]

Opposite to my concepts? I could see if you only read that statement alone but reading further on I write of ethics, morales, and China's attempt to control youth in an infringing way, yet coming from reasonable logics. Reasonable logics based on protecting thier populace from an unhealthy, easilly accessible lifestyle.

I do agree with your reaction to my: freedom+civil rights=garbage comment.... had I been serious. Thanks for your response and apologies for my vaugeness.

[ChromeX]

Originally Posted by yodasarmpit

Well with parents seemingly unable to take responsibility for their own childrens welfare these days, it seems the Chineese government have made a bold move.

Good or bad I can't decide.

my sentiments exactly

[DLoney]

well... with parents not steping up to take responsibility (in general)... if it goes well over in china, i can see it being brought over here (USA), and with the parents of todays children (again, im talking in general) wanting the goverment (IE: the school systems, ect.) to raise their children, such a law would do wonders.

[CardJoe]

I'm worried that if such a law were adopted here then laws to force children to spend 3 hours a day reading would be put in soon after. Or 3 hours of homework. Only 1 film a week, etc. There isn't anything wrong with these laws in theory, but it is not the role of a democratic government to dictate their people so.

[airchie]

First up, there's a typo in the article.

The news comes at the same type as pressure mounts to classify gaming addiction as a recognised psychological condition.

My opinion on this?
Its shocking that the government even needs to think about making the law.
As has been said, any parent who leaves their child alone long enough to play 8 hours straight is neglecting their duties as a parent IMO.

[pendragon]

Originally Posted by CardJoe

I'm worried that if such a law were adopted here then laws to force children to spend 3 hours a day reading would be put in soon after. Or 3 hours of homework. Only 1 film a week, etc. There isn't anything wrong with these laws in theory, but it is not the role of a democratic government to dictate their people so.

My thoughts exactly.

[metarinka]

Originally Posted by koola

Last time I checked, China was communist which means the State > Individual.

last I checked china wasn't communist but capitalist, in fact even more communist than the US in many respects. The difference is china is not democratic but an oligarchy where a few control the power and the means to get into power, but this is beside the point. China and just about any other country with a functioning government generally are more proactive and hands on in terms of private policy (I.E what you can do in your home and such) whether you see that as good or bad. An example would be the single child laws in china and the requirments of contraceptives something you could never get away with in the US. So a law regulating how much of a certian activity a minor can do is definately not an extreme or new sort of law.

I think where a lot of people are concerned is the fact that this is a regulation of an entertainment/leisure activity, which may seem like a precedent. I don't think just about any citizen wants the government telling them how many books they can read or how many hours of television they can watch. But here's the thing, there's increasing evidence that internet and computer games are a legitimate addiciton (which I strongly agree with from experience). And there's a long standing precedent for laws that limit or deny activities to minors that can be seen as dangerous or addictive. because as the theory goes minors aren't capable of regulating those activities themselves.

In my mind I see this as very similar to motion picture restrictions (no kid under 18 in an R movie) or smoking and drinking laws. in that the goal is to protect minors from an activity that can be reckless if an individual is not responsible.

that being said. I don't agree with the specifics of the law, ala 3hrs a day which is rather draconian, not to mention wouldn't adapt well to all games. or is this only in question of internet based games. ideally the reguirement for this software could be argued but perhaps parents get the last word or can set the limit, as I know as a minor 3hrs a day woulda killed my GPA. I'd be a bigger fan of maybe a quota system so many hours a week or month. I'll admit I've spent a lazy saturday playing 6+hours straight but right now I go 2-3 days without even logging on if I was under a quota system I could still get that one raid or lazy saturday or what ever.

aT any rate it's an interesting law, a rather heavy handed approach to dealing with video game addiction, I'll wait and see especially if there's some good studies on the topic

[ralph.pickering]

Originally Posted by metarinka

last I checked china wasn't communist but capitalist, in fact even more communist than the US in many respects.

Eh? Did you actually check, or did you just pull this out of thin air? (actually, a more colourful expression comes to mind). Mainland China is politically and socially communist, and while it allows capitalism to exist economically it is heavily regulated, and things like utilities, mining and heavy industry are state owned - typical of the communist economic model. It certainly isn't the free market economy typical of a capitalist nation.

[pendragon]

Originally Posted by metarinka

last I checked china wasn't communist but capitalist, in fact even more communist than the US in many respects.

uh.... have you read this ? statements like that make me think you haven't

[J-Pepper]

erm... guys, get some perspective here...

I know it's China, Communist pigs and civil liberty fascists and all (don't worry, I'm Chinese so I can get away with saying stuff like this! ) but you do realise it aimed at minors, and where ever you look, UK, USA, Europe or China... civil liberties of minors have always been curbed for their own safety and well being.

So really, some of you bashers out there, get some perspective... this is just the same as curbing the consumption of alcohol of minors et al.

[CardJoe]

I agree that minors need to be protected from elements that could be dangerous for them in terms of addiction etc, but this law doesn't really seem to address that. In Britain we know that gambling is addictive. And painkillers. And drinking. And eating. And we protect minors from these by not allowing access until they are a certain age - we don't let them have a set amount every day until they are old enough as this could produce results contrary to the aim.

Bear in mind that computer games already attempt to protect minors with ratings (but lets not make this a ratings arguement, eh?). Either way, it is the role of a parent to decide what is correct for their child within reason, not the government. The governments role is to stop children being exploited or abused - computer games do neither of these things.