Are mature games from 20 years ago still mature today?

[Anthony1]

I have two young boys, aged 4 and 6. They both enjoy video games, and I let them play Genesis and Super Nintendo games. The other day I was playing Contra 3: Alien Wars, and they walked in and saw me playing it, and they wanted to play. Now, Contra 3 isn't really a "mature" game, but at the time of it's release, back in early 1992 if I'm not mistaken, alot of parents wouldn't let their young children play a game like Contra 3. It was a game that people would maybe let their teenagers play, but the little ones would be told to play Mario and Sonic and stuff like that.

Of course, in comparison to the games we have today, a game like Contra 3 is considered pretty juvenile. Sure it has violence and such, but the graphical nature of the game is pretty primitive compared to modern games. Since Contra 3 has come to the virtual console of the Nintendo Wii, it had to be rated by the ESRB. This time, it got a rating of E10+ for fantasy violence. If the ESRB existed in 1992, I wonder what it would have rated Contra 3 back then. I'm guessing T for TEEN.


Take another game like Splatterhouse for the TG-16. This game was also recently released on the virtual console, and it got a rating of T for TEEN. For Blood and Gore and Violence. Streets of Rage on the Wii's Virtual Console got a E10+ for violence.

It's just interesting to think about how these older games would have been perceived back when they first hit the scene, compared to today, when the graphics are considered very primitive in comparison to the modern consoles. A game like Alien 3 on the SNES, might have seemed very scarry when it first was released. It might have recieved a M for Mature rating had the ESRB existed back then. Today, it still probably isn't appropriate for very young children, but for most kids it would be no big deal.

[NE146]

compared to today, when the graphics are considered very primitive in comparison to the modern consoles. ....Today, it still probably isn't appropriate for very young children, but for most kids it would be no big deal.

Yeah definitely! Like in 2600 X-man these were probably inappropriate at the time, but these days, with it's primitive block graphics, it's just totally laughable and just fine for young children to see and move the guy left/right like you do in the game.

[Anthony1]

Yeah definitely! Like in 2600 X-man these were probably inappropriate at the time, but these days, with it's primitive block graphics, it's just totally laughable and just fine for young children to see and move the guy left/right like you do in the game.

Yeah, totally appropriate, ha ha ha!!!

[Fighter17]

Compare to today's mature games, Mortal Kombat was noting.

[DigitalSpace]

It's completely fine for kids to play Golgo 13 and Leisure Suit Larry now.

(The above is not to be taken seriously.)

[cyberfluxor]

I remember watching Golgo 13. That's a freaking sweet ass anime! Def pick-up if you find it.

[MarioMania]

wtf Street of Rage got a E10+ for violence, is that good

[ShenmueFan]

A lot of the games mentioned in this thread aren't 20 years old, so I don't really get that. But anyways...

I think people are more accepting of stuff nowadays. Not everything is acceptable (Adult Only games are still frowned upon today by mainstream consumers) but generally, "mature" games are about the same. Still violent, although most of the time laughably violent (MK? Grand Theft Auto? etc.)

I dunno - I think the only thing that's changed has been the implementation of that stupid rating system that keeps changing every few years. It's arbitrary and worthless. Parents, just buy Mario games if you want your kid to be playing "good" games 'cause apparently the rest are pure filth, right ESRB???

[MarioMania]

I think the ESRB is mostly of 60 year old farts

[Overbite]

you should just hand one of your kids the controller and go "GOOD LUCK!" contra 3 is stupid hard

[gepeto]

I think the ESRB is mostly of 60 year old farts

I think that the todays youth has been so desensitize to violence that we are past the point of no return. Mortal kombats fatalities were bad then and are still bad today. The question is With the culture changed have we. I wouldn't let a 10 year old play mortal kombat. Just my choice.

It really is a shame of how far things have gotten out of hand. I was at a store when san andreas launched and you should have heard the teens foul mouths standing in line to get the game. One even had his own Grandpa with him. Gramps didn't have a clue. Years ago there clearly was more concern about what a kid was able to see and play. Today corp. money pushes alot through. I remember all the hoopla with technoocop for the genesis how bloody it was. I follow the guidelines today. For kids. Most m games arent a big deal for kids in any era.

[Arasoi]

Even ridiculously "mature" games such as Chiller just look ridiculous, now. Shock factor is far too dependent on cutting edge graphics/presentation etc.

In some cases, you have to ask if any of these were ever mature at all.

Custer's Revenge? Sheesh.

[Aussie2B]

Well, what you have to consider is that prior to rating systems, games would have self-imposed censorship because it was a free-for-all back then and you could get sued by any overzealous parent group or what have you at the drop of a hat. As it was Nintendo still had to deal with a lot of lawsuits even though their games were mostly squeaky clean (and they had no role in the third party content either, so blame wasn't really going in the right direction), so when companies wouldn't tone down their own content, Nintendo and other publishers were there to shake their iron fist and protect their asses. Therefore I think the vast majority of unrated games are fine for all ages.

When rating systems came into play, it allowed developers to have the freedom to do more edgy things with their games, so there was an influx of games not appropriate for children. I think the ratings still largely hold well today, so if I had children, I wouldn't want them playing Mature-rated games or Teen-rated games if they were very young regardless of how old the games may be.

As for E10+, I still think that rating is silly. If they didn't come up with that, all E10+ games would still be rated E. I really don't see a huge different between 9 and 11 and 11 and 13, so I don't think it's necessary to have or to follow.

[DefaultGen]

.....

[ubikuberalles]

...compared to today, when the graphics are considered very primitive in comparison to the modern consoles...Today, it still probably isn't appropriate for very young children, but for most kids it would be no big deal.

Using that logic, the Kama Sutra should be distributed to every 1st grader. The book is over a thousand years old and the graphics are so crude compared to modern graphics (they didn't even have movable type back then!) that it would no big deal for kids to read it.

It's not the just graphics itself that is under the consideration by the ESRB but what the graphics are doing. Stick figures cutting off the heads of other stick figures with poorly pixelated blood is still inappropriate for kids below a certain age and should be rated accordingly.

Despite what I just said I think a lot of how a game is rated is arbirtary, subjective and always changing. Imagine how silly and outrageous some of the arguments go on during a ESRB review meeting. I would hate to have that job.

[7th lutz]

There are games were considered mature back in 1987 are still today despite the graphics like Ring King for the nes. Ring King didn't look mature back when it was released in 1987, if you look at the game you know know that game is mature due to the intermission. I also don't see Ring King being released for the virtual game console either.

[j_factor]

I dunno... Mortal Kombat was rated MA-17 in 1993, and it's still M worthy today.

[Censorship-Zen]

hey you guys seem to know your shit. i´d love to have you in my censorship thread

[Stark]

It's not about the graphics or how old a game is it's all about the content. No sensible adult would allow a child to play X-man still today due to the pornographic gameplay. The ratings system we have today is just a guide to what parents can expect to find in a game and is pretty worthless since everyone I know have no clue what this or that game they bought for thier kid is rated and none of them prioritize the game rating over what the kid wants. If your 4 year old wants to play GTA it's your choice not the ratings board.

[Censorship-Zen]

It's not about the graphics or how old a game is it's all about the content.

i wouldn´t agree in all cases. i would let my sibbling play contra 3 with ease whereas say, gears of war is out of the question. both are shooters, but graphically miles lie between them