1223
« on: February 03, 2007, 06:01:57 AM »
I don't think that's true. Certainly the X-Box demographic is older than a lot of Nintendo's, but I've been playing Viva Pinata for a while now and it was certainly not designed for older gamers. It's still fun of course, but it maily appeals to kids. (Also, when I was younger, I certainly just only play "kiddy" games). I think the main thing should be to focus on having parental controls that would lock out potentially dangerous features for those too young or immature to handle an online environment.
I also think you're underestimating the age of a lot of Nintendo gamers. It's not like only eight year olds like Pokemon.
Edit: wandering, I was really unaware that had happened at all. However I don't think that this one isolated incident suggests there's a fundamental problem with the way online gaming is approached. People just need to take responsibility for their own actions, and make sure their children know the dangers and are responsible enough to protect them. I've read someone on here say that "it doesn't matter what parents SHOULD do..." but yes, it does. It is not Nintendo's responsibility to protect children, it is their parents', and Nintendo should not sacrifice a good product for the sake of "Nannying" people. If they choose to do that, it is of course their right as a company, but it comes at the price of an improved product and more customers.