Create new account
Forgot password?

NEWS

Nielsen: 17% of US GTA IV Buyers Underage

Tom Ivan's picture

By Tom Ivan

August 13, 2008

  • Login or register to post comments

See also:

Related Articles:

61 percent of the underage buyers indicated that they had purchased the game themselves

A high percentage of underage US gamers were able to buy Grand Theft Auto IV themselves or get their parents to buy it for them, according to new research from Nielsen Games.

The data comes from a series of interviews the research firm conducted with over 6,000 unique respondents through its weekly Video Game Tracking survey over a five week period beginning April 28, 2008, the day before GTA IV’s launch.

Of those surveyed, 736 respondents indicated that they had bought GTA IV and 1,582 respondents indicated positive purchase intent.

According to Nielsen, 17 percent of the respondents who had purchased the M-rated title were aged 7 to 16.

61 percent of the underage buyers indicated that they had purchased GTA IV themselves.

Parents or guardians were responsible for purchasing the game for 80 percent of the underage gamers who didn’t buy the title themselves, with friends, siblings and other relatives responsible for the remaining 20 percent of purchases.

Linko64's picture
On October 20th Linko64 said:

Its a impossiable task trying to ensure under age children play GTA or infact any 18/15/M cert game. They will always find a way as there curiosty will get the better of them, and i like some others am suprised the number is only a small 17%.

Markajaw's picture
On August 14th Markajaw said:

GTA IV should be rated T.

Countless studies have proven that video games do not affect children. I've been playing M rated games since I was 12. I'm 16 now and I have never thrown a punch in my life. Call me desensitized I'll call you overly sensitive.

CyberData4's picture
On August 14th CyberData4 said:

Here's the thing though, and I've worked enough years in retail as both grunt and management: Parents typically do NOT care what their kid plays. Period. You can slap all the ratings you want on a game, if little Billy wants it...Mommy will get it for him. I've had parents come into my shop and get ANGRY at me for not selling M rated games to their children. That they had to come all the way to the store and do it themselves was a terrible inconvenience.

I've only seen one parent ask what was about at the time of purchase and then decline to purchase the game due to its content.

TechRyze's picture
On August 13th TechRyze said:

This is America's problem. 'M' ratings don't use the law to forbid under 17s from buying the title - they're just guidance.

The same happens with their NC-17 movies, and we've just seen our own movie ratings begin to slide with the money making 12A rating, where 15 rated films can be watched by pre-teens with adult accompaniment.

I've no sympathy - as it's clear that the content of the titles in question is not suitable for children. Let's take the Joker's use of knives and violence in The Dark Knight to begin with...

DHX's picture
On August 13th DHX said:

I'm surprised the numbers are THAT low. This is both disturbing and sick. Namely the bit about parents and other associations purchasing the game for their young children. Clearly this game, as well as a few others in the series, should have been rated AO. Or maybe we need stronger regulations in place to keep this in check. Everyone cries "education" is the key, and that may help a bit. But until games receive ratings they actually deserve and there are enforcible regulations in place, these numbers will keep getting higher.

And why not? GTA IV and games like it DON'T NEED to be in the hands of children. An employee at GameStop is required by company policy, in a situation when a parent is attempting to purchase an M rated title for their underage child, to list the reasons why it received its rating (thus attempting to educate the clueless parent) and to wait until said clueless parent approves the sale, which they typically do anyway.

Whether it's because they couldn't care less, or they feel purchasing the game is a way to gain leverage on their unruly child, or they still pass it off as "a harmless videogame" not unlike Pac-man or Super Mario, or they feel such a game would make their child "stronger", or they use the age-old excuse: "They already see this content on TV/the news/real life/etc.", or whatever the reason, parents still buy these grossly inappropriate games for their young children. And of course when little Billy has it, he invites little Bobby over who's parents would never buy such a game, and introduces it to him. Or little Billy brags to everyone at school that he has the game, and soon more kids are pressuring their clueless parents to get the game for them as well.

If the game was rated AO as it should have been, this wouldn't be an issue. But game publishers apparently push for an M rating in order to sell more copies of their game. But who do they think their selling these "extra" copies to??? In reality this "extra market" as it were, encompasses underage children. And that's very sad. The adjudicators at the ESRB are also at fault for allowing such a rating. And let's not forget the parents buying these Mature games for their children. It's the collective miscarriage of judgment and moral responsibility that is producing the numbers that you see, as well as causing a general decline in morality among youth. And no, that's not good.

bitchigoth's picture
On August 13th bitchigoth said:

The rating system works fine. If parents ignore an "M" rating, which clearly says right on it: "17+", there's no reason to believe they'll pay any attention to an AO rating.

Additionally, publishers do not "push for an M rating in order to sell more copies of their game." They change whatever they need to change in order to get an M rating, in order to sell ANY copies of their game. Major chains will simply not carry an AO game, so an M rating is the only way the publisher can hope to recover their investment. Until Wal-Mart will sell them, manufacturers don't have the option to let a game be rated AO.

You seem to want the ESRB to change its rating system and to enforce more severe ratings, while at the same time admitting that no matter the rating, "parents still buy these grossly inappropriate games for their young children."

There will always be parents who bring their little kids to inappropriate movies, let them watch horrid TV shows, let them drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, let them skip school, and give them games they should never see. Bad parenting isn't something the ESRB can fix, and I'm not willing to let bad parents limit the content available to me (an adult) in my videogames.