Bravo, although that Mirror's Edge puts the fact that the main character:

Looks cool + has tattoos and KILLS THE SWAT TEAM! I have no clue why even you put that in there as a sub!

And the racist thing on Resident Evil may be a bit bad, because my dad bought the game for me and I think that there is even SOME black survivors. The only thing that will make it racist if you put a black man in Left 4 Dead/Left 4 Dead2 and watch him get clobbered by a Tank. And I wonder why you didn't put Left 4 Dead in it? What is the matter with you?

really,
really???!!!
here's something you adults should know... kids dont choose vidiogames just because there violent. SHOCKER!!!
I like spore and civilization 4 just as mutch as god of war 2 i dont like overly violent vidiogammes, there usually is no plot to them,
but that is just my oppinion
also just because there is a violent vidiogame dosn't mean that kids will start going around with an ak-47 there is a huge difference
also most rated m games are overated anyways
call of duty 1,2,and 3 were all rated t but call of duty modern warfare (one of the best games ever) and call of duty 4 were rated m even though they had the same ammount of violence as the other ones.
also if assasins creed were to become a movie but because it is a vidiogame it is way to violent

also i dont have no life, i spend a great ammount of time with my friends and family and only play vidiogames 2-3 hours a day, on weekends

Finnaly about the "racial undertones" just because you are fighting black zombies DOSN'T MEAN IT'S RACIST.......IT TAKES PLACE IN AFRICA!!! really people instead of taking the ESRB's ideas and making them sound way worse than they actually are ......... PLAY THE GAMES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Has anyone ever noticed that CSM is harder on video games than any other medium? It is because it's something relatively new and CSM, and hundreds of other paranoid parents are just afraid. Don't get me wrong, if you're dumb enough to let a six year old play something like Manhunt or Dead Rising, you probably shouldn't have had kids in the first place, and most of these games probably should not be given to anyone under a mature fifteen or an immature eighteen. All I'm saying is that everything the ESRB says is not set in stone, contrary to what CSM seems to think. If Assassin's Creed was a movie, the MPAA would've given it a PG-13 rating and CSM would have given it a 14+. But since its a video game, ESRB gives it an M and CSM gives it a "Not for Kids." It's a big fat double standard. Another example, Heroes is rated TV-14. It is incredibly violent, you see bodies broken in the most graphic fashions including decapitations, burnings, and just plain gory aftermaths of brutal murders. Infidelity and other tricky sexual subjects are tackled on Heroes, although no nudity is shown, we see cheating husbands, strippers, and a woman who has sex with a politician in return for the safe return of her child. Then, we have Mass Effect, a game with little blood except in one scene, and a forty second sex scene at the end between two consenting adults, neither of whom is married. Heroes, once again, TV-14. Mass Effect, M for Mature, 17 and up. Absolutely ridiculous.

i totally agree. and that is just crap because the people who actually made that report probly havent ever played the actual game. and ide find it rare that they even did their research on youtube or whatever.

While some of the games on this list are rightfully on here (MadWorld, Manhunt, God of War, Mortal Kombat, Gears of War, and I don't know about Saints Row 2 'cause I haven't played it), some definitely should not and it is clear that Common Sense Media has not even played them. Saying that Resident Evil 5 has racial undertones is COMPLETELY ludicrous because it is SET IN AFRICA. Africans live in Africa. Africans have dark skin. How could that possibly be racist!?! And there is never an opportunity to use a chain saw in the entire game, so that part is a complete lie. I would definitely replace that with Fallout 3, in which you can target people's heads and watch them explode AND later in the game you can make it bloodier. It's also obvious that CSM hasn't played Resident Evil 4: "Cursing and sexual dialogue?" There are at most five curse words and I don't recall any sexual dialogue.

You forgot Fallout 3. You can choose which body part you want to blow off or dismember and then watch it happen in ultra-gory and graphic slow motion. Oh and about Resident Evil 5's "racial undertones" that is just a stupid remark. Of course the victims are mostly black because it's set in Africa and in Africa people are mostly black. So it's stupid to point out something like that.

One more thing for parents, and although its kind-of off topic, its something important to get around: If there is any movie or documentary you should ever watch, its "War on Kids". It shows the oppression that is going on within America against the new generation of young adults, and it might just open your eyes to what could also be one of the hugest factors of violence and depression among our young society, think twice before just blaming students and what they watch for everything:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nlnwm11d6II Trailer for the movie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6WXl2kAG7Q : A clip of several interviews from the movie about the school system.

one more thing to add

the whole "racial undertones" thing in Resident Evil is stupid.
let's see why?

1. it's set in africa. and surprise, surprise, that means that most of the people there are going to be black.

2. i'm pretty sure that there are very few kids barbaric enough to really enjoy a game more because they're killing black people rather than whites or any other group.

3. recognizing this, the game companies are unlikely to produce a game where the enemies are mostly black just because it would be racist. they're creating a game set somewher in the world where the majority of the populace is black

4. what would the reception be if the game was a black hero vs. mainly white enemies? would they still say there were 'racial undertones'? i dont think so.

5. like 3, i just want to restate in a different way that the game companies are not intending "racial undertones" as far as i can tell. would you like them to set it in africa but have most of the people be white? i dont think that would be quite as realistic

but whatever. since when is commonsensemedia logical?

@FreedomFromCensorship - Thanks for the quote. I'm enjoying your posts; you have good points and you state them eloquently.

@nolemming - As I said, I am not an idiot. I don't buy games based on the amounts of sex and violence they contain; I buy them for the quality of the gameplay and/or the story. Yes, there's some small novelty fun to be had in blowing up some faceless little cartoons, but overall, I'd rather play Tetris than Infamous if the violence was the only draw to the game.

Do you even play the games before putting this stuff out and why should they dictate what is best for your kids every kid is different and not every kid who watches friday the 13th or gears will go on a homicidal killing spree.I have played gears of war ang gta4 and i watch almost any movie as long is it dosent have nudity and i am a straight A student i am christian and a pacifist. seriously trust your kids mor common sense media dosnt think we should be allowed to watch or play anything thats not sugar coaded and totally clean by making us play and watch stuff like that how can we ever be expected to survive in real life a place full of drugs murder unfair bosses and selfish people. dont let common sense raise your kids only you can.

sooooo...let me get it straight...
i hear assumptions that the following are true:

1. kids who play video games didn't spend time with their parents.

why it's not always true: i've played. i spend a LOT of time with my parents, we have a great relationship.

2. Violence in video games/media DOES cause violence otherwise, 100%.

why it's not always true: let's see, wrong? the simple fact is that you're letting the few who do act on what they have learned about violence, POSSIBLY from videogames/media, not necissarily, speak for the hundreds of millions of others who play video games and have NEVER done and WILL NEVER do any of those things.

3. Because somebody had the sense to assume that video game violence ("pressing X") and real-world violence are very, very different and killing in real life is different than video game killing, their comments should be ignored and and dismissed as not true.

4. ESRB=god

why that's not true: ESRB is not god. they are not all knowing, all seeing or whatever else god is supposed to be. they guess. they hypothesize. they make educated assumptions about what kids can be exposed to and at what age.

5. people who play games are zombies who eat up the garbage that the game industry throws out at them

why it's not true: well what do you expect them to do? they're gamers. one person condescended on gamers because they "are all just being played like those games [they] play, the [game industry] just uses [them] to make millions". well excuse me for asking, but why are you accusing them of using what you make for them? shouldn't you be happy that they buy your product so that you can eat and support a family?

6. all kids are the same. an M rated game shouldn't be in the hands of ANY kid who is underage.

why that's not true either: kids are different. every one of them. some of them shouldn't be seeing those things, playing those things, or whatever because they're not old or mature enough to handle it. but a lot of them are, especially with some good adult guidance.

really people, think before you speak. otherwise i wouldn't have to write this.

-@nolemming

Its not like my father didn't do those things with me either. I'm almost insulted that you would assume I had no childhood life, games just were apart of my childhood. It was on certain occasions that he let me play those games, it wasn't like I spent all my time in my room playing them all day, I grew up like any normal kid would, I just happened to play these games off and on when my father would let me. I didn't see these games as something serious and so connected to real life that I needed to worry about it, I was just having fun, heck I hardly could understand what was going on on the screen at that age. My life is fine, I'm hardly ever depressed, and If I am, I always try to get my self back into a good mood by hanging out with friends, or something along those lines. If I even needed to take anti-depressants, it would be from all the bulling I received through my school years, for years on end. It many not seem like something that would affect someone to the point of depression, but when you mix that with all the other problems at schools (control of thought, horrible rules that have no impact on education, useless homework, some with absolutely no connections to jobs in the real world), you really put a lot of stress on a child, which can greatly affect his or her mind. But did I give into this? No, I didn't. I stayed as positive as I could through it all, and that was all done during the times I was playing whatever video games I chose to buy for the most part. (Also a great thing that my parents taught me, to stay positive through everything).

We like these violent and sexual games because their entertaining, and granted, you have people who will just mindlessly buy them for those tendencies, no matter how stupid or bad the movie/game/video was, but many of these have decent storylines and characters. Take for example the movie, "District 9". It was as bloody and gory as heck but it was an amazing and emotional movie nonetheless. I don't buy a game because it has sex and violence in it, that is not what I look for first, I buy a game because its actually fun to play, no matter what its rated, I'm not saying an "E" game can't be as fun as an "M" game (World of Goo would be a good example), there are many cases in which that is true, it just happens that a lot of "M" rated games are in fact better than others, some don't even deserve an "M" rating (Call of Duty 4, one of the best games to date, could have easily been rated T, it had no gore in it whatsoever, and hardly any blood). And of course there's so much more to life, these games are just what they are: games, nothing more, why would parents be so worked up over them anyway? I could understand being addicted to them (World of Warcraft comes to mind) but if parents and kids can manage time as to not allow games to interfere with your everyday life, it shouldn't be a problem. I'm just annoyed at the fact that so many parents still claim them as being built for mindless "murder simulating". They are just games, parts of the media that rakes in millions of dollars. I could easily live without them, as would many. But that isn't guaranteed to slow rising violence and crime levels that parents keep screaming about, I think its just more fluctuating than anything, as in at some points in history, violence was rampant, and in others, it lowered to a certain point. Did you know that beheadings were once a family outing during the middle ages? I think they still do public beheadings in certain countries in the middle east, as well. These are places where violent and sexual video games are banned, and yet, violence is still everywhere in these countries.

On a random note: I wish CSM had a forum section, that would be nice.

You all think you are so smart. And you are all just being played like all those games you play by the media -
who just uses you to make millions. They put out garbage you buy it, and you love eating it up. I work in entertainment and the only thing the people making those videos and movies think about is using all of you to get richer and richer. And they know that if they appeal to your basic animalistic tendencies... sex and violence they have a sure winner. Especially if you are a kid, because then you really believe you
are pulling a fast one on your parents. I feel really sad for the kid whose parents have been letting him play M rated games since he was 4.
There is so much more to life. Your father should have been taking you for a walk or playing make-believe. You will never get that innocence back again. You have your whole grown-up life to deal with the violence that truly exists in this world. The last thing a young
child should be thinking about as a game is people dying. But then again I guess that is what anti-depressents are for. And now they are
the latest craze for pre-schoolers. I wonder why?

--@ bunyer

" "Killing someone in a video game is absolutely nothing compared to real life." - really? Have you actually *killed* someone in real life to validate this statement?? "

As quoted from doomzday below, "they are two different actions" Two. Different. Actions.

I really hope you're not saying that the two are practically the same. I guess I should clarify that I'm assuming that killing and violence in real life is different for obvious reasons: Its real life. Emotion is greatly involved. You cannot bring back what you kill. Its not as simple as "pressing X" or clicking on a mouse. Read this quote from the poster below: "You see, I am something the game-haters often claim is impossible: a minor who is not a mentally handicapped idiot with a tendency to apply video game logic to reality. I am a mentally stable individual who has no desire to commit random murders. I am still appalled by real-world violence, so don't try to call me desensitized, either.": This, along with me and most of my friends, are how we turned out.

"...but you are probably dodging any research showing how the threshold for violence in society is rising"

But is this research completely proven to be all linked to video games and violent media? We cannot read the mind of a 13 year old boy who is playing Gears of War, we cannot completely tell if he's thinking "I wish I could do this in real life" or if he's just enjoying the game. EVEN if he goes out and say, gets in a fight, you still have to factor in several different things. What was the reason behind this act of violence? Is the reason stated completely proven with evidence? Is he taking any medication that might increase aggression? Is he mentally unstable? Has he been bullied in the past? What is the condition of his home, his family, etc? I wrote a paper in Sophomore year on how violence in the media cannot be completely related to violence in real life. 2000 word paper, complete with resources and research, got an A on it. I'll try to upload it somewhere soon.

Now you might still say that kids can be desensitized to these differences of real life and fantasy, and that is in fact true. These children who are more likely to relate video games to real life will likely show sings of this early on in life (bullying others, violent behavior, etc.). However, that is where parents can help their children recognize what is right and what is wrong before the media takes over their lives.

I turned out the way I did because of how my parents raised me. They taught me, and reminded me of the differences between violence in real life, and the violence in video games, amongst other things relating to it. If more parents were like this, we would have less of an issue with violence in society. I'm not saying either that every child is going to automatically accept this fact, but its not a hard concept to communicate to your kids and teens. My main problem I have with parents is that many assume that their teens are going to eventually go out and imitate what they see in their games. I could understand younger children doing this, but teens, this is unlikely, assuming they've been brought up in a good family. I've noticed this site does try to convey that idea that parents need to teach their children about how media might affect them if they don't watch themselves closely, which is one of the few things I like about it.

Oh yeah, and I'm 17, my profile has been flipping back and forth between teen and parent for some weird reason, and I can't change it (a glitch, I'm guessing). Are you going to assume now that just because of my age, that my argument is totally invalid? That a teen has no power or worthwhile opinions just because of the fact that he or she is a minor like many other parents assume? I've gotten over the "don't talk back" age long ago, and realized its just a way for some parents to stop their kids from proving them wrong. Although age is commonly linked to wisdom, which is obvious to understand I would never assume old people are automatically smart, especially with all the problems we have now between so many different groups, countries, minorities, etc. Oh, that also reminds me, haven't religious conflicts caused violence and killed more people than anything? Could differences in religion, and lacks of tolerance for one another's preferences and such be another reason for this rising violence?
("Older men declare war. But it is the youth that must fight and die." ~Herbert Hoover )

While these games don't match up with the titles at all (I wouldn't advise getting "halo wars" when you told your kid you'd get him something similar to "gears of war") it does provide a nice list of pretty clean games.

First of all: The fast-paced, first-person platformer Mirror's Edge and the methodical stealth game Manhunt? Action game MadWorld and fighting/puzzle game Punch-out? Third-person shooter Gears of War and real-time strategy title Halo Wars? Did you even try to find games that are actually similar?

Secondly, to all the (truly good-intentioned, I'm sure) people out there trying to save the innocent children from the nasty games, please stop and consider some things. I play Left 4 Dead, which is extremely violent, as well as Oblivion and Infamous, which allow the player to commit "evil" acts. In a game, I often have the potential to role-play as evil characters, like a supervillain or a paid assassin, and sometimes, I do. In real life, I'm nothing like that; I have no desire to become a hitman or the next Hitler. I'm quiet and withdrawn; typically described as nice and reasonable with a good heart, probably because I am.

You see, I am something the game-haters often claim is impossible: a minor who is not a mentally handicapped idiot with a tendency to apply video game logic to reality. I am a mentally stable individual who has no desire to commit random murders. I am still appalled by real-world violence, so don't try to call me desensitized, either.

When you decide that a game is inappropriate for someone simply because some organization (run by people you don't know for the sake of making money and preventing lawsuits) says it's only for people "(x) years old," you defy logic and deeply insult the person you have judged using a stranger's logic. The player's ability to separate fantasy from reality, not some random person's "recommended age," should be the deciding factor.

bunyer:

ad hominem, much?

why would any of you think it appropriate to comment on whether or not killing someone in a video game is the same as killing a person in real life. take it from someone who knows, they are two different actions. your child realizes that when they kill someone in a game that they are not killing a real person. mnay cases of kids killing others and blaming it on video games are mere attempts to pass the buck. they dont want to get into trouble so they blame the first thing or person that comes to mind.

"Killing someone in a video game is absolutely nothing compared to real life." - really? Have you actually *killed* someone in real life to validate this statement?? Otherwise what you are making is a hypothesis. And if a hypothesis, then the only empirical research you have is (by the rest of your post) your own personal experience based on how *you* turned out. You are probably too young of an adult to have much of an anthropological view of the impact of videos games on U.S. society. Granted, every child who's played a M game won't turn out to be a Eric Harris or Dylan Klebold (Columbine, CO 1996), but you are probably dodging any research showing how the threshold for violence in society is rising, nothing offends us much, nor for long. And if it does, well, just fix it with a scholarship fund or new charity. I'll pretty much be dismissing the opinions of FreedomFromCensorship from here on out.

Exactly, well said DaMan15. The ESRB ratings are not laws or restrictions, but merely a guide to what general audience would be best suited for the game. I despise one-sided parents who use it strictly and always believe what the news says about violent games=real life violence, even though the two are totally different things. Games like Call of Duty 4 do not teach you how to handle a weapon. When you shoot a gun in real life, its more than just pulling the trigger, its factoring in recoil, weight of the gun, and bullet type, amongst other things. When it comes down to it, you do not "kill" a "person" in a game, you active a script within the game's code that causes the model of the character you "kill" to be removed, that's all it really is.

To me, it seems that adults and parents are having a hard time figuring out the differences between real life and fantasy!

You havn't really put much effort into finding alternatives to these games (Gears of War 2 and Halo Wars are entirly different genres, with nothing in common.) It always sort of bugs me when people treat the ESRB rating like gospel. The ESRB is meant as a guide, you should just know your own kids. It also bugs me when people act like these games are perfect simulations of real life violence (unless real soldiers hit X to throw gernades.) I own many of these games, and so do many of my underage friends. None of us are serial killers to my knowledge, so there you go.

"What really is so ironic is that the Air Force uses simulators to teach people how to fly planes. They sit at the controls of a computer and repeat motions over and over in order to train them to react without thinking -- so it will become automatic.

Aren't our kids doing the same thing? Are we not training a whole generation to automatically react in a violent way with no critical thought or conscience?"

----In reply to Stapleton------
It all depends on how the parents teach their children. I'm pretty sure parents wouldn't train their kids to kill, so why do they keep saying the media is teaching kids to do this? I though parents were supposed to be parents, not the media? If parents actually took the time to teach the differences between fantasy and reality instead of sit around on their lazy rears and let the media do the job, then we wouldn't have these problems. A 13 year old can play a "M" game, and still grow up like any other normal kid, if his or her parents have taught him how to deal with violence.

Killing someone in a video game is absolutely nothing compared to real life. Teens and kids who have good parents who clearly explain the differences between fantasy and reality understand that concept. I've been playing games like Doom since I was only 4 years old, and yet I'm probably one of the more kinder people around. My parents taught me the differences between shooting someone in a game like Grand Theft Auto or Half Life, and real life violence, and what should and should not be done. I have never once been in a SINGLE fight in my ENTIRE LIFE, and yet I have played some of the most violent, bloody games on the market, for hours at a time. Right now, I'm taking classes in actually creating characters, concept art, and animations for games and CG effects. These violent video games have shaped my talents and my future, and influenced me to write my own stories and create my own art.

And M games are simply directed at an older audience, they are not just for pure adults, you'll find that most teens and even pre-teens will prefer M games over any other (and most M games have not only better gameplay, but better scrips and more meaningful stories, you will find since most E games are directed at younger audiences, that not a lot of thought is put into gameplay mechanics, graphics, voice acting, etc....thats not to say that all E games are horrible, though) Anyone can play them as long as freedom still exists in the U.S.

-----
"....then parents should learn to say "no" and mean it, without apology, or attempts to placate with "similar" content."

This creates a rebellious, and angry child more than anything, especially if you don't give good reasons or an "apology". If their parents say no, they will try to find a way around it, school is one of those outlets for seeing things that parents forbid. The more you restrict a growing child, especially in their teen years, the more they will rebel against you and act out their anger (which ironically is the thing parents try to prevent). My mother is like this, forbidding, oppressive, and controlling, and worst of all, displays little logic or reason for her actions of controlling my life, even though I have proved her wrong countless time in my life. However my father is smart enough to know that I'm much more mature than my ignorant mother believes.

Dead Rising is definitely inspired by Dawn of the Dead but it is not based on it.

I don't see the irony of using simulators to train Air Force pilots. The military simulators are just that, simulators of a real life instrument. They have all the buttons and whatnot of an actual cockpit. Playing videogames is simply pressing buttons, that's what you're learning. Repetition of doing something is how you learn to do anything. You become faster at reacting and performing actions within the game, not learning how to perform those actions in real life.

Anyways, there is a reason these games are rated M; they're made for adults, not children. This article seems irrelevant, parents simply need to avoid all M-rated games. What would be more telling is putting together a list of the most violent T- or E-rated games.

The "alternatives" to these games is to say "no" when your underage son or daughter asks you to buy it. Let's begin to take the ESRB ratings seriously; if the industry says the game is intended for players over 17 years of age, then parents should learn to say "no" and mean it, without apology, or attempts to placate with "similar" content.

What really is so ironic is that the Air Force uses simulators to teach people how to fly planes. They sit at the controls of a computer and repeat motions over and over in order to train them to react without thinking -- so it will become automatic.

Aren't our kids doing the same thing? Are we not training a whole generation to automatically react in a violent way with no critical thought or conscience?

And we wonder why violence is increasing in our society exponentially....go figure!

none of the alternatives come close to the games they replace. Halo Wars as an alternative to Gears of War? Fail.

I agree that six year olds shouldn't be playing things like RE or GTA, but there are better alternatives out there

I don't like violent video games. I don't play violent video games. That comment just seems a bit unnecessary. Why didn't you just list the entire Resident Evil series instead of calling out RE5 for it's 'racial overtones'???

It's set in Africa. Hello.

I puked at almost all of these alternatives (except for Batman:AA, that was an excellent game, however, God of War 2 is about equal to it in terms of fun) You cannot compare Gears of War to Halo Wars. Not only are they two different types of games, but Halo Wars is barely any good at all.

These are the worst alternatives I've ever seen, Ghostbusters and Resident Evil 4 are completely different games.