Also worse is the reason the platform companies do this -- because it is in their best monetary interests to keep the market images of the consoles as "kid friendly." They want that parents can randomly pick a game off a shelf without ever looking at it without fear of putting something inappropriate for a child in the console.
They don't want that a child could ever acquire something inappropriate for the console at all, in any channel, for fear that the reputation of the console would hurt sales in the sub-16 range.
The irony is that they want this so that they can continue selling M rated games to 13 year olds, as that's the most lucrative section of sales for M rated games, as they stand on gaming platforms.
Because really, if you sit back and look at it, the level of 'mature' content that ends up in actual M rated games is the exact kind that appeals to young teens, and everyone knows it.
Why is that inherently bad? The companies release a product with a target market; some content for the platform would be a deal-breaker for their positioning, so they disallow it. It's a free market and companies are allowed to make those kinds of decisions.
If there was huge pent-up demand for adult-themed games, wouldn't it stand to reason that some console manufacturer would buck the trend to collect the profits?
Incidentally, if the most lucrative part of the market is 13 year olds buying M-rated games, doesn't that sort of imply either that there isn't much money to be made from making AO games, or that the eventual audience for those games would be 13 year olds?
Absolutely. The idea that this vacuum of hyper-violent or graphically-sexual video games is somehow a "problem" is more a treatise on what some people believe the market should be more than what the market actually is. It's absurd for precisely the reasons you state. If there was a market for it, however seedy or unorthodox, it would exist to service that market for a tidy profit. It doesn't exist, therefore no one believes it would be profitable.
It is not about hyper-violent or graphically sexual games. It is about games which can conceivably address that content, or use that content for effect, without fear of being marginalized or censored.
You answered his comment but not mine. My point doesn't depend on superficial adult content. If there's money in artistically-valid AO games, why doesn't someone capitalize on that? In reality, aren't we talking about AO developers being unhappy that they can't capitalize on the success of a platform that is successful because it successfully targets 13 year olds?
Hi, I'm Chris Hansen, tune in for a special episode of Dateline NBC, entitled, how your adolescent is having sex with the video game system in your basement...
They don't want that a child could ever acquire something inappropriate for the console at all, in any channel, for fear that the reputation of the console would hurt sales in the sub-16 range.
The irony is that they want this so that they can continue selling M rated games to 13 year olds, as that's the most lucrative section of sales for M rated games, as they stand on gaming platforms.
Because really, if you sit back and look at it, the level of 'mature' content that ends up in actual M rated games is the exact kind that appeals to young teens, and everyone knows it.