God forbid anyone under 18 knows that gambling exists without actually engaging in it.
You do know that you can play a card game without it being gambling, don’t you? Or that you can gamble on not just any card game, but just about anything?
By your logic we should rank solitaire as 18+, since people actually gamble on it in casinos.
My parents actually banned face cards at our house, and they still generally avoid them on an “appearance of evil” basis. I always thought that was dumb, because it’s just as easy to gamble with numbered cards as with face cards. The design of the cards isn’t an issue, nor even the mechanics (i.e. highest scoring hand wins), but with the actual gambling aspect to it.
I have a zero tolerance for gambling in my house, but we use face cards regularly, and I’m happy to play Balatro w/ my kids. In fact, I’ve been meaning to, I just have other games to get through (currently Hogwarts Legacy and *Zelda: Echoes of Wisdom). They like to watch me play, and Balatro would be really interesting to them since they love math.
I once bet a guy a $1 that I could take two people, one a stockbroker the other a homeless person, and trade their lives to see the social ramifications. Lotta laughs, that’s for sure.
Then how do you reconcile that they aren’t, or what about games that feature real money gambling like sports games? (NBA games feature real gambling with micro transactions and casino games such as slot machines and pachinko machines). NBA 2k games have a pegi rating of 3 and up.
It’s not performative if the industry insider run ratings commission uses their power to give ratings that favor their games and hurt smaller independent studios.
It absolutely will. The game has already been erroneously removed from storefronts in the past.
If an 18+ rating will drive sales, why do the operators of PEGI and ESRB bend the rules to ensure their games (EA sports games being a prime example) get as low of a rating as possible, even when they have actual gambling (slot machines paid for with real money)
I mean your own adamancy shows the damage since you seem to be under the impression that the game involves wagers/betting/gambling or other activities that could be perceived as dangerous.
I have described several times, based on the steam store page, what it involves. Nowhere has been actual gambling. The point is to be up to standard. Not to lower because someone else is behaving badly.
Then they should have been rated higher.
God forbid anyone under 18 knows that gambling exists without actually engaging in it.
You do know that you can play a card game without it being gambling, don’t you? Or that you can gamble on not just any card game, but just about anything?
By your logic we should rank solitaire as 18+, since people actually gamble on it in casinos.
My parents actually banned face cards at our house, and they still generally avoid them on an “appearance of evil” basis. I always thought that was dumb, because it’s just as easy to gamble with numbered cards as with face cards. The design of the cards isn’t an issue, nor even the mechanics (i.e. highest scoring hand wins), but with the actual gambling aspect to it.
I have a zero tolerance for gambling in my house, but we use face cards regularly, and I’m happy to play Balatro w/ my kids. In fact, I’ve been meaning to, I just have other games to get through (currently Hogwarts Legacy and *Zelda: Echoes of Wisdom). They like to watch me play, and Balatro would be really interesting to them since they love math.
I once bet a guy a $1 that I could take two people, one a stockbroker the other a homeless person, and trade their lives to see the social ramifications. Lotta laughs, that’s for sure.
Then how do you reconcile that they aren’t, or what about games that feature real money gambling like sports games? (NBA games feature real gambling with micro transactions and casino games such as slot machines and pachinko machines). NBA 2k games have a pegi rating of 3 and up.
It’s not performative if the industry insider run ratings commission uses their power to give ratings that favor their games and hurt smaller independent studios.
An 18+ rating isn’t going to hurt a video game. If anything teenagers are going to buy it more.
It absolutely will. The game has already been erroneously removed from storefronts in the past.
If an 18+ rating will drive sales, why do the operators of PEGI and ESRB bend the rules to ensure their games (EA sports games being a prime example) get as low of a rating as possible, even when they have actual gambling (slot machines paid for with real money)
I mean your own adamancy shows the damage since you seem to be under the impression that the game involves wagers/betting/gambling or other activities that could be perceived as dangerous.
I have described several times, based on the steam store page, what it involves. Nowhere has been actual gambling. The point is to be up to standard. Not to lower because someone else is behaving badly.
“It’s okay because laws don’t work” is a buck-wild take.
Best I can do is 5 stars.