My girlfriend is having a friend over this weekend, and she has two kids. Her youngest is six, and he is ALL OVER my ps3 as soon as he walks in the door. Which is fine. The think that gt me thinking is what games he plays. Of course, he doesn't think about this the same way I do, and has decided that the best games are rated 16 years and older. Games rated 18 years, aren't that good. No matter what title it is. Still, he is currently on his way to complete BFBC2 on story mode, on the easy setting,. (The kid is six years old after all.) in two days. I find that sort of impressing. Yes, he dies a lot, and no he doesn't get all the objectives. BUT HE CLEARED THE GAME IN TWO DAYS!! And it made me think. What makes a game a "kids" game, and what makes it "adult"? I am not talking about the drugs, violence or language. You don't NEED bad language to make BFBC2 a good game. And the violence...? Well, pretty much 70% of all the programs on Cartoon network features some sort of violence. Turn off the blood, or gore or whatever it's called, and let the kid play. I am not suggesting that six year olds should be playing Silent Hill, Resident Evil, or Alone in the Dark. Nor Manhunt, which is only about butchering people anyway. Games like Battlefield, which takes reaction, Tomb Raider with it's puzzle solving and CoOp players which requires you to have a friend helping you complete quests or defeat the enemies I feel only helps develop the minds of kids. Naturally kids should also play outside, and strengthen their minds and bodies that way too, but if they are gonna be stuck in front of the TV anyway, I would rather have them use their minds and think, then sitting there, mindlessly watching some tv show, that serves no other purpose than to pass the time.