terr0rflare
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 55
- Reaction score
- 0
Nearly 3 weeks ago, I sent an email to the Australian Independant Nick Xenophon, who is calling for a ban on Tamagotchi, this email:
As an update, Tamagotchi are not off the shelves, as I bought Toys R Us' limited edition colours this week
*phew!*
Just now, I received this reply from him:Dear Mr Xenophon,
This week, I joined many Tamagotchi players in the activity of rolling their eyes at their television screens during Channel 7's report of the MLP calling for the OFLC to reclassify the latest version of Tamagotchi to the threat of "gambling addictions" it posed. If you are so concerned about the "gambling problems" these small pixel-based toys pose, where were you when Nintendo's Pokemon games, which also feature gambling references, were released? According to your biography, you formed your "No Pokies" campaign in 1997, correct? Pokemon games have been in Australia since 1995, and games such as Pokemon Gold and Pokemon Silver, which have gambling games, were released in 1997. And even then, Pokemon Ruby and Pokemon Sapphire were released in 2001, still involving gambling references (for which they received the G8+ rating). And they have many more features of gambling compared to Tamagotchi, most notably with their improved graphics thanks to the Game Boy Advance screens (compard to the Tamagotchi's pixel LCD screen). And Pokemon Emerald was only released only 2 months ago, also with gambling games. I am stressing my point extremely here: Where were you when these games came out? Of course, I have no problems with the Pokemon games themselves. I have been a player of Pokemon since 1995, and I played the gambling games, but I'm not down at the Pokies pouring away my life's savings. The only concern I have is why you are only targeting Tamagotchi, and not approaching Nintendo about their Pokemon games. Honestly, even the Pokemon Pikachu toys, very similar to the Tamagotchi toys, had gambling features. In fact, the gambling game was the ONLY game on the Pokemon Pikachu. And it went out of fashion about 4 years ago. If you were honestly concerned about kids being trained to gamble, you should have researched a little more. Why you are only targeting Bandai is quite a legitimate question, so I will ask you - why Bandai alone?
According to The Australian (https://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16139305%255E1702,00.html), you want an "R" rating imposed on the toy line. Surely, as an MLP joining the band wagon of the nation's anxious parents, you should know that the OFLC's classifications for video games, including toys, only range from G to MA 15+ (https://www.oflc.gov.au/special.html?n=175&p=134). In their recent revision of the classification system, the OFLC have still not included the R rating for video games. Strange, considering every politician seems so concerned with protecting their nation's children. An R rating for video games would certainly protect children from purchasing games such as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (which was recently reclassified, and taken off retailers' shelves as of last week), and inform parents to make the right decisions when purchasing games for their children. And in the end, to think, you want to place Tamagotchi, a pixel-base, pet-raising game that teaches children about responsibilities, on the same moral, and legal, level as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, a game that involves gangster themes, violence, drug use and, more recently exposed, sex scenes (fully clothed, mind you).
So Mr Xenophon, if you truly want to fight the Pokies, take a step back, have a deep breath, and review a humble Australian citizen's advise: leave the innocent kids alone to enjoy what fun and games they can before the nation's anxious parents decide that all toys and video games are evil and focus on the adults who are already addicted to gambling and supporting the families who are already affected by it.
Catherine Ring
Frustrated Tamagotchi Owner, Video Game Player, and University Student.
And my reply to this?Dear Ms Ring,
Please accept my apologies for not being able to respond to your email of 6 August 2005 any earlier. I am sorry that I could not respond to you any earlier because of the literally hundreds of phone calls, letters and emails I get each week and the relatively limited resources I have to deal with them.
You are not alone in your criticism of my approach on the Tamagotchi game, but I would like to sincerely thank you for putting such a considered view across unlike some of the messages I have had.
I had previously raised the issue of gambling features on Pokemon games, and the former Government dismissed those concerns.
I raised this issue publicly about being contacted by a parent that was concerned about the pokies feature on the Tamagotchi on their 6 year old son. I obtained advice from Dr Paul Delfabbro from the University of Adelaide Psychology Department and he provided his expert opinion that the feature on the game was undesirable and that it could lead to a higher incidence of problem gambling behaviour amongst children exposed to it.
Dr Delfabbro has referred me to extensive literature on youth and adolescent gambling patterns. His email address is '[email protected]'
He has also referred me to work by Professor Mark Griffiths at Nottingham Trent University. A summary of which is available at www.ntu.ac.uk.
I also bring to your attention the link between such kids games and poker machine manufacturers. The company that makes Tamagotchi is about to merge with a company that makes poker machines.
You are right that the focus of my activities should be (and is) to tackle the problems caused by gambling in the community (primarily pokies), but I feel that I wouldn't have been doing my job if I didn't raise the concerns of the parent that approached me, backed up by the independent opinion of a problem gambling expert.
I accept that you don't agree with my position, but I hope you can at least understand it.
Thank you again for such a considered letter, despite the fact you fundamentally disagree with my position.
With best wishes,
NICK XENOPHON
Independent No Pokies Campaign
Member of the Legislative Council
Parliament House
North Terrace
Adelaide SA 5001
ph: 8237 9112
fax: 8231 0525
e-mail: [email protected]
Discuss?Mr Xenophon,
Thank you very much for responding to my email. I understand that you are a very busy politician, but I am still a disgruntled one.
I can understand Australia's parents being appreciative of you raising this issue with the slot game on the Tamagotchi device. My concern is this: instead of Australian parents researching the games included on the Tamagotchi and letting them decide for themselves whether the device is suitable for their children, you are calling for the Government to ban them in the name of good parenting and looking after our children. In my view as an Australian citizen, this is not good parenting. Good parenting would be using the internet to its most potential in order to find out what games there are on the Tamagotchi, and deciding whether the slot machine game is suitable or not for their children. The typical way for the Tamagotchi to get to its target audience, the child, is through the parent. The parent should be deciding whether the Tamagotchi should be suitable for the child - not any other party. The fact that Bandai revived the series has been great for people such as myself whom enjoyed them as a child. My mother and father decided what was appropriate for me as a child, and they did so sensibly. If I wanted a toy, they would ask me why I wanted the toy, what I would use it for, and investigate the toy for themselves to see if it would provide negative influences. If they did not think it was suitable, they would not buy it for me, and explain to me why I should not have it. I would understand and take onboard their advice. This has helped me become a better person, and taught me the rights and wrongs in the world. That is good parenting. Most parents that have bought a Tamagotchi for their child have bought it because the other children at school have one. Mr Xenophon, would you mind asking the concerned parent of the 6-year-old victim of this notorious marketing if they went to the trouble of making sure the Tamagotchi was appropriate for them? I would be interested to know if s/he went to the trouble of deciding the Tamagotchi's suitability for their child.
Personally, I think the former Government were right to dismiss your concerns for the Pokemon games. The OFLC, despite their lack of R18+ classification for video games, are a competent agency. Their classifications of the Pokemon games did include the Mild Gambling References classification, which is responsible, and informs parents of the risks. Even then, I lost interest in the gambling mini games as they were not related to the storyline of the game and have learnt from such an experience to avoid poker machines, as they are very, very boring. If you still have concerns with the Pokemon gambling games, why not raise them with the Howard Government? Pokemon Emerald was only released in June 2005, and that involved gambling games.
The reports by Dr Delfabbro and Professor Griffiths do show a potential link between youth and gambling problems, but must Tamagotchi be removed from the market? If parents really want to prevent gambling problems, get rid of the poker machines! I know that is not as easy as it sounds, but it is a lot better than telling your child that Tamagotchi must not be sold in Australia because of the potential gambling problem, but parents are still allowed to play their dangerous poker machines. That's what I find most distressing and appalling.
As I stated before, Bandai and Namco are in the planning stages of merging. This would have absolutely no influence on this particular version of Tamagotchi, as the Japanese release of the Tamagotchi was seen in March 2005, long before Bandai and Namco announced their merging plans in May. Again, I ask, should the Dancing Stage/Dance Dance Revolution series be banned because of Konami's production of poker machines?
It was wrong of me to say you are not doing your job - I support your cause for the removal of gambling machines nation wide and your continued support for the families coping with their gambling problems - your actions are commendable on that front alone. I just would not be playing my part as a passionate fan of the Tamagotchi series to let my opinion remain silent. I really hope your actions do not lead for the Tamagotchi series to be banned from toy stores, as older children and adults who can understand the potential influences and make decisions for themselves would certainly be missing out on the popular toy. We are hoping that Bandai will release their Tamagotchi Mini series despite the concerns parents have raised, as it is simply another toy we are looking forward to playing. I would understand your position better had you taken the approach that parents should decide what is best for their children, not the Government, instead of trying to ban the Tamagotchi series in the name of good parenting.
Regards,
Catherine Ring
As an update, Tamagotchi are not off the shelves, as I bought Toys R Us' limited edition colours this week
*phew!*
Last edited by a moderator:
great thinking! But his reply... kind of sucked. anyways, I hate that guy. He's WAY over too protective of his kid, if he has one.. 
;; It was really frustrating, but, yeah... At least his opinions have been swayed. It was all for the love of Tamagotchi!!
:mimitchi: 
