It would seem that on the basis of the causation rationale that age restrictions on violent video game content is no more logically justified than other types of overly broad restrictions (Olson, 2004). In the 1950s, several instances occurred where young children watching the original Superman television series fell to their deaths after trying to emulate the star character's leaping takeoff from high-rise building windows. The series was not cancelled or changed to an adult time slot; instead, public service announcements were produced using George Reeves, in character and costume as Superman, expressly warn children not to try to emulate their hero. That approach solved the problem of inappropriate and dangerous behavioral emulation among children too young to distinguish entertainment from reality.

Much more recently, movie theaters began restricting entrance to movies with violent content or expressly sexual themes and imagery based on age; however, those restrictions are flexible enough to accommodate parental decisions. Specifically, restrictions of movies rated "R" admit adolescents with parental supervision. Similar restrictions are not necessarily inappropriate with respect to violent video games, although not necessarily because they are capable of influencing behavior or of increasing the chances that individuals exposed to them will perpetrate violence in real life.

The argument that graphic imagery in video and computer games should be restricted subject to parental approval for other reasons is much stronger than the argument for similar restrictions based on their supposed ability to increase the propensity of young consumers toward actual violence (Olson, 2004). Specifically, responsible parents typically exercise their personal authority over what types of recreational activities to allow their children, as well as over what magazines they may...

Irresponsible parents may exercise no such control, misuse television as a babysitter, and allow their children to play in the street at their peril.
Conclusion

In all likelihood, exposure to violent, criminal, or sexual imagery should be restricted from minors (subject to parental approval) for many of the same reasons that exposure to similar images in film and on television are either restricted outright or capable of being restricted electronically by parents. On the other hand, there does not appear to be a logically valid justification for restricting video and computer games based on violent content out of the specific concern that regular exposure to graphically violent imagery in video-game format increases violent behavior among children and adolescents. If anything, the available literature strongly suggests that exposure to violent video games does not actually contribute to real violence; rather, the anecdotal connection are merely coincidental. Ultimately, violent video-games should probably be restricted from unsupervised (or unauthorized) use by adolescents, but only for the same reasons as other forms of media that may be inappropriate for their consumption without parental approval. They should probably not be restricted based on the concern that they directly contribute to real violence.