I'm not sure why so many people limit video games as being violent and brainless. So many games out there are not violent and are perfect for young children. Even if children under 10 play more violence-oriented games, could you blame them? Violence has been a staple in human entertainment since roman times and has existed in sports and media alike, completely uncensored (boxing, wrestling, even cock fighting in certain countries, m-rated films). There is even a 9 year study showing that video games have no effect on the mental state of growing children.
There seems to be this logical fallacy that children should be blamed for playing violent games. People forget to realize that the responsibility should lie on the parents for getting them the game in the first place! For example, you can't go out and give your 8 year old son a copy of Mortal Kombat 9 or GTA 5, then try to curse out the publishers, and blame them when your kid wants to start fighting. Give your kids a game suited to their age level. Hence, the creation of the "age rating" system. Kids shouldn't have to be restricted from playing games at a young age due to the ignorance of the grown ups. As long as you monitor your children's playing activity, and let them play in moderation, then you should have no problems.
Most kids around 10 should be outside playing haveing fun with other kids not locked indoors on a game. I myself regret not getting out much as a kid but because i was in playing games all day i have no social skills so when i go out i try to avoid people, and now i just sit alone at a table and look around at people when i go out to eat i dont even like to order my own food. So if your a parent and you let your kids play video games please condsider making them go outside more i dont want them to end up like me do you.