You have to have family and friends before you can hear this kind of idiocy. But I have heard this argument before. And @Shagger is exactly right. That's why we have ratings on games now. You wouldn't give a 5 year old a copy of Conker's Bad Fur Day just because it has a cute squirrel on the cover, so it has to be for kids. Well when the kid is bouncing off a sunflowers tits, maybe you will think twice before calling a game system a child's toy. Even Atari was doing it with Custer's Revenge in 1982. Look at the fucking ratings people. There are games directed at the 5 year old demographic, and games directed at the adult demographic. Not all of them are pornographic. Some are gory, some are cutesy. Some are nightmare inducing, some are calming and soothing. You have to look into what the plot and story is. If I had kids, I wouldn't let my ten year old play Call Of Duty, but I would have no problem with them playing Castlevania. Just because they need to understand the difference between fiction and nonfiction. CoD is too realistic for what I would want my child exposed to at that age. Castlevania, is obviously a fictitious story. So as long as my child was able to enjoy the game, and it had no mental/emotional effects on him/her/neither/both then I would be fine with that.
What parents need to understand is that there are ratings for a reason, and you have to make a responsible decision. When you do that, then it can be called a toy for the younger demographic, but it's not for the older.