Jack Thompson and his little crusade.

[Sovietlukmanov]

does it not teach players of reality? if you commit crime, you will be pursued by the authorities, then, you can try to resist and end up dead, and on a few occasions, you may even escape.

 

Just a little life skill, and I say nothing is wrong with that...

Except in reality, unless you're a celebrity, you don't escape. You commit a crime, they will lock you away. Simple as that. Your reality argument really isn't strong since in game there really isn't any down side to death or being arrested, you just respawn back in town, able to do whatever you want again. Loss of weapons/money isn't anything when you can get them back. No, to make it more like reality, you would have to set it so that the player has to spend several years+ in jail or haldcuffed to a hospital bed.

 

Sorry, my mistake, I didn't explain well enough. Well, yes, there are some (very important) differences from committing it in game and committing a crime in real life. Well, mostly criminals do get thrown to jail, or handcuffed to a hospital bed, but it is always arguable that there are also few that is able to get away with it. The ones who get away with crimes, well, as you said, are mostly, celebrity, however, there are few non-celebrity criminals who can actually escape. Anyways, before going elsewhere with this statement, let's go back to the topic.

 

don't get it. If 200 000 people says that the game doesn't reward the player for killing cops, why does he keep saying that?

 

He does not play the game, and yet he insist as if he knew everything.

 

He wants everyone to listen him, but he won't listen back. How can you be a politician with that attitude?

 

he can, if gamers, game producers, and others who are related to gaming becomes the minority. Thing is, we know for sure that the chances of it are very thin.

[ninja_lord666]

he can, if gamers, game producers, and others who are related to gaming becomes the minority. Thing is, we know for sure that the chances of it are very thin.

Gamers are, and always will be, the majority. Even my grandparents play video games! Of course, they aren't hardcore gamers, but they do enjoy a game from time to time, mostly simple ones, though, like cards, or battleship.

[Vagrant0]

don't get it. If 200 000 people says that the game doesn't reward the player for killing cops, why does he keep saying that?

 

He does not play the game, and yet he insist as if he knew everything.

Actually, he does say that he has played those games, I don't recall what amount of time he figured, but he did play enough. Sadly, you do get rewarded for killing cops, destroying cars, slaughering countless people in the form of a higher score. In this regard he is actually correct. People get the enjoyment of causing pure mayhem and the game makes notes of their accomplishments in those regards. Yes there is more to the game, but can you really stop yourself from going on a brief rampage, or just jacking one person for long... If you enjoy doing it, and want to continue doing it. There is already enough there to be concerned.

 

The bottom line is simple, retailers need to stop selling mature games to kids, parents need to stop buying those games for their kids. Parents need to learn how to RAISE their kids. And people need to just learn how to stop being so damn stupid. Since those things will obviously never happen at this rate, it's easier to just blame the media. The nation goes down the toilet and we're all too busy yelling at game makers.

[Sovietlukmanov]

Actually, he does say that he has played those games, I don't recall what amount of time he figured, but he did play enough. Sadly, you do get rewarded for killing cops, destroying cars, slaughering countless people in the form of a higher score. In this regard he is actually correct. People get the enjoyment of causing pure mayhem and the game makes notes of their accomplishments in those regards. Yes there is more to the game, but can you really stop yourself from going on a brief rampage, or just jacking one person for long... If you enjoy doing it, and want to continue doing it. There is already enough there to be concerned.

 

The bottom line is simple, retailers need to stop selling mature games to kids, parents need to stop buying those games for their kids. Parents need to learn how to RAISE their kids. And people need to just learn how to stop being so damn stupid. Since those things will obviously never happen at this rate, it's easier to just blame the media. The nation goes down the toilet and we're all too busy yelling at game makers.

 

And how long does he "play" the game?

 

A few hours can't be called playing, it's "playing around" with it, tell me of a SERIOUS GAME (not like tetris, space invaders, Solitaire) which you can master in a few hours, sure, you'll get hold of basic controls, basic rules and stuff, but never the depth things of the game itself. Unless he's really born a gamer, I doubt he could know GTA by playing a few hours in a few days, but if he is born a gamer, then he will not point accusations on games.

 

While playing GTA, he would've found a bunch of negative things in the game, because that's what he's looking for. For those who enjoy role-playing games, would play GTA, and see it through it's storyline, how Tommy Vercetti was sent there by Sonny Forelli, how he climbed through to power over vice city, how he struggled to defend it. If you're looking for the violence however, you'll see nothing than the player being allowed to slaughter an entire city without due consequence, he sees what he wants to see.

 

And of course, we're not supposed to question how parents raise their children, they are after all, parents.

 

You also said that people had to stop being stupid, now question is, how do you define: stupid?

[TheTerminator2004]

I just found a very interesting interview with Gerard Jones, the guy who wrote 'Killing Monsters: Why Children Need Fantasy, Super Heroes, And Make-Believe Violence'... one of the key bits, at least for the purposes of this debate, is this:

 

I think the first thing game advocates have to do is get over Jack Thompson. He's not a major figure in the game regulation field. All the moderate critics of games have distanced themselves from him completely, if they even think about him anymore. It's only hardcore game culture insiders who really even know who he is. So to react to a Leland Yee or Craig Anderson as if he were "a Jack Thompson type" - and justify one's overreaction accordingly - is painfully self-destructive. Jack loves being "the man the videogame industry loves to hate," and he works the game community consciously in order to maintain that role. Too many game geeks, with their love of conflict and the righteously indignant victim role, play right into that.

 

I strongly recommend you read the rest of it, you can find the entire thing here.