Jack Thompson on Attack of the Show

gamer2 · Post by **gamer2** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:51 pm

a while back Jack Thompson was on Attack on the Show which is G4s version (but not as good as) The Screensavers. Adam Sessler who is one of the last remaining TechTV hosts who is on Xplay, debated against ol Jack, and in my opinion Adam Pwned Jack.

From the Podcast
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvyy9ooD18g

and addless version of the segemnt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmJ7IXeqG7k

Adam isnt as dumb as he acts on Xplay, weird.

*$cuba $teve* · Post by ***$cuba $teve*** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 1:40 pm

I am so SICK and TIRED of Jack Thompson slanderizing us and when only the stupid gamers can't see the diffrence betwine moving computer generated bullets into computer generated non-concise models, in order to end their aimation and destroy the conciness of a actaual being.

cennar · Post by **cennar** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:38 pm

im sick of hearing about this guy. lets ignore him not even the people banning games pay any attention to him... also props to x-play that was briliant.

usbcd36 · Post by **usbcd36** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 7:23 pm

I am not a fan of violent video games (ie, I don't really play anything with a rating greater than T), but I personally think that rules and regulations should be laid down by the parents. If done at the right age, kids probably won't even seek such games out.

Post by **bicostp** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 7:53 pm

Same here. I don't have any interest in games in the genre "Duke Macho Shoots Zombies at Midnight: The Final Confrontation III". Give me a racing game, a puzzle or a good sidescroller instead.

As far as Jack goes, he just thinks kids are completely brainless and impressionable, I guess. I mean, you can see some concern, like little kids playing violent games, but discerning who can play the games is not the developers' responsibility. That lies with the parents and the stores. One example: I have seen a parent buying Doom 3 for their 6 year old. On the other hand, a different parent didnt let their kid get Luigi's Mansion because of the ghosts (there goes Casper...

).

Here's what I think the laws should be, if they aren't already:

Anyone can buy/rent EC and E rated games
Kids need to be with their parents to buy/rent E10 and T games.
You need to present ID to buy/rent M rated games
You need ID and have to be 18 to buy/rent AO games
M and AO rated games should have a brief quiz in the beginning like the Leisure Suit Larry games to determine age.

Banning video games in general is plain ridiculous. If that were the case, then we should also ban:

Blue's Clues, for teaching kids to talk to funiture and jump into books
The board game Clue for involving homocide and meddling
Monopoly for promoting immoral buisness practices
Photoshop for having a floating disembodied eye for an icon
Looney Tunes and Tom & Jerry for promoting violence

Get my point? (sorta?)

usbcd36 · Post by **usbcd36** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:20 pm

bicostp wrote:One example: I have seen a parent buying Doom 3 for their 6 year old. On the other hand, a different parent didnt let their kid get Luigi's Mansion because of the ghosts (there goes Casper... ).

Here's what I think the laws should be, if they aren't already:

Anyone can buy/rent EC and E rated games
Kids need to be with their parents to buy/rent E10 and T games.
You need to present ID to buy/rent M rated games
You need ID and have to be 18 to buy/rent AO games
M and AO rated games should have a brief quiz in the beginning like the Leisure Suit Larry games to determine age.

First of all, that's something seriously wrong with the gaming industry. They send games off to the ESRB to be rated, and then people don't even follow the ratings!

As for purchase limitations, they're a good idea (of course, E10+ and T games should also be able to be purchased with ID if you're old enough) that would be beat down by the (overzealous) first amendment.

See, when they wrote the Bill of Rights, I don't think they were considering children, and obviously not the 'net.

In my opinion, it is outdated.

As for a quiz in the beginning, I believe that to be a good idea as well. Should one bypass all other means of protection (ID in store and parental supervision), it will determine whether one should be able to play.

vskid · Post by **vskid** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:44 pm

bicostp wrote:Banning video games in general is plain ridiculous. If that were the case, then we should also ban:

Blue's Clues, for teaching kids to talk to funiture and jump into book

They should ban Blue's Clues, that guy is queer as a 23.5 dollar bill (now who would've thought of that?).
I think it should depend on how old you are (any age=E, 10=E10, 13=T), but it doesn't matter to me because my parents drive me to the store anyways.
My parents regulate games pretty good on their own. M games are pretty much off-limits (no Halo, thats what friends are for, though), T are usually fine unless they look way bad, E10 and down they don't even worry about.

gamer2 · Post by **gamer2** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:26 am

I dont think its right that some parents let thier under 10 years of age kids play hyper violent and meaningless games like GTA. I have Nieces and Nephews, and they play video games but thier parents are careless. they are all under 10 and my sisters husband lets them play GTA: SA, Half-Life 2, Red Orchistra, and Counter Strike. My sister lets the play the Sims and The Movies.

When they over here I let them play kids games like Super Mario Bros, legend of Zelda, Sonic the Hedgehog, because those games are for every one and not ment for adults. With Any luck they will be like me and get bored of GTA.

Electric Rain · Post by **Electric Rain** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:04 am

Here's what I posted on YouTube about this video.

On YouTube, I wrote: I don't understand what's so hard here... M rated games should be treated EXACLTY like R rated movies. And if a minor gets ahold of a violent, M rated game and is accused of committing a crime because they were "influenced" by the game (which is BS anyway), their friggin' PARENTS should be held fully responsible. Period.

Also, what about R rated movies? I understand they may not be as involving or influential because your just watching it rather than controlling it, but don't you think kids might get some ideas from violent movies as well? Does anyone ever think about this?

Here's another interesting observation. How often do you see something on the news about how video games help kids? About how someone lost 300lbs from playing DDR? Or about how a certain games improve hand-eye coordination and concentration for the mentally-ill? Sometimes, yes, but the media doesn't report on this NEARLY as often as they blame a videogame for some kid that went to school and shot 7 on his classmates.

The media is just as bad as Jack Thompson, but unlike the producers and assignment editors that choose which stories are worthy of coverage and air-time, Jack just happens to have a face. This makes him much easier to hate.

Oh, and look at this.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_2Jc314 ... ed&search=
Well said, no?

totokan · Post by **totokan** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 7:40 am

Hey, this problem jkeeps coming up, huh? it's the parents job to limit what a child watches or does with the tv. just like there are parental controls on the TV, there should be better ones on consoles too. Not that that is really required, better parenting is required. My neighbors have an 8(or is it 9..?) year old son, and when I saw what types of games they had given him, I asked them, do you thing it's okay for him to be playing games of this violent nature? They said, yeah, we think its fine. It's this kind of attitude that should be changed.

gamer2 · Post by **gamer2** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 10:32 am

totokan wrote:Hey, this problem jkeeps coming up, huh? it's the parents job to limit what a child watches or does with the tv. just like there are parental controls on the TV, there should be better ones on consoles too. Not that that is really required, better parenting is required. My neighbors have an 8(or is it 9..?) year old son, and when I saw what types of games they had given him, I asked them, do you thing it's okay for him to be playing games of this violent nature? They said, yeah, we think its fine. It's this kind of attitude that should be changed.

you should haveyour neighbor play the games that they gave him.

Extreme_Jesus · Post by **Extreme_Jesus** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:24 pm

Violent videogames had no affect on me what so ever when i was little

Doom at the age of 5, Quake a bit later etc etc

Mind you though what was considered a violent game 10 years ago isnt quite the same as today

People keep saying the blame lies with the parents which is probably true, but i also feel the blame lies also with the child themselves. If they were swayed to violence by a video game then part of it is their responsibility, nobody forced them do it.

And besides the number of kids the go on rampages compared to the number of kids that play videogames isnt even worth comparing

Post by **Sparkfist** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:25 pm

I think the problem with Jack is that he's out there for the neglectful parents. The parents that don't want to know what their kids are doing, don't want to use the V-Chip to limit what their kids view on TV. And really the only thing he is doing is punishing the majority for the incompitance of others and the ignoramce of people who should have taken parenting classes.

As far as I'm conserned cencoreship starts with the parents. The parrents when through the act and had a kid, and I don't care if the child was expected or not, they need to monitor what the child is taking in. Censoreship from there can be the channel or time for TV, the ratings of movies, and ratings of video games.

If a parent purcheses a video game for a child and they are not of the age the parents should feel at the very least some punishment for the act their child commited. I know that what is being proposed is a double edged sword, but parents today are not being held resoponsible for thier neglect.

Jimmy · Post by **Jimmy** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:41 pm

usbcd36 wrote: First of all, that's something seriously wrong with the gaming industry. They send games off to the ESRB to be rated, and then people don't even follow the ratings!

That has nothing to do with the gaming industry. That has to do with parents being retarded, buying violent games for their children, then accusing game developers of corrupting their minds.

NES_fanatic · Post by **NES_fanatic** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 7:18 pm

I'm sure Jack Thompson played Duck Hunt when he was younger.

This is the biggest problem the world faces, and it goes beyond games: The world is gradually becoming a worse and worse place for us because everything is being catered to stupid people. They have to take away the fun from something just because one moron did X with it. There's even been those dumb movements to try to do things like ban dogs with a bad rap like pitbulls and such.
If you got bit by my dog it would not be my fault for tieing it to a bench as I went into the bagel shop; it owuld be your fault for approaching a dog you've never seen before and wanting to pet it. How would you like a stranger coming up to you to touch you? Ooooh, I hate people so much!