Thompson Game Made

fini · 5 Feb 2006 at 00:39

Jack Thompson, of hating GTA and thinking he could do better fame, has finally had his mic take game, outlined in his 'modest game proposal' made.

I'm thinking he wont be happy . The link explains everything if you don't know what I'm talking about.

fini

Nieldo · 5 Feb 2006 at 00:49

Ive not really been keeping up with this guy, hes against computer games because apparently they send kids crazy and make them shoot up schools/public places? Which... They dont acctually, GTA must have sold billions of copys, and how many of the people that baught it and played it when out and shot someone?

Anyway, Im not to bothered, hes only campaigning in America right?

Edit: he looks like that guy who presents that funny American comedy/news show.

Edit2: The daily show!

benjo plz. · 5 Feb 2006 at 00:56

Nieldo said:
hes against computer games because apparently they send kids crazy and make them shoot up schools/public places?

It really depends on the psychological approach taken. Theories like SLT say that it is indeed possible for that to happen, for instance the two who did the columbine massacre were Doom and Wolf 3D addicts, and there are theories that they became desensitised and in the end, couldn't tell the difference between real life and fantasy. Not my personal view, just whats been said.

Mason64 · 5 Feb 2006 at 01:00

i hate people who thing that games make kids messed up. its not on how people work there guts out to make a good game 2 weeks later it could get banned so silly. get a life get ** kids2 play games then go out and play outside for a few hours.

bah!!!!!!

Nieldo · 5 Feb 2006 at 01:00

Just because a few kids go crazy doesnt mean others should be made to stop playing computer games.

Its like on fireworks night, just because a few kids blew there hands off no one can buy bangers anymore. I loved those things, I would salotape laods of them together and light them all at the same time, great stuff.

benjo plz. · 5 Feb 2006 at 01:05

Mason64 said:
i hate people who thing that games make kids messed up. its not on how people work there guts out to make a good game 2 weeks later it could get banned so silly. get a life get ** kids2 play games then go out and play outside for a few hours.

bah!!!!!!

Thats the problem though, most psychological theories say that violent video games do make kids messed up.

me227 · 5 Feb 2006 at 01:11

True he does look like an older version of Jon Stewart.

I think if the games around now were available when I was younger I would have turned out differently and they would have to be limited more.

That is my opinion, but i'd certainly still be able to tell the different between real life and fantasy, and that killing people is bad.

MiGSY · 5 Feb 2006 at 01:15

Phnom_Penh said:
It really depends on the psychological approach taken. Theories like SLT say that it is indeed possible for that to happen, for instance the two who did the columbine massacre were Doom and Wolf 3D addicts, and there are theories that they became desensitised and in the end, couldn't tell the difference between real life and fantasy. Not my personal view, just whats been said.

I did a presentation titled 'Violence in video games' for a college project last year. A part of this presentation was about the Columbine massacre, so I've researched the subject quite extensively.

Neither Eric of Dylan were gaming 'addicts', they didn't play either Doom or Wolfenstein excessively.

From reading their journals and diary entries it's quite evident that these games had no part in their motives for committing the massacre.

This is an extract from Eric Harris's diary:
"It’s my fault! Not my parents, not my brothers, not my friends, not my favorite bands, not computer games, not the media, it’s mine."

benjo plz. · 5 Feb 2006 at 01:19

MiGSY said:
Neither Eric of Dylan were gaming 'addicts', they didn't play either Doom or Wolfenstein excessively.

From reading their journals and diary entries it's quite evident that these games had no part in their motives for committing the massacre.

This is an extract from Eric Harris's diary:
"It’s my fault! Not my parents, not my brothers, not my friends, not my favorite bands, not computer games, not the media, it’s mine."

Yes they did, they made a load of maps for doom.

Diary entries of people who go and shoot 35 people and then themselves are hardly reliable.

Freud said that a persons personality is determined by the unconcious, which then causes an imbalance between the superego and the id. How can a person know the cause of their abnormality if it lies in the unconcious?

MiGSY · 5 Feb 2006 at 01:55

Phnom_Penh said:
Yes they did, they made a load of maps for doom.

Diary entries of people who go and shoot 35 people and then themselves are hardly reliable.

Freud said that a persons personality is determined by the unconcious, which then causes an imbalance between the superego and the id. How can a person know the cause of their abnormality if it lies in the unconcious?

They didn't play Doom...etc any more than the average gamer, they certainly were not 'addicts'. It was merely a hobby for them, like games are for most of us on these forums.

Explain to me why their writings should be deemed 'unreliable'. They shot and killed people? They believed in a cause, and they fought for it. Like any soldier of any military force, they kill because they believe they are fighting for the right cause. Whether that cause is right or not is of course a different matter, but I see no reason why the fact that they killed should make their writings unreliable.

benjo plz. · 5 Feb 2006 at 02:50

MiGSY said:
They didn't play Doom...etc any more than the average gamer, they certainly were not 'addicts'. It was merely a hobby for them, like games are for most of us on these forums.

Explain to me why their writings should be deemed 'unreliable'. They shot and killed people? They believed in a cause, and they fought for it. Like any soldier of any military force, they kill because they believe they are fighting for the right cause. Whether that cause is right or not is of course a different matter, but I see no reason why the fact that they killed should make their writings unreliable.

? Various sources have claimed that they had an obsession with violent media.

If the unconcious effects the concious, yet the problem cannot be recognised by the concious unless it is brought from the unconcious to the concious, how could a person know why theyre as abnormal as these two were, cause or not.

No normal fighting force, or person for that matter would go and shoot a school of innocent teenagers.

Raikiri · 5 Feb 2006 at 03:35

Phnom_Penh said:
No normal fighting force, or person for that matter would go and shoot a school of innocent teenagers.

If only that were true. Well, I suppose the normal method would be bombs or missiles but the end result is the same.

Even if the games did have an effect on their subconcious, there are likely to be many other factors. And if the games were not there something else almost certainly would have taken it's place. Why not blame some murders on "paintball obsessed teens" etc.?

The media is always looking for a scapegoat, right now it just happens to be games.

Toekiller · 5 Feb 2006 at 06:40

Shootings before computer games - 0
Shootings after computer games - 40

turbo · 5 Feb 2006 at 11:25

Toekiller said:
Shootings before computer games - 0
Shootings after computer games - 40

What about shootings before movies and then after movies

I personally think the number would be significantly higher than any video game could cause....

benjo plz. · 5 Feb 2006 at 13:36

Raikiri said:
If only that were true. Well, I suppose the normal method would be bombs or missiles but the end result is the same.

I disagree, theres a difference between dropping a bomb on a place and going in and shooting every one. While the end result is the same, they would have different psychological effects on the people doing the killing.

Raikiri said:
Even if the games did have an effect on their subconcious, there are likely to be many other factors. And if the games were not there something else almost certainly would have taken it's place. Why not blame some murders on "paintball obsessed teens" etc.?

Yes, thats arguable, other factors do indeed play into it, but just because they do doesn't mean you can excuse games from being part of the problems. Paintballings different, the person still knows the difference between fantasy and real life as they're not actually killing anybody, and are in real life.

Raikiri said:
The media is always looking for a scapegoat, right now it just happens to be games.

Maybe, or are the games makers just looking for an excuse to make games that are unquestionably violent?

Raikiri · 5 Feb 2006 at 14:10

Phnom_Penh said:
I disagree, theres a difference between dropping a bomb on a place and going in and shooting every one. While the end result is the same, they would have different psychological effects on the people doing the killing.

Maybe so, but why should there be such a media scandal and outrage at games which may or may not have caused something when goverments/armies are killing innocent people on a much larger scale and nobody really cares (at least, thats how it is portrayed).
Bombing a school in the name of war/or for oil is no more justified than going into the school and shooting them.

Phnom_Penh said:
Yes, thats arguable, other factors do indeed play into it, but just because they do doesn't mean you can excuse games from being part of the problems. Paintballings different, the person still knows the difference between fantasy and real life as they're not actually killing anybody, and are in real life.

They may be part of the problem, but the major factor is the person playing them. I have played many 18 rated games since I was about 10 and suprise suprise I have not gone on a killing rampage. And paintball is a lot more realistic than a mouse and keyboard and much more likely to be a "killing simulator" as games are often referred to by the likes of Thompson.

Phnom_Penh said:
Maybe, or are the games makers just looking for an excuse to make games that are unquestionably violent?

I don't think they need an excuse, they make them because they sell. They simply don't want to be blamed for the actions of other people that are out of their control. If every company started making games about peace and kindness do you think wars would end?

Of course not, they don't have enough power to do that or to make somebody kill.

MiGSY · 5 Feb 2006 at 14:12

There is a theory on what caused the massacre to take place, called the perfect storm theory. It describes how a number of different factors came together to allow it to happen. Now we can take all of your points into consideration here, and others.

- Desensitisation through games, films and various other media.
- Avaliability of firearms/weaponary
- Their motives

Let's just keep it at those three points for the sake of this discussion.

Now, as I see it, the first two points are common in most people. It's natural to become desensitised when directly or indirectly involved in violence. You will never, ever stop people from being desensitised, because you simply cannot totally remove violence from our world.

Again, the avaliability for firearms and weaponary was more or less common to everyone in their particular state.

Their motives, were something that was not common to everyone. Their motives are the base of the cause. If you remove their motives, it would not have happened.

Yes, the other factors played a part, but there's millions of people around the world which share those same factors who are considered perfectly sane and law abiding. The difference is they don't have the motives.

Removal of any of the other factors arguably, might have stopped the massacre from taking place. But removing those factors, is removing our freedom. That's like accepting the problem, just removing the tools. That's not the right way to go about it in my opinion.

Weebull · 5 Feb 2006 at 15:03

On topic, but some already did this months ago.

Thompson refused to pay the $10,000 he had promised to pay to charity if such a game was made, claiming that the satire was completely tongue in cheek.

Zephyrus · 5 Feb 2006 at 15:18

Personally i believe that it is not the computer games that are to blame. Without the computer games there would be something else which these types of people would latch onto ie movies, books etc. If a person has a disposition to be violent or murderous it stands to reason that they will be drawn to computer games that are of this type. It does not however mean that the games are responsible for creating this mind set, the mind set is there already. All the games are is one possible outlet for it. As i said, if it weren't the games it would be something else. There are countless different violent and gruesome 'fantasy' materials in the world which this type of person could immerse themselves into. Humans out of all animals on the planet take the most pleasure out of pain and suffering. We are all at least interested in it in some way or another otherwise we wouldnt find so much entertainment in the movies, literature, games etc that we do.

Zeph.