Headline :: It's not just Jack Thompson who's upset with GTA IV

[Steven W]

The big cheeses of New York City are getting involved in the GTA IV debate after the recent trailer showed off some of the city's landmarks.

Check out the Headline

[GeorgeTuk]

Man they know how to sell games don't they? Basing on a real city was just the ticket to create some headlines!

Also works both ways because the politicians get some votes from the good moral crusaders but they will have to watch out because the number of people who are not worried about violent games is rising as more people get into gaming.

[jackthompson1]

I continually feel like Jeff Goldblum's charactr in Jurassic Park, when the T-rex comes through the de-electrified fence: "Damn, I hate being right all the time."

Once again, I am right about GTA IV and the furor that would ensue with its scheduled release and sale to minors. Take-Two is suing me to stop me from stopping its sale to minors. Good luck with that stunt now. I have the Mayor and police in New York now on my side.

Hooah! Jack Thompson

[Nick]

It's interesting that you should use such a film to draw illustrate what you perceive as a parallel...

It's a delicious irony that your example is a film that features realistic re-creations of dinosaurs eating people along with disembowelment, dismemberment, maiming and blinding... oh, and also features two minors constantly placed in harm's way.

So clearly, your example of how 'right' you are is actually worse than the game you seek to attack... at least the graphics in GTA IV aren't remotely realistic.

Oh and for the record, I would argue that 'once again' is hardly accurate... in your own mind maybe you're right again but for all of us in the real world, we all well know how many court cases you've lost and how many people have disassociated themselves from you and your blinkered ultra-conservatism.

That is of course if this is the real Jack Thompson and not just some berk trolling with a comcast email address.

[jackthompson1]

If you don't understand the difference between Jurassic Park, in which there are "good guys" who are the heroes and GTA, in which the socipathic hero is blowing away all the innocent people in sight, then you don't know "Jack."

My goodness, where do you people come from, other than gaming's parnoia universe? Jack Thomposn

[TiG]

Dinosaurs have feelings too

TiG

[GeorgeTuk]

My goodness.

You were doing well up until then. Thats just not the language of Jack Thompson.

Anyway who the hell has time to waste doing what you doing. You must have a very very dull life.

[Nick]

So let's get this straight:

The good guys in Jurassic Park are who, exactly?

The scientists who mucked about with fossilized DNA, bringing extinct and, as portrayed by the film, ferocious animals back to life and were then surprised that those same creatures went on a rampage killing everything?

Or would it be the John Hammond character, who decided to stick his grand children out in the park, leaving them at the mercy of a bunch of velociraptors and a hungry tyrannosaur?

Or maybe it's the so called 'blood sucking lawyer', (why is that so apt in this context) who thought they would make a pot of money, even though people had been killed even before the park opened, as seen in the film's opening sequence?

My point being that you've completely missed the point of the movie, so I suggest you go watch it again and this time look past your infatuation with Jeff Goldblum and see the rather obvious message that mankind couldn't and shouldn't try to meddle with nature and that horrific as ravenous dinosaurs are, the characters only have themselves to blame.

As to GTA IV having the player "blowing away all the innocent people in sight", have you actually played the game?

Have you actually played any of the GTA games or for that matter, any of the games you like to attack?

If you had, then you'll know that killing innocents is not actually part of the game or even a focus of the game.

Just because you can do, it doesn't mean you actually have to or even should.

So I guess you could say, in that respect, that GTA is realistic as you get a choice, just like in real life.

So I could go off and run people down in my car, but that doesn't mean I will.

Or will you look at banning driving for anyone that plays GTA?

And finally apart from genuinely laughing out loud over your remarks about paranoia, do you not yet understand that all these utterly outrageous claims you frequently make only serve to undermine your credibility?

Get some perspective, back up, take a deep breath and stop spouting scare-mongering nonsense if you want to be taken seriously.

I only ask because I do feel that the sale of 18 rated games to minors is an issue that should be addressed and is largely down to lack of knowledge by parents. Now if you could direct some of your undoubted fervour towards working with the ESRB and ELSPA to better educate people, you'd actually start to do some good rather than just turn yourself into a laughing stock every time you opened your mouth.

To my mind, the only reason people listen to you is because they themselves have no experience of what you're talking about. You use that ignorance to your advantage and rather than educate, you fill them full of dread over what is essentially a non-issue.

One consolation I do have in all of this is that today's gamers will become tomorrow's politicians and you, my friend, will find yourself with a dwindling circle of influence and unable to hype-talk to those in power as they'll know the subject matter far better.

By the way, how are things going with National Institute on Media and the Family? And did you ever cough up that $10,000 when the game you asked for was actually made?

Of course, I'm still doubting this is actually Jack Thompson, but hey, let's ask the questions anyway, you never know, the real one might pop up and surprise us!

[Lee H]

Well said Nick

I cannot understand all this "uproar" about something people play for a bit of stress release. Yes I can understand that some people might be influenced by the actions on screen but these individuals might also be influenced by horror movies or even lyrics of music.

There is a simple solution to this. Enforce the age ratings like they do with movies and people like Jack should hopefully be out of a job and the limelight

[chuckskull]

Take Two are suing Jack Thompson right now Nice turn around.

Also if they set Halo in disneyland I will go out and buy an xbox 360 today.

[Raz316]

does the PC version of Halo allow mods?

[directhex]

Shock Tampon J is fairly well known for trolling on assorted forums and message boards. Joystiq's comments area is generally the first port of call though.

As for the insane lawyer himself? Honestly, getting rather bored of his antics.

I just wish he'd stop lying under oath. The fact that he gets away with it yet HASN'T been disbarred doesn't show the legal profession in a good light.

[directhex]

Now, of course, you might have noticed another typical Jack Thompson tactic - never hang around for a debate or discussion.

The reason, as far as I can tell, is that he absolutely does not want to risk learning anything. Appearing, making inflammatory comments, then leaving - that's just behavior for teenage Internet trolls and JT.

Funny thing is, hundreds of people have attempted to point out to Jack the times when he's wrong or misinformed. Some aren't particularly mature responses, sure, but plenty are reasonable, calm, and considered comments.

Now, someone who lacks knowledge of a topic is generally considered ignorant. They don't understand something, so often say things that are wrong. Ignorance, however, can be cured through education. So what do we call someone who is ignorant and cannot be cured of ignorance? Why, that would be... stupid. More precisely, someone who exhibits a learning deficiency and cannot be fixed despite extreme education would be classified as Trainable Mentally Retarded on the American Psychiatric Association scale - or on the older IQ scale officially an "Imbecile".

Of course, it's quite easy to confuse stupidity with senility. There's a great quote from JT moaning about whiskey-drinking kilt-wearing Scotsmen spreading racial stereotypes. Or if we scroll up a little, you can see a man who accused a number of webcomics, blogs, retired heads of industry groups, the RAND corporation and the reverse vampires of being part of an evil illegal organized crime ring - calling gamers paranoid. Quite.

In fact, JT's known to have memory problems (sending emails then accusing people who reply to them of contacting him out of the blue); often uses the wrong words for things; acts confused at basic concepts, suffers from massive mood swings, including bizarre aggression and lack of inhibition; inability to learn new things; confabulation. By my calculations, JT is a textbook case of senile dementia, and should seek assistance from a psychiatric nurse.

Generally though, JT's an odd fellow. The only lawyer in the US forced to carry a certificate to prove minimum standards of sanity (i.e. will not bite the nose off anyone who vexes him, at last time of testing anyway - fantastic minimum standards). He seems to have absolutely no desire to see anything done - constantly wasting time and effort of taxpayers and judges and the public on fools' errands. Every time he opens his mouth, what emerges is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing. Sims 2 made by pedophiles! Gay sex in Canis Canem Edit! NO. Wrong. Bad Jack. No cookie.

Here's the thing - nobody can even tell what Jack Thompson's message is anymore. What is he campaigning for, exactly? Other than seeing a random publisher shut down, that is. There's a real danger when the messenger gets bigger than the message. NIMF's attempts to disassociate themselves from JT are because they have a cause they want to work on - they're not interested in seeing that cause sidelined by the antics of a giant ill-informed ego.

So, now we come to an interesting question. Why does JT get so much time on the net? Why should we care what a senile imbecile from Florida has to say? Well, we shouldn't - but unfortunately, Jack uses an old tactic employed by electronics stores to sell things to the ignorant (making things up and sounding confident about it) - and his ignorant target is the US government. Bringing his "ban videogames" rhetoric to state attorneys and presidential hopefuls, and spinning a web of deceit over topics they don't understand - that affects an awful lot of us.

What's more funny is that JT could, if he wanted, have gamers agreeing with him. He really could. Should young kids be playing, or be able to buy, games like Grand Theft Auto? No. No they shouldn't. And according to recent industry research, it seems (in the US at least) they can't - until ill-informed parents get involved. Most US stores will refuse to sell M-rated games to kids, but when mommy comes over and demands that the cashier sell her a copy of Blood Gore Fest 7000 for little Timmy, then any attempts at regulation - either legal or industry self-regulation - fall down. Most people on this forum would support anything that would keep inappropriate content from inappropriate hands. Here in the UK, without that pesky constitution, selling Grand Theft Auto San Andreas for PlayStation 2 to a 17 year old could result in a £5000 fine and 6 month prison term. The same as for selling them a DVD of art house movie Cidade De Deus.

So what have we learned? That Jack Thompson is either senile or an imbecile (or both). And that he has no desire to do anything but spread fear, uncertainty and doubt amongst those of a shrinking generation.

[Steven W]

I can't help thinking about that line out of one of the Carry on Films. 'Infamy, infamy, they've all got it infamy'.

[kalniel]

Here in the UK, without that pesky constitution, selling Grand Theft Auto San Andreas for PlayStation 2 to a 17 year old could result in a £5000 fine and 6 month prison term.

That's all that needed to be said, really

[DecomposingStar]

Jack Thompson has bad spelling for a lawyer, eh?