Slashdot Mirror
Jack Thompson Continues To Talk
Lucerin Red writes "It seems the next game on Jack Thompson's censorship list is Killer 7. The article posted by IGN quotes Jack as saying "There is no question in my mind that a videogame containing 'full-blown sex sequences' cannot be rated anything other than 'AO' rather than 'M.'" The 'full-blown sex sequences' are no more then you could see in a rated R movie." Meanwhile, MowAlon writes "Those of you keeping up with all the latest in the Rockstar Games/Take-Two Interactive/ESRB/EA Games sex scandal may be interested in a radio interview just made available: ChatterBox Video Game Radio just posted an 80-minute audio interview with Jack Thompson, the Miami lawyer out to shut down Rockstar Games. The interview provides a much deeper insight into his views, opinions, and efforts than anything else I've read about him elsewhere on the internet. One highlight includes Jack saying "Will Wright said he wants Electronic Arts to collaborate with the porn industry to allow wholesale modification of their game"."
I sometimes wonder if the games industry should just use the same ratings system as the movies, possibly migrating some of the ESRB subcategories useful for describing game content.
Not only are many people apparently under-educated about the meaning of the ESRB ratings - I mean, just look at all the stories about kids playing GTA and parents who let them - but having a separate ratings system makes it impossible to have apples-to-apples comparisons between these two types of media which makes it easy for people to misrepresent the situation. The fact is, these games aren't for kids that's for sure but they aren't any worse than R-rated movies. That they are called "MA" is perhaps the source of the confusion - they may simply not know what that really means. Using the same ratings system seems like it would at least simplify the arguments people seem to want to have about all this.
-Eric Cosky
That would be better but the MPAA has copyrighted (tradmarked?) the movie rating system and has prosecuted people that come too close to copying it.
The US AO rating does seem to be completly stupid, no game is ever actually rated it.
In the UK we have a slightly stange situation where most games have advisory ratings from PEGI (who took over a couple of years ago from ELSPA), but under certain critera they can have the legally enforced BBFC ratings, like DVDs and films.
But in the UK, the highest ratings (18+ for PEGI, 18 for BBFC) have been used (although the 18+ PEGI rating is rare, as most of them go into the BBFC ratings). Indeed, both Grand Theft Auto (all of them) and Killer 7 are BBFC 18, and they're commonly availible, I can go into my local ASDA (owned by Wal Mart) and buy them. But in the US, it seems that everyone is allergic to the AO rating, even the ESRB. I'd guess it's some sort of weird market forces, where the shops have all decided that AO really means it's banned. And mysteriously the industry run ESRB avoids it like a plauge as well. If I wasn't pissed, I'm sure I could make a better essay on the US puritan streak etc. (it's half like the Daily Mail ran a country!), but instead I'll end up with a horrid steam of conciousness thing. I mean, it's only some dry humping FFS. How does that change the bloody rating...
I'd also like to note the BBFC said during all this ho-hah over GTA:SA, that even if the "Hot Coffee" had been in the game, it would still be rated the same.
(I should note that for BBFC, there is the Restricted 18 rating as well (can only be sold in licenced sex shops, used for hardcore porn), but no game has ever qualified for it AFAIK).
10 PRINT "LOOK AROUND YOU ";
20 GOTO 10
Seriously. The only reason the ratings have any power is because various stores refuse to carry AO games. If the rating system bows to this idiot, the gaming industry needs to respond by only producing AO games. If the top five studios went in together, they coudl do it. If the rating people refuse to 'overrate' games, include hidden content the same way Rockstar did...content you can't possibly get to, but is included in the data files anyway. Scan in hardcode porn and put it in the texture file or whatever.
And then watching retail stores that refuse to carry AO games either give in or get made irrelevant, thus making the entire rating system irrelevant.
Congrats, Jack. It's entirely possible you'll be the death of the entire video game rating system if you piss the industry off bad enough. They'll just make everything AO, and then where will you be?
Which incidentally will result in parents being trained to purchase completely harmless AO games, and thus not batting an eye when 13-year old Jonny wants Hardcore Rape Simulator 2: The Revenge, now with motion feedback.
But when has anyone who cares 'about the children' actually cared when their actions harm children?
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
I, the interviewer, agree with you completely. Although I'm extremely pleased with the content of the interview, and the fact that it does something for the community that hasn't been done yet (get out Jack's unslanted/unedited views), I was very unhappy with my interview style. My only defense is that he's a lawyer who's been doing this for a long time and who's put a lot more thought and research into this subject than I ever could. I was prepared, believe it or not, but just stood there and let him talk when I should have taken more control. Like you said, though, he probably would have hung up on me even earlier, and that was the absolute last thing I wanted to happen.
Typically, yes, this is true, but it would give these crusaders one less thing to complain about. I've heard people like them use children's summer jobs, etc as excuses for why they don't know what their children are playing, so closing off that excuse would probably be a good thing.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
I think that a lot of parents are appalled by the idea of their kids playing any kind of video games. They don't even bother to check the contents because, in part, they "know" they won't like it. I know a mom who couldn't discern between Animal Crossing and Resident Evil. To her, it was all just mindless, gory brain rot.
(When we assured her that Animal Crossing was completely nonviolent, she told us no one would play it because there wasn't any shooting.)
A strain of paranoid prevention can be worse than the disease, whate'er the intention.
"but lets not kid ourselves about the nature of the tittilation being peddled."
I think everyone here understands what these games are about, we read the reviews, we see the screenshots, we play the games... but what Jack Thompson is saying (and his agenda) is that these games are dangerous and are corrupting our youth and turning them into violent killers... the problem with this is it's just not true.
Video games have enough stigma attached to them already.. do we really need another ass-hat running around spouting lies and making the Video game studios water down or censor these games like they already do for movies, TV, and songs?
"wrote him a letter explaining that I was a gamer and liked what he was doing."
And he wrote you a positive reply? Amazing...
Try an experiment, write him as a gamer and tell him you don't like what he is doing.. see what kind of response you get...
"Thompson is anti-violent games in the hands of minors."
If there is no correlation between youths who commit acts of violence and Violent video games then why is this good?
If there is actually a correlaton between reduced violence in minors who play violent video games (which the vioence in youth statistics does show) then wouldn't Jack be doing a bad thing currently?