Hot Coffee, Rockstar & the ESRB.

[Sogrinaugh]

and it's not even that scandalous to begin with.

And therein lies a bigger problem that's being glossed over by politicians and the like. The mini-game is less offensive than the rest of the game. Should the game have been AO from the start? Yes. Rockstar knows it pushes the boundaries with each game they produce.

What the fuck are  you people, marketing for Rockstar?  With each additional post i grow more curious about this game.  If i buy it and it sux, im car-bombing your stupid web server... with a chevy impala

[Shockeye]

What the fuck are  you people, marketing for Rockstar?  With each additional post i grow more curious about this game.  If i buy it and it sux, im car-bombing your stupid web server... with a chevy impala

That sounds like a terroristic threat and I'm afraid the FBI will be contacting you shortly.

[Samwise]

GTA:SA is pretty similar to the previous games in the series, if that gives you any idea.  If you haven't played any of the previous GTA games, SHAME.  I can't guarantee that you'll think that they're some of the best games ever made, but you're doing yourself grave a disservice by not having tried them out at all.

[Triforcer]

Triforcer, do you really think that toddlers are getting their hands on $50 games without any parental involvement?  As far as I can tell, most kids that are getting their hands on GTA are being aided and abetted by their clueless parents.  At some point, parents do have to take responsibility for what the hell they're doing. 

Giving your kid movies and games with "AGE 17+" on the cover or giving them $100 of allowance money and turning them loose in Best Buy without even reviewing their purchases is not responsible parenting.  If you sit your kid on top of a lit stove for a few minutes you're not allowed to sue the stove manufacturer when he gets burned.

Of course, in that situation you describe, the problem IS bad parenting.  To extend my earlier analogy, even if you equip the soldiers and they outnumber the enemy, they still might lose due to ignorance, stupidity, bad soldiering, etc.  What I was addressing in my post is the general sense of outrage that seems to permeate this thread as to ratings existing AT ALL, or the indignation at having to buy porn at an adult store instead of Walmart.  Society has to at least provide the basic tools for people to raise their kids "morally", however that is defined.  Having the theoretical ability to parent well won't matter, though, if porn is everywhere with no rules, which is apparently the society some want.  Society has to provide SOME air support, so to speak, for parents to practically exercise the abstract ability to parent well. 

[HaemishM]

Just out of curiosity, of the people here who hate the ESRB ratings and also think American society is fascist and puritanical for not letting everyone from toddlers on up have easy, free access to unlimited porn, how many of you actually have children?  As with so many other issues, its easy to extol the virtues of totally unrestrained hedonism as an angry collegian stoner but harder when you have your own kids. 

Please shut the fuck up, you neocon titwaggling douchebag. People hate the ESRB ratings (or MPAA) not because they "restrict hedonism" but because they do not achieve the aim they are meant to achieve, i.e. keeping inappropriate content out of children's hands. How many children get into or see R rated movies? Enough. How many kids under 17 get a copy of GTA:SA? Enough. The ratings are meant to help parents understand what is right for their kids, and yet they don't do that because: 1) many parents aren't fit for the title, 2) the ESRB does not do nearly enough PR explaining what their ratings are and why they are important, and 3) their ratings suck ass and are mostly based on silly, backwards hypocrisy.

Seriously, that was a really troll-like thing to say. Stop being a crotchpheasant.

EDIT: And after having read your following posts, wow, you really are a fuckhead. No one here is saying that pr0n should be everywhere on all street corners and that every retailer should have to carry it. Holy fuck, where you got that from, I have no idea.

But see, Wal-Mart is being made to carry something that if they really cared about the content, they'd never carry. GTA? Shit, forget that. Wal-Mart should never carry that game because of their own stance about CENSORING MUSIC CD's. They force musicians to re-record edited versions of their entire CD's just to remove curse words. Yet they have no problem selling unaltered M-rated games like GTA: SA, which has more actual violence and cursing than an Easy-E album. The ratings are supposed to let the retailers know what they are selling, and the parents what they are buying. But apparently, they don't do that, which is in part a failure on the ratings system, and in part a failure of the retailer. Notice that the only real action by any of these parties taken against the GTA games only came about because of media and political pressure. 

And of course, they really don't do that when douchebags like Rockstar hide the content their games contain.

[Triforcer]

Just out of curiosity, of the people here who hate the ESRB ratings and also think American society is fascist and puritanical for not letting everyone from toddlers on up have easy, free access to unlimited porn, how many of you actually have children?  As with so many other issues, its easy to extol the virtues of totally unrestrained hedonism as an angry collegian stoner but harder when you have your own kids. 

Please shut the fuck up, you neocon titwaggling douchebag. People hate the ESRB ratings (or MPAA) not because they "restrict hedonism" but because they do not achieve the aim they are meant to achieve, i.e. keeping inappropriate content out of children's hands. How many children get into or see R rated movies? Enough. How many kids under 17 get a copy of GTA:SA? Enough. The ratings are meant to help parents understand what is right for their kids, and yet they don't do that because: 1) many parents aren't fit for the title, 2) the ESRB does not do nearly enough PR explaining what their ratings are and why they are important, and 3) their ratings suck ass and are mostly based on silly, backwards hypocrisy.

Seriously, that was a really troll-like thing to say. Stop being a crotchpheasant.

See the post immediately above your own.  I have no quarrel with the argument that much bad parenting DOES go on, but it DOES make my blood boil when Euros pop in to mock us about having any restrictions on sexual expression in society at all or to whine about their right to buy porn at Walmart.  That is more of an undercurrent in this thread than you wish to admit.

[voodoolily]

If the undercurrent is there, and not being addressed seriously, maybe it's because not all of us think that nudity is a big deal. At least not as big a deal as homocide. The Euros got it right on that one.

[HaemishM]

Just out of curiosity, of the people here who hate the ESRB ratings and also think American society is fascist and puritanical for not letting everyone from toddlers on up have easy, free access to unlimited porn, how many of you actually have children?  As with so many other issues, its easy to extol the virtues of totally unrestrained hedonism as an angry collegian stoner but harder when you have your own kids. 

Please shut the fuck up, you neocon titwaggling douchebag. People hate the ESRB ratings (or MPAA) not because they "restrict hedonism" but because they do not achieve the aim they are meant to achieve, i.e. keeping inappropriate content out of children's hands. How many children get into or see R rated movies? Enough. How many kids under 17 get a copy of GTA:SA? Enough. The ratings are meant to help parents understand what is right for their kids, and yet they don't do that because: 1) many parents aren't fit for the title, 2) the ESRB does not do nearly enough PR explaining what their ratings are and why they are important, and 3) their ratings suck ass and are mostly based on silly, backwards hypocrisy.

Seriously, that was a really troll-like thing to say. Stop being a crotchpheasant.

See the post immediately above your own.  I have no quarrel with the argument that much bad parenting DOES go on, but it DOES make my blood boil when Euros pop in to mock us about having any restrictions on sexual expression in society at all or to whine about their right to buy porn at Walmart.  That is more of an undercurrent in this thread than you wish to admit.

See my edited in comments, repeated below.

EDIT: And after having read your following posts, wow, you really are a fuckhead. No one here is saying that pr0n should be everywhere on all street corners and that every retailer should have to carry it. Holy fuck, where you got that from, I have no idea.

But see, Wal-Mart is being made to carry something that if they really cared about the content, they'd never carry. GTA? Shit, forget that. Wal-Mart should never carry that game because of their own stance about CENSORING MUSIC CD's. They force musicians to re-record edited versions of their entire CD's just to remove curse words. Yet they have no problem selling unaltered M-rated games like GTA: SA, which has more actual violence and cursing than an Easy-E album. The ratings are supposed to let the retailers know what they are selling, and the parents what they are buying. But apparently, they don't do that, which is in part a failure on the ratings system, and in part a failure of the retailer. Notice that the only real action by any of these parties taken against the GTA games only came about because of media and political pressure. 

And of course, they really don't do that when douchebags like Rockstar hide the content their games contain.

[Strazos]

WHat Haemish said. Post++

I have no problem with games being rated. They just need to be utilized more extensively. I have no qualms about being carded when I buy a "M" rated game. If that would keep it away from people it isn't intended for, and it would end this congressional nonsense. And on pr0n....if you go overseas, you see it in a lot of public places...but it's just not a big deal to them. Sure, it's at every newsstand, but the cashier will probably not sell it to a 10-year-old.

Also, Triforcer, your analogy sucks.

[Sogrinaugh]

Sorry, I don't want someone's parenting problems to infringe on me. Parenting should be the responsibility of, you know, the Parents.

I'm not saying replace Saturday morning cartoons with pr0n, but people need to calm down about this nonsense.

Don't want you kids to be exposed to inappropriate content, such as what may be in a game? Then do your job.

There is a fundamental problem of illogic with the two statements common to your side of this debate:

1.  "Leave parents to parenting.  If they don't want their child exposed to things they don't like they need to do a better job."

followed by

2.  "Since its the parents responsibility, we should have the right to a society with no moral rules or strictures whatsoever  because its not our fault if their kids see it."

This argument is like dropping a soldier in the middle of the warzone with no weapons or armor or clothing and telling him to fight.  It may be his immediate job to win the war on the ground, but when he loses you are still fucking to blame.  Telling parents to "parent better" is all well and good but when you strip them of most of the reasonable means to do so is YOUR FAULT.  You can't justify society being unlimitedly hedonistic because parents have a 100% magical ability to shut it all out, because you have systemtically deprived them of the tools they need to shut it out. 

What samwise said.  You have the ultimate power as a parent, the same power as the OMB, the power of the purse.  Untill they are old enough to get a job, you provide what they can and can't consume.

Furthermore, people need to get real about "protecting the children".  You can make whatever jokes you want and call me a perv, but i can remember being kindergarden/pre-school age when i saw my first penthouse, i can even remember vague details about the lesbain spread i couldn't take my eyes off of (dark-haired and well-tanned).  I had seen Terminator and Predator both multiple times before i was in second grade.  I grew into neither a sociopath nor a sex-offender.

No one wants personal accountability, as this leaves them vulnerable to shame and personal failure if thier kid goes columbine.  Its a SOCIETAL problem.  Sure it is, fuckers.

PS:  Also nature, but thats a seperate (and uncontrollable) issue entirely.

[Sogrinaugh]

What the fuck are  you people, marketing for Rockstar?  With each additional post i grow more curious about this game.  If i buy it and it sux, im car-bombing your stupid web server... with a chevy impala

That sounds like a terroristic threat and I'm afraid the FBI will be contacting you shortly.

It suck that bad?

[Daeven]

Just out of curiosity, of the people here who hate the ESRB ratings and also think American society is fascist and puritanical for not letting everyone from toddlers on up have easy, free access to unlimited porn, how many of you actually have children?  As with so many other issues, its easy to extol the virtues of totally unrestrained hedonism as an angry collegian stoner but harder when you have your own kids. 

Please shut the fuck up, you neocon titwaggling douchebag. People hate the ESRB ratings (or MPAA) not because they "restrict hedonism" but because they do not achieve the aim they are meant to achieve, i.e. keeping inappropriate content out of children's hands. How many children get into or see R rated movies? Enough. How many kids under 17 get a copy of GTA:SA? Enough. The ratings are meant to help parents understand what is right for their kids, and yet they don't do that because: 1) many parents aren't fit for the title, 2) the ESRB does not do nearly enough PR explaining what their ratings are and why they are important, and 3) their ratings suck ass and are mostly based on silly, backwards hypocrisy.

As a 'neocon titwaggling douchebag', I'd just like to state that I'd prefer my kids get get exposed to sex rather than violence.

But then, while I may be a  'neocon titwaggling douchebag', I am most certainly not a 'puritianical, fundamentailist, cockgobbler'.

So, whatever man.

[HaemishM]

Thankfully, Daeven, you tend to actually think about what you say, instead of posting inflammatory piles of stupid like the Triforcer Douchebag Neocon Postbot v3.0.

[Shockeye]

Whenever I see "neocon" I think of "Neocron" and that makes me a little sad.

[Shockeye]

Sims 2 content "worse than Hot Coffee"

Miami attorney Jack Thompson claims cheat codes makes EA's life sim a pedophile's paradise by showing genitalia; calls for ban on

How do you like your hot coffee? If you're Jack Thompson, you like it scalding game publisher's laps. The Miami attorney and anti-gaming activist has done his share to see that games do not fall into the wrong hands--and lately, those hands have belonged to almost everyone.

Thompson was among those who spearheaded the recent effort to slap an "Adults Only" rating on Rockstar Games' Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, and he's often been on the forefront of many other gaming issues, several of which have targeted the crime-spree GTA franchise. In the past, he has represented defendants who have been the victims of GTA-inspired crimes, including a triple homicide of three police officers by an 18-year-old boy in Alabama.

His beef with San Andreas? Unused code in the game that depicts sexual acts. These minigames can be unlocked by using game cheat devices or patches available on the Internet.

Thompson is on a roll--and he's not done yet. His latest goat is a game that doesn't involve guns, carjacking, or prostitutes. He's going after Electronic Arts' The Sims 2.

In a manifesto sent today to press outlets, Thompson focuses on dismantling the Entertainment Software Rating Board and exposing what he calls the industry's "latest dirty little secret." The secret's out now, and it involves nude Sims.

In the statement, Thompson says, "Sims 2, the latest version of the Sims video game franchise... contains, according to video game news sites, full frontal nudity, including nipples, penises, labia, and pubic hair."

The Sims 2 is a "life simulator." In the game, players steer their digital beings around their cyber lives. The actions include everything from the spectacular (getting married, having children, promotions at work) to the mundane (cooking microwaved meals, going to the bathroom, mopping the floor). Such activities, as in real life, sometimes require nudity. EA circumvents inappropriateness by "blurring" out the nether regions, almost to a comical sense.

Knowing that the game is popular among all ages, EA has even taken steps to insure that Sims fans aren't exposed to indecent depictions. In the recent expansion pack, Sims 2 University, gamers can send their teenage Sims off to college. However, instead of packing the expansion with keggers and reefer, EA chose to use juice and bubble blowers.

Thompson doesn't seem to care. He cites a cheat code that can remove the blur which covers nudity. "The nudity placed there by the publisher/maker, Electronic Arts, is accessed by the use of a simple code that removes what is called “the blur” which obscures the genital areas. In other words, the game was released to the public by the manufacturer knowing that the full frontal nudity was resident on the game and would be accessed by use of a simple code widely provided on the Internet."

It's not just the adults that are liberated from their wardrobe. Sims kids can also be nudified, "much to the delight, one can be sure, of pedophiles around the globe who can rehearse, in virtual reality, for their abuse."

Were this to be true, Thompson would have his smoking gun, and EA would be forced to recall all copies of the Sims 2. However, it's what's under the blur that Thompson's after, and what happens when the blur is lifted? A simple mannequin-esque smooth body, according to EA.

Jeff Brown, vice president of corporate communications at EA, in response to the accusations, told GameSpot, "This is nonsense. We've reviewed 100 percent of the content. There is no content inappropriate for a teen audience. Players never see a nude Sim. If someone with an extreme amount of expertise and time were to remove the pixels, they would see that the Sims have no genitals. They appear like Ken and Barbie."

Thompson doesn't buy it. "The sex and the nudity are in the game. That's the point. The blur is an admission that even the 'Ken and Barbie' features should not be displayed. The blur can be disarmed. This is no different than what is in San Andreas, although worse."

The last time we checked, the Sims 2 is rated T for teen by the ESRB, which means that anyone 13-years of age with $50 can purchase the title.

By Tim Surette -- GameSpot
POSTED: 07/22/05 12:06 PM PST

It's only going to get worse from here.

[Strazos]

Someone send that man a case of "SHUT THE FUCK UP" Juice.

EDIT: Anyone with programming expertise and time can make a game do whatever they want. The ESRB, VG Industry, Devs, or Publishers are not responsible for this.

I might need to make a stop in Miami while I am in Florida.

[NowhereMan]

It's not just the adults that are liberated from their wardrobe. Sims kids can also be nudified, "much to the delight, one can be sure, of pedophiles around the globe who can rehearse, in virtual reality, for their abuse."

Yes this seems like a perfectly rational argument. Pedophiles play this game in order to plan child abuse because, y'know, clearly you can do that with little pixelated people. What's worse is I hear that there's a game out there that features an alleged pedophile going around grabbing his crotch and getting little kids. You could edit that to make the kids nude.

I am sure pedophiles have often used Moonwalker to 'rehearse' kidnappings.

[Margalis]

I think the GTA games suck, don't waste your money.

But anyway, this is a can of worms that is going to bleed into things like "your experience may change during online play."

[Shockeye]

Microsoft is taking a step in the right direction by giving parents tools to restrict what types of games their kids play.

Xbox 360 to feature parental control system

Ellie Gibson 14:44 22/07/2005

Microsoft's next-gen console to check software for age rating restrictions

The Xbox 360 will feature a parental locking system that can be used to prevent children from accessing games unsuitable for their age range, according to Japanese website Mainichi.

Parents will be able to set-up the console so it will only play games with appropriate age ratings. When users attempt to load a game, the machine will read data from the disk to determine whether it falls into the correct category.

In addition, parents will be able to programme the 360 to restrict children's access to online chatrooms.

The Mainichi article states that the new features, which have never been included in a games console before, will be built-in to US and European machines as well as Japanese units. There has recently been a storm of controversy in Japan surrounding Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto, before even the Hot Coffee scandal emerged.

[Llava]

I like how he jumps immediately from nudity to pedophilia.

PEDOPHILES ARE PLAYING THE SIMS AND PRACTICING ON IT!

[tazelbain]

I smell a thought crime.

[Roac]

I smell a thought crime.

Crimethink?

[HaemishM]

Microsoft is taking a step in the right direction by giving parents tools to restrict what types of games their kids play.

Xbox 360 to feature parental control system

Ellie Gibson 14:44 22/07/2005

Microsoft's next-gen console to check software for age rating restrictions

The Xbox 360 will feature a parental locking system that can be used to prevent children from accessing games unsuitable for their age range, according to Japanese website Mainichi.

Parents will be able to set-up the console so it will only play games with appropriate age ratings. When users attempt to load a game, the machine will read data from the disk to determine whether it falls into the correct category.

In addition, parents will be able to programme the 360 to restrict children's access to online chatrooms.

The Mainichi article states that the new features, which have never been included in a games console before, will be built-in to US and European machines as well as Japanese units. There has recently been a storm of controversy in Japan surrounding Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto, before even the Hot Coffee scandal emerged.

As much as I hate the VChip and things like it, I think this is a good idea. It gives Junior something to work on disabling when learning about computers.

The Sims thing? If you're going to jump all over Rockstar, you have to jump on the Sims as well. Shit, I'd be worried if my kid started playing the Sims, especially if he was a boy, because I'd think he was turning into a fruit. Or just had really shitty taste in games. But pedophilia? Good one, Jack.

People like Jack Thompson can not see the qualitative difference between nude and nekkid.

[WayAbvPar]

I am still trying to scrub my eyes after reading the words labia and Sims in the same sentence.

[Fargull]

I vote we start burning all the copies of The Sims and anything ever produced from R*, Damn JD Salinger while we are at it.

Fucking fundies.

[Evangolis]

What took Jack Thompson so long?

No one here is saying that pr0n should be everywhere on all street corners and that every retailer should have to carry it.

Well, let me fix that.  The entire system of censoring violence and sex, directly or via ratings, is a giant crock of hypocrisy.  Take football alone, where large men, often from economically deprived backgrounds, perform ritualistic violence on each other, with the inevitable results of injury, permanent disability for most, and death on rare occasions, for our amusement.  We attach to that a variety of sexual images, mostly centered on the fetishistic cheerleader as an underage sex object.  We then use this combination to sell sex-enhancing drugs and alcohol to the resultant audience, along with other consumer products.  Several of the most prominent figures in the ownership game are politically active social conservatives.  This behavior is never questioned, even though we use government funds to support the game in our schools, even though it has been linked to physical injury to and drug abuse by children.  Indeed, school children that do not actively endorse such behavior are likely to face social pressure to conform.  To ignore this activity while making a colossal stink about cartoon characters is both hypocritical and self-deluding.  And there are other examples like this.

The fact is, our society lies about this stuff, and it starts by lying to itself.  Ratings systems are a big part of that lie.

Just for the record, I love football.  I loved watching Doug Plank, who routinely hit people hard enough to give himself minor concussions.  I loved Walter Payton's punishing style of running.  And I laughed my ass off the first time I saw the Swedish Bikini Team.  But I don't really have a problem with Hot Coffee, either.  What pisses me off is the lies and hypocrisy that retailers, Rockstar and the politicos on all sides, and our society as well, are engaging in here.

[Samwise]

Jack Thompson has irritated me to the point of emailing him and trying to provoke a discussion - the only other person who's ever irritated me this much is Bill Schnoebelen (sadly, I don't have the copy of the email where I got him to sweepingly condemn all art as sinful).  If I get anything entertaining I'll share it.

[NowhereMan]

Y'know, I hear that some paintings contain nudity. I saw we start checking ID cards at art galleries and museums before we find ourselves with a generation of pedophillic rapists.

NB: I'm not trying to equate GTASA with art or anything, I just find it odd that a 17 year old watching simulated sex is a cause for outcry when children can see naked people at a far younger age in art galleries. Hell if they find a sculpture gallery they can even touch naughty bits.

[Samwise]

I'm not trying to equate GTASA with art or anything.

Why on earth not?  (No irony intended - I think GTA is pretty damn artistic.)

[Daydreamer]

What took Jack Thompson so long?

No one here is saying that pr0n should be everywhere on all street corners and that every retailer should have to carry it.

Well, let me fix that.  The entire system of censoring violence and sex, directly or via ratings, is a giant crock of hypocrisy.  Take football alone, where large men, often from economically deprived backgrounds, perform ritualistic violence on each other, with the inevitable results of injury, permanent disability for most, and death on rare occasions, for our amusement.  We attach to that a variety of sexual images, mostly centered on the fetishistic cheerleader as an underage sex object.  We then use this combination to sell sex-enhancing drugs and alcohol to the resultant audience, along with other consumer products.  Several of the most prominent figures in the ownership game are politically active social conservatives.  This behavior is never questioned, even though we use government funds to support the game in our schools, even though it has been linked to physical injury to and drug abuse by children.  Indeed, school children that do not actively endorse such behavior are likely to face social pressure to conform.  To ignore this activity while making a colossal stink about cartoon characters is both hypocritical and self-deluding.  And there are other examples like this.

The fact is, our society lies about this stuff, and it starts by lying to itself.  Ratings systems are a big part of that lie.

The difference is two-fold I think.  First, from movies to television to sports and other things we are taught to like violent and sexual imagery but frown upon sex and violence themselves.  Skimpy skintight body suits are accepted, but Janet's wardrobe malfunction is not.  Sports/Mainstream media are socially accepted outlets because they are veiled and at one remove, where as Hot Coffee makes fun of our views of sex directly.  The end result on consumers is likely nearly the same, but that owuld never stand up in the court of public opinion.

Second, if you say the century old sport of football is violent and sexual, people think you are a crank.  If you say the same about an industry that has been capable of producing recognizable human characters for what? 10-12 years max?  You get elected to public office.  When boundaries are pushed, the age of the medium has been a key factor for the last century.

I think arguing about other mediums, or direct vs. indirect exposure, is likely to do the industry more harm than good howver true they may or may not be.  And since Rockstar isn't likely to take more of the blame that it can plausibly shovel off onto others, and the ESRB looks useless to most now, a sacrificial lamb wolf isn't an option.  Really I think its out of anyones hands right now - I just hope the Stem cell/Rove/SC stuff explodes soon enough that it takes people's attention away before congress does something mortally stupid.

[Margalis]

I've always thought that the worst things for kids are things that normalize terrible behavior. A good example of that is "Friends". Pretty much everyone on the show has fucked everyone else, they are all incredibly shallow and stupid, Joey sleeps with every woman alive, etc etc. But they are portrayed as relatively normal.

The guys on Seinfeld did crazy things but every KNEW they were crazy. There was not a pretense of being in a normal situation. In that same way things like comic books and video games make no pretense at being normal, they are clearly fantasy.

What's dangerous are things that are fantasy but not clearly so. Those are the kinds of things impressionable people emulate, knowingly or unknowingly. Sure, there are 8 year olds that emulate Mighty Morphin Power Rangers or GTA or Looney Toons, but there are teens that emulate the more "realistic" crap. A show like Friends routinely displays an abnormal but possible situation as normal.

[Merusk]

Jack Thompson has irritated me to the point of emailing him and trying to provoke a discussion - the only other person who's ever irritated me this much is Bill Schnoebelen (sadly, I don't have the copy of the email where I got him to sweepingly condemn all art as sinful).  If I get anything entertaining I'll share it.

You would get nowhere.  I don't mean you wouldn't move him, I mean he's fucking crazy and very-well reasoned e-mails have been responded to with one liner put-downs.  Replies to these have been responded to with "stop playing games so you can think again."  Check out the posts from Reverend Slim at this link.


Stormwaltz in the thread about this over at Corpnews expressed his concern that even a tiny victory on Thompson's part would embolden him to go after other games.  ANY game that he decided wasn't ok.  Unfortunatly, Storm was right and Thompson's  next target wasn't WoW or EQ or even Quake.  It's the Sims 2.

A wackjob who hates games on principle is amusing in the 'why didn't he join the meninites?' kind of way.  A wackjob who thinks he's got momentum in his crusade gets frightening.  If this wackjob actually gets support I'll be downright scared. 

[Samwise]

Jack Thompson has irritated me to the point of emailing him and trying to provoke a discussion - the only other person who's ever irritated me this much is Bill Schnoebelen (sadly, I don't have the copy of the email where I got him to sweepingly condemn all art as sinful).  If I get anything entertaining I'll share it.

You would get nowhere.  I don't mean you wouldn't move him, I mean he's fucking crazy and very-well reasoned e-mails have been responded to with one liner put-downs.  Replies to these have been responded to with "stop playing games so you can think again."  Check out the posts from Reverend Slim at this link.

Thanks muchly for the link.  At least I know not to spend too much time composing long emails to him.     That was my first impulse, but instead I just asked him point blank why he flat-out lied in his statements on The Sims 2 (the part where he said that the game had full frontal nudity, which is as far as I can tell completely without any basis in fact), and whether he was concerned about libel suits from EA (which it seems like they'd have ample ground for, if my understanding of libel is at all correct).

[AOFanboi]

People from EA have stated - correctly as far as I know - that the Sims/Sims 2 attacks are without basis in reality, and that nude sims are as featureless as Ken and Barbie. I guess he took a wild guess and jumped on it. Another sad example of foot-in-mouth disease, plz put him out of his misery.

[Evangolis]

The difference is two-fold I think.  ...

Second, if you say the century old sport of football is violent and sexual, people think you are a crank.  If you say the same about an industry that has been capable of producing recognizable human characters for what? 10-12 years max?  You get elected to public office.  When boundaries are pushed, the age of the medium has been a key factor for the last century.

I think arguing about other mediums, or direct vs. indirect exposure, is likely to do the industry more harm than good howver true they may or may not be.  And since Rockstar isn't likely to take more of the blame that it can plausibly shovel off onto others, and the ESRB looks useless to most now, a sacrificial lamb wolf isn't an option.  Really I think its out of anyones hands right now - I just hope the Stem cell/Rove/SC stuff explodes soon enough that it takes people's attention away before congress does something mortally stupid.

I'd say the difference is one-fold; that going after the NFL for sex and violence is a political third-rail.  No politician would survive the experience.  But I'm not running for office, and I'm not a crank, I'm just a cranky middle-aged guy, who is sick of this political game.  The emporer has no clothes, and I think game advocates are wrong to play along with the lie that he does.  Americans are sufficently cynical to recognize why a group like the NFL gets a pass and games get the heat, and it does us no favors to play along with the big boys.  Comics proved that self-ghettoizing is a mistake, and we shouldn't repeat that mistake.