Ever since the announcement of this debate at SGC, I've been wishing that I could attend this conference. Oh, don't get me wrong, even without this debate I would still gladly sacrifice a kidney to go there, but this was just IT.
Jack Thompson is perhaps the most talked about "enemy" of the gaming world. His views, though on the right path, are wrong. What he's trying to accomplish however is still something to root for. He is trying to keep our children safe from these negative influences like Grand Theft Auto. I'd sleep better if my kid didn't know his health would regenerate by banging a hooker in an alley in the back of a car.
So, Jack Thompson is at SGC as we speak and, disappointed as I am, the open forum has already passed. I had one question that I wished that I could have asked. The answer to this question would have been very enlightening and would have brought me more insight to the man who was disbarred as a lawyer recently. This question would have been:
"Mister Thompson, if you could go back in time and do your campaign all over again, would you still focus on the developers or would you divert your attention to the parents that allow their kids to play these games and the store clerks that sold these games to kids in the first place?"
I sincerely hope that someone has asked this question or something similar like it. And that the answer gets shared with us.
If you are reading this close to this blogs creation, The JT debate is being made public via Twitter. All you need to do is add: http://twitter.com/JtDebate
This has been Puddle Jumper, I'll see you next time.
That's a very good question.
That's a very good question. As much as I like to make fun of Jack Tompson, I agree with much of what he wants to accomplish. Not with his methods, but his goal is generaly a good idea.
Kids will always want that forbidden fruit and it's a parent's job to protect their children from themselves. What gamers tend not to want to admit is that game developers and publishers, regardless of what they say, want children to buy their mature games along with adults. The more sales the more money they make.
There must be a way to enforce mandatory parental permission for mature themed games. We'd probably end up with something like the film industry were movies get slightly watered down for the PG-13 rating, but games are more like straight to DVD movies.
Kids don't have a right to video games so they should be happy to get what their parents deem OK for them. I was happy with it when I was a kid.
-- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
I'm an old school gamer, but I'm still hip. Wait, when referring to oneself as, "Hip", does it reverse its meaning?
He answered the question in
He answered the question in the debate. Following it on Twitter and on Destruction. I gotta admit, he's not making a lot of sense. Now I'm happy I'm not there or I wouldn't have been able to stay calm and zen.
So you want the game makers
So you want the game makers to release two versions of their games? One for the kiddies and one for the adults? Come on now...
And another thing, there is a way to prevent kids from playing and buying these games. It's called being a real parent. Not blaming everything else when you can't take care of your own kids.
I never said two versions, I
I never said two versions, I just mentioned that games are more like direct to DVD movies than films that get released at a lower rating in theaters and get an uncut version later. Movie producers want the most ticket sales so they water down films like Live Free or Die Hard and Terminator Salvation. A PG-Rating gets kids and family to buy tickets where an R-Rating is limited to adults.
Games are sold on shelves and because there is no mandatory enforcement of the ESRB system publishers bank on they games appealing to all ages. Even if they really should only be played by adults. Right now the rating system only serves as a way to help good parents decide, but if a retailer wants to they can sell mature games to kids without any guardian present.
I think that is the fundemental problem that Jack Thompson has with the video game industry. I don't think he hates all video games. He appears to missunderstand what little social and pycological studies have been done, but I don't think he has a beef with video games as a form of entertainment. I think he just doesn't want mature games in the hands of children.
I can't argue with that. I want developers to make mature games, but I don't want children to have access to them without the OK from their guardians.
You are 100% right about parents who should not blame everyone but themselves, but if the kid can go to the store without the parent's knowledge and buy the game from a retailer who doesn't care than there isn't much a parent can do about it. The best parents have to walk a thin line between discipline and trust with their kids.
Jack Thompson said he he doesn't want to take mature games away from adults, the problem he has is with how easy it is for kids to get a hold of them.
Bad parents are a different issue altogether. There are some terrible parents in the world who give their kids drugs, alcohol, etc. Parents who think all games are for kids and are surprised when a game is adult themed are necessarily bad parents, naive sure, but if they take the game away I can see how they would be angry that the retailer didn't explain the content of the game to them. The ESRB warning is small and parents who don't know anything about games would easily overlook it.
The problem I have with Jack Thompson is the way he goes about his crusade. He thinks the developers are to blame, and although I'm sure they are happy to sell to any age group to make as much money as possible, they go out of there way to comply with the ESRB.
Instead he should focus on retailers who knowingly sell mature rated games to underage customers. I think everyone agrees, except for kids, that children should only play the games they parents deem appropriate. Well, it's gotten to the point were that ESRB rating system should be enforced like the the rating system at a theater. If you don't have the ID or a guardian you don't get it.
-- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
I'm an old school gamer, but I'm still hip. Wait, when referring to oneself as, "Hip", does it reverse its meaning?