Post by: HadesGigas on April 17, 2007, 10:51:33 PM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 17, 2007, 10:54:27 PM
Post by: Shift Key on April 17, 2007, 10:56:36 PM
Post by: couchmonkey on April 18, 2007, 04:00:53 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 18, 2007, 08:54:51 AM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on April 18, 2007, 08:58:53 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I'd like to throttle the retards who thought it was a good idea to make a Columbine simulation game because they're just giving Thompson more ammunition.
They made one?!? O.O!!!!!
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on April 18, 2007, 09:45:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I'd like to throttle the retards who thought it was a good idea to make a Columbine simulation game because they're just giving Thompson more ammunition.
It was set to win the game contest it was entered in until it was disqualified for content. Too bad the other developers decided that censorship was wrong and they pulled all thier games too. Besided Thompson can have all the ammunition he wants, he's still only shooting blanks.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 18, 2007, 11:24:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1 Besided Thompson can have all the ammunition he wants, he's still only shooting blanks.
That's the thing: if the f*cker keeps at this for long enough and manages to start a general public outcry, he might actually get something to stick against gaming which will result in the government creating some new laws regarding gaming content.
A Columbine game is pretty damn close to the ammo he needs. All of his strength stems from misguiding and angering the public (which seems to be all the rage these days), but if he could point the finger of morality to the extent that it whips people into an angered frenzy, enough letters to congressmen might get something to happen.
The first 9/11 game we see released will probably do just that.
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on April 18, 2007, 12:04:53 PM
I still don't get the Columbine game. As SB said, it's the perfect thing they need for serious anti-game laws to be passed. And I don't see how it would be fun. Shooting innocents is in no way challenging.
Post by: HadesGigas on April 18, 2007, 12:21:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I'd like to throttle the retards who thought it was a good idea to make a Columbine simulation game because they're just giving Thompson more ammunition.
It's a completely basic top down RPG made with RPG Maker, there's pretty much nothing you can learn about killing people from the game. Other than to don't trust your idiot friend to set the proper time on the timebomb...
It's a pretty boring game gameplay-wise, the developer even said so. It's more just a very slightly interactive look at what was going through their mind before they did it. Not much different than a book or a movie, except that it looks like a JRPG.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 18, 2007, 12:38:19 PM
All JT would ensure that they hear is "SOMEONE MADE A COLUMBINE VIDEOGAME, THEREFORE VIDEO GAMES ARE EVIL!!!!" and there's a certain number of people who would listen to him because they don't understand the context but it enrages them.
Post by: 18 Days on April 18, 2007, 04:30:13 PM
Which was made by a friend of one of the victims…
Post by: wandering on April 18, 2007, 04:42:05 PM
Post by: Zach on April 18, 2007, 05:38:54 PM
This shooter Cho, he obviously was a very very tormented soul, His notes, plays, and the videos sent to NBC only scratch the surface of some extremely deep complicated mental problems. It should be obvious to anybody with half a brain that video games had absolutely nothing to do with this. (I know Im preaching to the choir here)
Post by: HadesGigas on April 18, 2007, 05:52:37 PM
Yep:
Quote
Several Korean youths who knew Cho Seung Hui from his high school days said he was a fan of violent video games, particularly Counterstrike, a hugely popular online game published by Microsoft, in which players join terrorism or counterterrorism groups and try to shoot each other using all types of guns.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 18, 2007, 06:54:55 PM
Post by: Crimm on April 19, 2007, 06:19:45 AM
Post by: nitsu niflheim on April 19, 2007, 06:51:33 AM
Post by: that Baby guy on April 19, 2007, 07:13:31 AM
Post by: nitsu niflheim on April 19, 2007, 08:22:00 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 19, 2007, 09:20:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: thatguy
For those of you who say only Fox News would put him on air, know that Hardball featured him, and there's an article with the clip on kotaku. In it, Matthews at first doubts Thompson, but it seems like he begins to believe him as time passes. I swear, whenever a show features JT, they need to have someone on screen that knows what they are talking about to counter his "facts."
Exactly, and therein lies the REAL danger JT poses: he has no intention of playing fair. He will never pass up a chance to lie, deceive and outright manipulate the information presented to the public so he can further his own agenda. In his mind, he probably believes that god wants him to do this, even if it requires dishonesty.
And THAT is why games like Columbine and JFK reloaded are so insanely idiotic. If I were Jack Thompson, I'd want nothing more than for someone to create games like that because I could use it to whip the public into a lynch-mob frenzy. It doesn't matter how poorly done the games are. The fact that they exist is enough for JT to mention them and point out how evil and terrible they are, spouting lines like "What could be so heartless and cruel as to glorify the events of Columbine? Video games, THAT'S what!"
We all look at this f*cker as a pesky little gnat, but if he goes unchecked long enough, he has the potential do some real damage, like ratifying a bill which dictates that all games must adhere to strict content guidelines, M rated or otherwise.
Remember that he's not out to ensure that M games don't find their way into the hands of children who shouldn't play them. He wants to see the entire industry go down in flames, period, and the fact that he has recently gotten Dr. Phil to join his crusade is a very bad sign.
Tons upon tons of white trash watches Dr. Phil, the exact same kinds of people who can easily be whipped into a lynch-mob frenzy.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on April 19, 2007, 09:41:55 AM
I asked because he commented on Thompson and Phil's claims.
EDIT: OK, found the original statement:
"CALLER: What I really think is an issue is video violence, video gaming. I will guarantee you, I’ll bet my last dollar in my pocket, that this shooter will be found to have been a compulsive video gamer, and when people are living that kind of lifestyle — and college students do this a lot.
RUSH: (sigh) Let’s say you’re right. Not every video gamer goes out and murders 33 people on the college campus though. There’s more to this than that. We can find all kinds of societal problems and ills, but the fact of the matter is that whatever you would look at as a bad influence — video games as you mentioned — it may desensitize people, but it doesn’t turn everybody into mass murderers."
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on April 19, 2007, 06:43:52 PM
Post by: that Baby guy on April 19, 2007, 07:15:57 PM
I have to agree with Penny Arcade, though. I think the best way to prove him wrong is to show the great things games and gamers have down, while comparing games to earlier media that was censored previously, but is now considered brilliant works of art. It would be important not to get caught up in things that have already been deemed bad by the public, such as Hot Coffee, and instead deem this as a big mistake the developers left in, and shouldn't have. In reference to Super Columbine Massacre, talk about the award it almost received, first off, and secondly, attempt to get footage of the game on air, even if only brief, to allow the audience to know that you couldn't train to kill on the game.
Bring up Child's Play, and ask him what he thinks about that, and then bring up studies about stress, and studies about how gaming relieves stress.
To end up the discussion, I imagine that you could go with one of any different scenarios. You can talk about how there were school shootings before games were commercially available, though you can be sure Thompson expects that, he gets it a lot. You could bring up that when Hitler was in jail was when he wrote Mein Kampf, ultimately, a form of ultimate censorship, and obviously, this didn't stop him from his atrocities against humanity. That may be a little too dramatic, though, and would make you look like a crazy extremist. I suppose another option would be to bring up the value of family, and that, as with any form of media, it is important for families to be actively involved in all types of media their children observe, teaching them what is appropriate, and using the time spent as bonding time as well.
That seems pretty sound to me, and shows that games, just because they can be violent, do not cause violence in those playing them. Somewhere, I suppose it should be mentioned that the Washington Post retracted the part of the article that blamed Counter-Strike. Overall, I really haven't spent too much time following Thompson's actions until now, and on television, I have to say, to a neutral audience, he is a very convincing person. He appeals to things normal people like, and he references things that they don't know about, so they don't know any better than to trust him. It's sad for me to say this, but I feel like most people I have read from on the internet, including the owners of several major gaming sites, seem to be able to see how well he speaks on camera, and how influential he can be. Instead, they become outraged, and if given the opportunity, they react to Thompson like Sessler did, not even intending to. Unfortunately, Sessler was prepared to make an argument, with references and studies, and the like, but he isn't used to being off script, nor is he used to arguing against someone that can purport himself as a hero on camera so easily. If you watched that hardball clip objectively, you'll see that he has little problem convincing Matthews that there were video games out there for people to train how to kill on, despite the fact that Matthews typically remains incredibly skeptical of anyone that appears on his show, especially those who are conservative.
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on April 19, 2007, 07:44:51 PM
Quote
He tried to tackle Rockstar's gay-kissing Bully game, then moved his target to Grand Theft Auto IV, and then frantically tried to find people who would still listen to him overseas on his march to prevent Manhunt 2. Luckily, Take Two Interactive filed for the equivalent of a restraining order, and with this settlement, we can finally game in peace for at least a short while. Thompson has agreed that he:
-will not sue or threaten to sue to block sale or distribution of any game published by Take Two or its subsidiaries (i.e., Rockstar)
-will not communicate to Take Two or anyone doing business with T2 (like, say Wal-Mart) any accusation that the company committed any wrongdoing by selling its games. Thompson is not restricted from criticizing the content of T2 games, nor is he prevented from acting as counsel in lawsuits brought against Take Two by other parties
-will make any future contacts with T2 through its attorneys
In return, Take Two dismissed their counterclaim and dropped the contempt of court charge on Jack Thompson. Basically, they put out a raccoon trap, caught the son of a bitch, and are releasing him into the wild, hoping he will never return.
This is the first step in the right direction. Soon people will just completely tune him out.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 19, 2007, 09:29:24 PM
Quote
And THAT is why games like Columbine and JFK reloaded are so insanely idiotic.
Have you ever PLAYED JFK Reloaded? That game is fun as hell. Go see if they have it on underdogs, I think they do.
And see if you can assassinate JFK with two richochets into a headshot. I played until I could.
Post by: Shift Key on April 19, 2007, 09:39:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R
And see if you can assassinate JFK with two richochets into a headshot. I played until I could.
My contribution to this thread: "ICH BIN EIN BERLINER"
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 19, 2007, 09:54:59 PM
Post by: Shift Key on April 19, 2007, 10:21:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R
If you haven't played JFK Reloaded and laughed like a retard after you get the president's limo ten feet in the air, you're kicked out of the funhouse
Show me the door. I've been stuck here forever searching for a way out!
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 20, 2007, 08:42:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1
This is the first step in the right direction. Soon people will just completely tune him out.
I'm REALLY hoping this is the case.
My fear lies in the fact that ignorant masses are generally just lumps of influential clay when it comes to sensationalism and the fact that JT is big on playing the catholicism card is evidence that he sees this as well.
These people won't even get to see the rebuttals to his outrageous claims, especially when the media has never had anyone competent to counter him whenever he's on some kind of talk show.
Post by: that Baby guy on April 20, 2007, 09:41:39 AM
Post by: Crimm on April 20, 2007, 05:51:04 PM
Yes, it does look more like MSNBC did this to get him back then because they genuinely disagreed with him.
Post by: Shift Key on April 20, 2007, 08:43:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: thatguy
I think this is a threat to Thompson, that if he doesn't stop with the pushing that CS did this, then MSNBC might go into actual stuff against JT on air.
Did you see the legal beartrap that Take Two managed to catch JT in? I laughed because it pretty much gets him off their back, and they did it through the legal system!
Quote
The settlement now assures that JT will not: sue or threaten to sue to block sale or distribution of any game published by Take Two or its subsidiaries; communicate to Take Two or anyone doing business with T2 (like, say Wal-Mart) any accusation that the company committed any wrongdoing by selling its games; make any future contacts with T2 unless it's through its attorneys.
http://gamepolitics.com/2007/04/19/breaking-grand-theft-auto-publisher-settles-lawsuit-against-jack-thompson/
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 21, 2007, 01:52:16 AM
edit: words
I want to go to that nerd rally in NY
Quotelolllllllll
"He might have killed somebody but he wouldn't have killed 32 if he hadn't rehearsed it and trained himself like a warrior on virtual reality. It can't be done. It just doesn't happen."
Post by: wandering on April 23, 2007, 11:03:07 PM
A friend of mine was just, today (well, yesterday), involuntarily committed to a mental institution for evaluation, for something he wrote in class. That may not have happened if there was one rational voice out there pointing out that school shootings are very rare occurrences, and much less of a threat than, say, cars or cigarettes. That overreacting is the worst thing anyone can do right now. That singling people out because they have things in common with the shooter is stupid. That lots of people are weird, and write violent stories, and play videogames.
If you're a school official, I do want you to respond to direct threats well. If, for example, someone shoots 2 people in a dorm, you might want to do something about that. If someone says that he's going to harm himself or others, please, call the appropriate authorities. But, if you just feel that someone is iffy, for one vague reason or another, make sure your response is reasoned and appropriate.
(too serious for the funhouse?)
Post by: Shift Key on April 23, 2007, 11:34:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
(too serious for the funhouse?)
Not at all.
In this day and age its very easy to gain attention by being an alarmist [spolier]sup al gore. The mass media runs on this method of delivering news, as it grabs the attention of the audience. And once it has the audience, it has to deliver more news that grabs the attention. Its a vicious cycle.
What disappoints me about the shootings was how quickly everyone was looking for an excuse for the tragedy. Sure, the shooter was ID'd pretty early on, but after that it looks like everyone went on wild goose chases searching for that single elusive item that links everything together. I'm sure JT will claim that he was just expressing his opinion of the matter (correct or otherwise) but his attitude towards the incident was disgusting. He trumpeted that video games produce murderers because he could spout examples from the past. He spent more time rambling then answering questions.
My opinion of the event is that it was a terrible tragedy. Like most people, I wanted to know why Cho decided it was time to slay his fellow students. When I heard that the shooter had mysterious words tattooed on his arm, i tried to understand what those words may mean, as I believe the shootings were his way of sending a message to the world (as morbid as that is). But once I saw his videos being broadcast around the world, which consisted of the angry rants and hateful message of a disturbed person, I didn't want to know any more. He managed to gain attention by manipulating the media and justifying what he did.
He knew what he was doing. And that is why I don't believe the shootings can be blamed on mental problems, as it was a premeditated and devastating act.
Quote
A friend of mine was just, today, involuntarily committed to a mental institution for evaluation, for something he wrote in class. That may not have happened if there was one rational voice out there pointing out that school shootings are very rare occurrences, and much less of a threat than, say, cars or cigarettes.
On the contrary, you look at this like its painting your friend as a psychopath. On the flipside, there is a process that goes on once he is at the institution. Its not like a hotel, you can't stay there unless you have mental problems. And even if he does, he's getting help at the place at least, rather then letting the problem manifest into various forms like we have seen.
For example, the worst shooting in Australian history was done back in the mid 90s. No-one saw it coming, not even his girlfriend. He had mental problems for most of his life (but no-one noticed), collected and stashed away guns guns (he had a couple of rifles and a shotgun at the time) and one day decided to go on a murderous rampage. Much like Cho did. But unlike Cho the authorities arrested the culprit and he's now serving 35 life sentences.
I know you are obviously angry at what happened, but mental problems are very different to cars and cigarettes. Keep us posted on how he is.
Post by: KDR_11k on April 24, 2007, 07:00:01 AM
Post by: Plugabugz on April 24, 2007, 11:35:25 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on April 24, 2007, 07:26:37 PM
Post by: wandering on April 24, 2007, 09:06:35 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Shift Key
...there is a process that goes on once he is at the institution.
Well, yes. But he never should have been placed in an institution in the first place. He never directly threatened himself or anyone else, and is not psychotic. The social worker who was responsible for him being taken away in handcuffs should have seen that. Instead, she saw what she wanted to see.
Quote
Its not like a hotel, you can't stay there unless you have mental problems. And even if he does, he's getting help at the place at least, rather then letting the problem manifest into various forms like we have seen.
I take it you've never seen One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
Quote
Keep us posted on how he is.
I've gotten word that the people over at the institution think that the social worker's assessment of the situation was incorrect. They don't think my friend is psychotic, in other words. It looks like he'll be home soon. So, hooray. Perhaps your faith in the system is justified, after all.
Quote
[The shooter] knew what he was doing. And that is why I don't believe the shootings can be blamed on mental problems, as it was a premeditated and devastating act.
As there's no such thing as a mental disorder that takes away free will, I don't think any shootings can be blamed on mental problems.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Our local newspaper just said he flipped because of girlfriend issues. Considering the number of suicides that happen for that reason it sounds reasonable.
When I heard about his girl problems, I was like "ah, that explains it!" I couldn't understand what would motivate a college student to shoot up his classmates, when college is so much less cruel than high school.
...but then I found out he thought was being picked on. That his college classmates were every bit as cruel as high school kids...at least, in his mind.
Though, now that I think about it, I suppose you can still blame the shootings on his girl problems. At least, if he was getting some, I don't think he'd have killed anybody.
Post by: KDR_11k on April 25, 2007, 06:02:47 AM
That is assuming the will is actually free. So far I have seen no evidence supporting that and a lot of evidence cotradicting it (e.g. addictions).
Post by: odifiend on April 25, 2007, 06:48:45 AM
I stopped following the VT case as soon as it was announced he was a loner and nobody knew anything about him. I'm sorry to break it to him but he wasn't unique and his behavior was so cliche - he was a much less cool Itachi. It is not true he was being picked on, it sounds like people just ignored him because he ignored people. He was just so anti-social that in his 23 years of life or whatever, he didn't understand the value of life as proved through his actions.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 25, 2007, 07:04:01 AM
Post by: that Baby guy on April 25, 2007, 05:09:42 PM
..............................................................not.
Post by: Arbok on April 27, 2007, 04:02:43 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
I really wish the Daily Show would say something about the media's coverage of the shooting. So many stupid things are being said.
They heard you, it seems. Even mentioned the video games angle, although discredited it real quick and moved on.
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=85992
Post by: Shift Key on April 27, 2007, 05:05:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: thatguy
Well, now he has taken the next step, and added Kotaku to his sue-list, or whatever it is. Apparently, he is very bad at drawing up lawsuits.
..............................................................not.
Kotaku suit gets laughed out of court
Court says JT failed to follow the proper federal court procedure for amending a complaint.
JT pleads ignorance, claims he will file the complaint again.
Post by: that Baby guy on April 27, 2007, 05:18:02 PM
