Jack Thompson on Attack of the Show 8/10 (video online!)

First off, Jack Thompson has a very silly voice. I always expected him to sound a lot deeper and slower, like most uptight conservatives.

Second, the entire debate was just a horribly stereotypical, unstructured, and unnecessarry mess. On one side we have stuffy lawyer, the other annoying and energetic host, and in the middle dull voice of reason who looks like he was ready to sleep through the debate. The characters were so exagerrated, it was like a comedy show sketch. I was almost waiting for someone to drop the punch line, or throw a pie. It was all screaming, very stupid, and did not solve a thing (although im proud of Jack Thompson for not saying anything completely retarded. I think he's learning he can't get away with everything!)

Bully sounds like a completely retarded game to me. Rockstar is just looking for attention, and doing it in a dispicable way. It's like if a bomber who was just released from prison dropped a mysterious bag in front of a library. The bomber was arrested and when the bag was opened, after hysteria, it was revealed to contain money. The bomber, now in an interregation room whines "I only wanted to donate money! I'm not a bad guy! You're all soooo meen!!!"

and Kap, there's no chance Jon Stewart or Steven Colbert would take time away to participate in a debate like this. They're busy satirizing real news

Great, now G4 has good ratings for a night. Hope you're all proud of yourselves
 
[quote name='botticus']No no no... Jack Thompson does not need that much exposure, even if it's just on G4. Give the man time to talk himself right out of coherence, and let it be done with.[/QUOTE]
Actually, Jack is the one who made the most sense. Adam (?) sounded like ranting fanboy who had no idea what he was talking about. Their major counter point to Jack's scientifically backed argument was, "There was violence before video games!" Wow, great debate! I'm not saying I even agree with Jack, but he certainly came out seeming the more informed, and the more rational. The guy in the middle (forget his name), just didn't say a whole lot other than that he was a dad.
 
To Jack's credit, Bully does sound like a horrible concept for a game. It probably would be better for the industry if they didn't release garbage like that.
 
man.. I agree with most of you. What a waste of a debate. This had a lot of potential had they thought this through more, and maybe used someone else aside from Adam sessler.
 
[quote name='SMMM']To Jack's credit, Bully does sound like a horrible concept for a game. It probably would be better for the industry if they didn't release garbage like that.[/QUOTE]

So is he rubbing off on you? Have you read the descriptions of the game from the media, or only what Jack said?
 
[quote name='SilverPaw750']what the fuck? just as it was getting good, it ended.[/QUOTE]

Seriously...cut way to short. Adam sounded like a moron. Thompson still wanted to talk at the end. He didn't seem as stupid as I thought he would be.
 
[quote name='SilverPaw750']what the fuck? just as it was getting good, it ended.[/QUOTE]
are you kidding!?! as soon as Adamn opened his fucking mouth it was over and we gamers looked like a bunch of ignorant dumbasses (although JT did too)

no one won
 
[quote name='gamereviewgod']So is he rubbing off on you? Have you read the descriptions of the game from the media, or only what Jack said?[/QUOTE]

August 10, 2006 - "This probably isn't the game you thought it was." At least, that's the sentiment being expressed in various newspaper write-ups all over the country regarding Bully, Rockstar Games' rediscovered actioner for the PlayStation 2. Unheard of since E3 2005 and believed to be grounded in a number of outrageous and unconfirmed scenarios that had opponents screaming about thing before the truth was unveiled, Bully puts players in control of 15 year-old Jimmy Hopkins -- a boy who has just begun his first year in the New England-based Bullworth Academy, and a guy who's charged with the mission of ridding the school of a number of its undesirable elements.

Identified by their white shirts, the bullies are against everyone else: the teachers, the nerds, the jocks, the preppies... you name 'em, they're against 'em. Luckily, Jimmy is encouraged to stand up for himself and the other kids, and while players can certainly have moments of questionable judgment themselves (through pranks and razzing), being a bad kid isn't supposed to be tolerated. Again, this probably isn't the game you thought it was.


Click here to watch the debut trailer.
But we can get more into the intricacies of the game at a later time (and we will), but for now, we have a more immediate update for IGN readers first. Rockstar has hooked us up with the debut footage of Bully (in trailer form) as means of getting the word out on what kind of game this really is. To check it out for yourself just click the image above to go straight to our video page, and you may also want to keep an eye on Rockstar's Official Bully Homepage for other possible tidbits in the near future.
Click to expand...

I have heard a lot of this game before I even heard Thompson open his mouth; however, it looks like either I and everyone else was given false info when the game was first revealed, or they just decided to change the entire concept. But right now, it just looks like ANOTHER mission-based game from Rockstar. Save me from these guys. Get this from this guy. blahblahblah. Hope I'm wrong though and they can actually pull of something original.
 
OMG Adam Sesler just owned Jackass Thompson.

What what, the responsibility of parents?!?!? What a profound idea!
 
[quote name='SMMM']To Jack's credit, Bully does sound like a horrible concept for a game. It probably would be better for the industry if they didn't release garbage like that.[/QUOTE]

I agree completely. And No, I am not on JT's side to the person who feels ppl are for something or against it. What the jackass Mr. Thompson is advocating is outright censorship and keeping all games with even a hint of violence or sexuality(even the sims!?) away from anyone younger than 18(or just everyone in general).

What I want is the industry, including(and especially!) Rockstar to regulate themselves better. They cannot keep making games that Play on the media's sensationalized idea of what gaming is about and keep profiting on that negative publicity without the whole industry coming under heavy fire from the gov't. If developers and publishers don't stop making games that contain hot-topic themes without any redeeming qualities, then we will get goverment regulation of games. It is as simple as that.

As far as bully goes, I really wish I could believe it is more than what the media spins. However I have no reason to believe Rockstar is not going for gratitious violence and just feeding the media frenzy. They have been totally silent on the issue so we have to assume one way or another. If they want to make games like this they should be outspoken on why they are doing it. Otherwise, it just appears to most(like it does to me) that they are just out to make the quick buck, to hell with the consequences.
 
I think the best part of the interview was when the GameDaily guy whipped out the line that in the end the parents are responsible for what their children play/watch. Then he asked JT what he thought and he said no. lol JT is a typical lawyer type always pushing the blame elsewhere. All JT is after is more money from his lawsuits.
 
[quote name='SMMM']To Jack's credit, Bully does sound like a horrible concept for a game. It probably would be better for the industry if they didn't release garbage like that.[/QUOTE]

Does anyone really know what the concept is? If there's solid info out there, I'd like to know.

To me, it looks like it might provide a good narrative, possibly putting this game closer to the level of film than previous Rockstar games. That's what I gather from the trailer in any case.
 
Holy hell, that was proof positive evidence that G4TV is the worst TV channel ever. Way too short and their resident expert is Adam Sessler? Seriously you could've got someone off the street to do a better job, the guy from game daily made good points but he got all of two sentences to speak.
 
[quote name='seanr1221']Olivia is so hot :drool:[/quote]

Won't disagree with you there. :lol:

This Loop segment on AotS is way too short. They've had other debates that they've cut off right when things were getting good and today's segment was no different.

I understand where Jack is coming from, being a parent myself, but there's a reason why we have a rating system for games like Bully and it's up to the parents to be responsible with what their kids watch and play. Sadly, in today's society, most parents don't care.
 
[quote name='Setzer']Sadly, in today's society, most parents don't care.[/QUOTE]

And the parents like to push the blame elsewhere. God forbid someone blame the parents. :D
 
[quote name='mik']Only G4, specifically Sessler, could make Jack Thompson look like the sane one.[/QUOTE]

You got that right.

"There was violence before video games." Worst argument ever. How does that in any way counter Jack's point that video games cause violent behavior? Thanks Sessler, for making the game community look like a bunch of retarded apes.
 
Yeah, honestly.... Rockstar is a plague on the industry. They release games only for shock value and it brings nothing but bad publisity to the industry. If some of this stuff starts getting passed, it'll fuck things up for everyone... but Rockstar still makes that cash.

I hate Rockstar and their shitty games... and I dont understand why people support them. Their games are tech demos and just because you can beat someone to death with a baseball bat doesnt make it fun.

I hate to say it, but Jack Thompson looked like the sane one there, and if you agree as well... well they're is definatly something wrong with the industry.
 
Actually, if Adam hadn't stuttered like an ADD-riddled middle schooler, he did make a good point - which Kevin unfortunately interrupted. The study that Jack Thompson quoted also showed that kids with violent tendencies tended to seek out games/movies/etc. that have violent images. That data kind of negates the "facts" that violent games cause violence.

Whether you like Rockstar or not, these are M-rated games. I don't see people going after Eli Roth for the ultra-violent movies he makes (which kids of ANY age can go into Target or Best Buy and purchase), so why go after Rockstar for games which kids should not be playing in the first fucking place?
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']I hate Rockstar and their shitty games... and I dont understand why people support them. Their games are tech demos and just because you can beat someone to death with a baseball bat doesnt make it fun.[/QUOTE]

I completely disagree. The production values in most Rockstar games are phenomenal - far from being tech demos. There's a lot to do and most side missions offer up plenty of challenges. You could play for weeks without randomly beating people with baseball bats.
 
[quote name='SMMM']I have heard a lot of this game before I even heard Thompson open his mouth; however, it looks like either I and everyone else was given false info when the game was first revealed, or they just decided to change the entire concept. But right now, it just looks like ANOTHER mission-based game from Rockstar. Save me from these guys. Get this from this guy. blahblahblah. Hope I'm wrong though and they can actually pull of something original.[/QUOTE]

No, we knew nothing of the game. The article you linked to says specifically "unconfirmed." Anything you heard was manufactured by certain people who really don't know what they're talking about.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Yeah, honestly.... Rockstar is a plague on the industry. They release games only for shock value and it brings nothing but bad publisity to the industry. If some of this stuff starts getting passed, it'll fuck things up for everyone... but Rockstar still makes that cash.

I hate Rockstar and their shitty games... and I dont understand why people support them. Their games are tech demos and just because you can beat someone to death with a baseball bat doesnt make it fun.
[/QUOTE]

Yep, because series like Midnight Club, Table Tennis, The Warriors, Smuggler's Run, Max Payne, and Wild Metal were all about the shock value.

The only "controversial" series Rockstar has produced are GTA and Manhunt, and the latter didn't do so hot in the industry and no one remembers it. GTA has evolved way past "shock value", these days. If you're going to damn Rockstar, let's at least throw some of the blame towards THQ and Activision who are just copying their formulas for their own games.
 
[quote name='Roufuss'] The only "controversial" series Rockstar has produced are GTA and Manhunt[/QUOTE]

State of Emergency.

Also, Bully is using the same running animation from GTA. Which I think is pretty hilarious for a lot of reasons.
 
[quote name='Roufuss']Yep, because series like Midnight Club, Table Tennis, The Warriors, Smuggler's Run, Max Payne, and Wild Metal were all about the shock value.

The only "controversial" series Rockstar has produced are GTA and Manhunt, and the latter didn't do so hot in the industry and no one remembers it. GTA has evolved way past "shock value", these days. If you're going to damn Rockstar, let's at least throw some of the blame towards THQ and Activision who are just copying their formulas for their own games.[/quote]

I don't think Manhunt did that well because it wasn't advertised a whole lot like GTA is. Obviously because of the subject matter ("a game pretty much about making a snuff film, sure lets advertise the living fuck out of this") I have it for xbox. Hell, I was waiting for it to hit the xbox once I heard about it.

Though, can you imagine a game like Manhunt combined with all the stuff you can do in Dead Rising. The very idea makes me froth at the mouth! :drool::drool:
 
Awesome! It's two spastic retards playing shitfit with a topic we've seen debated for years on the internet, but NOW IT'S ON TV!!!!
 
I liked the part where Jack tried to say the UK has an equivalency to the 1st amendment. You could tell he was totally talking out of his ass because well they don't have one to put it bluntly.

Most of you guys have said Sesler looked like an idiot, but aside from when he got into the shouting matches, he made some damn good, intelligent points.
 
Would it have killed that guy videotaping his TV to get a tripod or something? The video is making me sick. I cant watch it :(

edit. Found a better link.
 
I agree with RedvsBlue. If Jack Thompson hadn't been interrupting him and Kevin wasn't an ass, it would have been good.
 
I don't know why people keep bringing up Jack Thompson (see EGM's latest issue where they rate the shock value of a video game by Jack Thompson heads, and this thread.) It appeared (to me) as if he was going away for a little while, putting him on a Tv show to debate with him is only giving him more publicity. It also seems as if complaining about video games is this guy's life, maybe if we don't care about what he says he'll eventually die...besides, who cares about Bully anyway?
 
[quote name='evanft']I agree with RedvsBlue. If Jack Thompson hadn't been interrupting him and Kevin wasn't an ass, it would have been good.[/QUOTE]

Yeah Kevin was a horrible moderator for this "debate".
 
[quote name='Strell']State of Emergency.

Also, Bully is using the same running animation from GTA. Which I think is pretty hilarious for a lot of reasons.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure SoE was really "controversial"... other than the riots, which weren't based on any particular event in history, the game was more like a shitty 3-D brawler.

If what I read above about Bully is true, that it's a kid standing up against some bully's, then yea, the game is alot different than their GTA / Manhunt stuff.

I'm gonna also add Red Dead Revolver to my list of games Rockstar put out that isn't controversial.
 
[quote name='lebowsky']Actually, if Adam hadn't stuttered like an ADD-riddled middle schooler, he did make a good point -[/QUOTE]

Haha yea, this was crazy, when they first turned to him you could tell how furious he was and just started stuttering his words repeatedly.

wtf, it ended way too early.
 
[quote name='Roufuss']I'm gonna also add Red Dead Revolver to my list of games Rockstar put out that isn't controversial.[/quote]

True, and a good game, probably because it was a Capcom title first.
 
The most important fact I learned from watching the clip is that the Steelers/Cardinals game will take place exactly two months after Ben Toothlessburger's motorcycle accident (from the scroll at the bottom).
Jack Thompson can try to police our nation as much as he wants, but he will be hard-pressed to find anyone of authority to offer him a badge.
 
I don't know what's worse. The trailer for that game, or the fucking clix nick lachey commercial that preceeded it.

Why the hell does it still look first generation PS2?
 
Graphics are really shitty but if they can come up with interesting missions and cool cutscenes it could be really good. The subject of the game could give it a really good story. I still don't understand if you are a bully or if you're fighting against bullies to help others, though.
 
[quote name='hohez']I don't know what's worse. The trailer for that game, or the fucking clix nick lachey commercial that preceeded it.

Why the hell does it still look first generation PS2?[/quote]
You've obviously never played a first-generation PS2 game with that remark, as it outdoes anything those games did. The game looks just fine as they suit the game well. I'm looking forward to the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top