Jack Thompson.

The two proper nouns to piss of any well informed gamer. Well, that and Jar-Jar Binks, but that's only if you're on the super geeky side of the force. To point, though, it seems a lot of people as of late just love to throw dung at this chap without actually understanding what he's yelling about. I'm not about to say he's right- he's an ass, quite simply; constantly bringing down an industry he feels is in a moral declince, while changing your own rules of right and wrong at the same time, is a pretentious double standard.

The bigger problem has more to do with what he had to say, rather than how it was said, or to whom. The largest problem in the video game industry is the industry itself: there is a vast stagnation of content, and as such, every little caveat has to be marketed by the hippest looking Joe Camel to appeal to every child that will nag incessently. This comes as much to the chagrin of all parents involved, as they turn a blind eye to the chain of videogame sequels and appropriately rated content.

First to really understand: Not all games were meant to be played by everyone. This is something that should not have to be repeated by someone else; it's idiot's logic. You wouldn't show a child a xxx movie: why show them an AO rated game? That game is made to appeal to the demographics behind it. Should something be rated MA 17+- 'Holy Crap!- that's for people over 17!' I can not believe the amount of flack I receive from customers on a daily basis who don't understand why their ten year old can't buy 'Saints Row'.

Then I read the rating advisories on the back.

This leads to my point: The public needs a better education. Jack Thompson proposes that we ostracise all video game makers of MA content, and ban their existing content from further circulation. He 'assumes' that the average individual wouldn't want to be bothered with their right of choice, because the average person either doesn't know the difference in gaming, or doesn't care to learn. This does make him half-right, sadly: people just want to be told what to do. However, an extra minute at the counter, and a retail employee can empower a customer with the logical toolset to make their best choice for the child. This would also help preserve individual freedoms of expressions both from the game developers, and by the rights and association of the purchase.

Sadly, I do have to ammend my thoughts on the 'Sequel Factory'. Thompson has had minimal impact on this, except in a few rare instances where companies have produced sequential units of a title simply to exacerbate their standing. Some companies enjoy the comfort of the guaranteed financial flow, which will then be poured from three certain-to-sell sequels, into one untried IP.

This constantly recycled material does add fodder for people like Thompson to go after, though. A large majority of games all fall within specific classifications these days. This is such a strong alignment, that it's safe to presume-and quite correctly- the core content of a game based off of what entertainment alignment it accrues. Those of the gta-like style all seem to have guns, language, drugs, and sex. Then again, so doesn't Anywhere, USA, but that hearkens back to an under-educated consumer and another discussion. This presumptive nature of gaming- the positivity that the same things will constantly keep cycling back up again- make it so easy for people to decry the horror of gaming. Couple this with the numbers on the core demographic of gamers being the same as the core for purchasing - 22-29 - and you can see how the numbers will always generate the same basic game. The problem is, the politicians are taking advantage of a naiive consumer, who assumes that children are the core demographic. The consumer that protests with the politician, not realising they're loosing their own rights to purchase material that has been produced for the voting-age public.

Now for something that extends beyond these dingbats: If a new law is ever passed that prohibits the content of games, imagine what that will do ten years after. Due to the effects of the prohibition- a ban on alcohol- the base laws needed for the MPAA evaluation systems were legally enacted. It scares me as a voting citizen to think of what laws could be passed from video game censoring, if that which regulated alcohol regulates the conscious right behind whether I would want my son watching heads explode on the television, or whether he'd be learning how to really woo the ladies.

To conclude, politicians should not be trying to censor the video games in America. They should be effectively be using the ESRB's funding to educate the public. Fortunately, it seems like the idea is finally sinking in, as the ESRB is reporting for the first time ever a drastic decline in the sale of M rated games to minors. Thompson's tactics were ignorant, foolhardy, and disturbingly misinformed, and it's hard for me to not think of him as a terrorist- look how afraid everyone is to do anything to cull him out of the woodwork. It seems for now, though, that the pressure he applied in some ways provided the beginnings to the new wave of an educated consumer.