MSNBC questions Jack Thompson’s accusations

Now that evidence shows that Cho Seung Hui didn’t own a single video game at the time of the Tragic shooting, a new article over at MSNBC questions Thompson’s fervent accusations. This is in light of his recent interview wherein he responded to IGDA criticism.

The MSNBC article notes that contrary to Thompson’s claims of counterstrike being a “killing simulator” for youths, Cho didn’t need much skill to shoot as many people as he did. Eye witness accounts indicate that many of the victims were shot at point blank range.

Moreover the article notes that Sternheimer, a sociologist at the University of Southern California and author of the book “Kids These Days: Facts and Fictions About Today’s Youth” points out that before this week’s Virginia Tech massacre, the most deadly school shooting in history took place at the University of Texas in Austin way back in 1966, before the days of pong.

The article says that nobody realises that since the advent of videogames, violence rates in the US have declined “precipitously.” Sternheimer even notes that it is likely that any 23-year-old man living in America has already played a videogame. How many 23-year-old men go out on a killing spree?

The MSNBC article goes on to note this nice gem:

For those who didn’t grow up playing video games, the appeal of a game like “Counter-Strike” can be hard to comprehend. It can be difficult to understand that the game promotes communication and team work. It can be hard fathom how players who love to run around gunning down their virtual enemies do not have even the slightest desire to shoot a person in real life.

As a commenter on Digg noted, the truth is that massive multiplayer killing fests are really just slightly more complex and themed versions of cops-and-robbers. An online and engaging visual form of “tag” wherein players “tag” one another in the form of virtual kills, in a world where there are no real consequences. A game of tag in a world where death isn’t really malicious or evil, or “desensitising” – death only means waiting for the next play round or respawn.

It is a competitive environment where sportsmanship is still the norm; where it is expected that after all the boasting and chest-thumping is done, the winning party will get up and shake the losing party’s hand and say “good game.”

Now that evidence shows that Cho Seung Hui didn’t own a single video game at the time of the Tragic shooting, a new article over at MSNBC questions Thompson’s fervent accusations. This is in light of his recent interview wherein he responded to IGDA criticism.

The MSNBC article notes that contrary to Thompson’s claims of counterstrike being a “killing simulator” for youths, Cho didn’t need much skill to shoot as many people as he did. Eye witness accounts indicate that many of the victims were shot at point blank range.

Moreover the article notes that Sternheimer, a sociologist at the University of Southern California and author of the book “Kids These Days: Facts and Fictions About Today’s Youth” points out that before this week’s Virginia Tech massacre, the most deadly school shooting in history took place at the University of Texas in Austin way back in 1966, before the days of pong.

The article says that nobody realises that since the advent of videogames, violence rates in the US have declined “precipitously.” Sternheimer even notes that it is likely that any 23-year-old man living in America has already played a videogame. How many 23-year-old men go out on a killing spree?

The MSNBC article goes on to note this nice gem:

For those who didn’t grow up playing video games, the appeal of a game like “Counter-Strike” can be hard to comprehend. It can be difficult to understand that the game promotes communication and team work. It can be hard fathom how players who love to run around gunning down their virtual enemies do not have even the slightest desire to shoot a person in real life.

As a commenter on Digg noted, the truth is that massive multiplayer killing fests are really just slightly more complex and themed versions of cops-and-robbers. An online and engaging visual form of “tag” wherein players “tag” one another in the form of virtual kills, in a world where there are no real consequences. A game of tag in a world where death isn’t really malicious or evil, or “desensitising” – death only means waiting for the next play round or respawn.

It is a competitive environment where sportsmanship is still the norm; where it is expected that after all the boasting and chest-thumping is done, the winning party will get up and shake the losing party’s hand and say “good game.”