Slashdot Mirror
Too Soon For A Columbine Videogame?
neutralino writes "Rocky Mountain News has a story about a computer game based on the Columbine massacre. From the article: 'Called Super Columbine Massacre RPG, the game mixes cartoonish scenes with photographs of Harris and Klebold, pictures taken from newspapers and television stations and excerpts from their writings... [The game's creator] said he wanted to create something profoundly unique and confrontational that would promote a real dialogue on the subject of school shootings.'"
First of all, someone is going to bring it up eventually, so I might as well be helpful and give everyone the link to the website that has the actual game...
http://www.columbinegame.com/
By the way, it appears that the game was designed using a program called "RPG Maker 2000"
Hopefully their website charges them for bandwidth, and once they get Slashdotted the server hosting bill will bankrupt the authors...
Secondly, I think that most people would feel some concern about copycats, and being that I haven't played the game myself, I don't know whether the perspective in the game glorifies the actions of Harris and Klebold. If it does, this can be pretty dangerous for some kids... Some of the comments in the news story tend to suggest that they are glorifying the murders. For example, the article stated that when someone is killed in the game, a dialogue box pops up stating "Another victory for the Trench Coat Mafia".
I would be against any effort to impose government censorship on this kind of thing, but the authors should have really thought about whether this was a good idea.
If you are going to download this game, you may want to do it soon. The article indicated that some of the content within the game may be in violation of a copyright.
Slashdot, where you get modded down as redundant for stating an opposing viewpoint... Independent thought anyone?
But never seems soon enough for a game about Columbine.
How, exactly, is a video game about it going to do anything other than glorify the massacre?
I like it.
Is it too soon for a Haulocaust video game? Seriously, it would promote dialogue and what-not...
I have NO idea what these people were thinking. Mass murder of children is NOT entertainment. Sheesh.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
That is pretty much the textbook definition of tasteless.
Wood Shavings!
- Godai
he wanted to create something profoundly unique and confrontational that would promote a real dialogue on the subject of school shootings.
I think what he wanted to do was generate some free promotion for himself, and he figured that school shootings would be a great way to get people to take a look at him. Instant noteriety.
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
My question is, when will I be able to buy a Flight 93 game, and choose to either play as the terrorists, the cabin crew, or the passengers?
And will they let us use blankets? Very useful on planes.
But, yes, the whole Columbine game concept is excessively sick and twisted, and I'm sure they'll sell lots of copies.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I think the real question, is does the game EVER need to be made, not if it is too soon. There are some people that just do not function well, in society.
I will give my personal guarantee that Jack will be all over this shit.
-30-
I would say the only thing profound is the creator's willingness to make a game for which he will either get sued for or possibly threatened/killed himself for making.
Remember last year when the JFK reloaded game was released? There was plenty of hubub about that, and in that case the actual event happened 50 years ago.
Really. What if someone made a game about the holocaust (and you play for the 'bad' team)? It's more than a matter of just how much time has passed, I'd say...
Jew Roundup? An RTS where you are a Nazi trying to gather up those pesky jews and get them to extermination camps before being over run?
Master. You are running a plantation before in the old south. You must get as much work out of your slaves and through selective breeding improve the quality of your stock?
The answer is YES it is too soon!!!!
I think right after our sun goes red giant would be a just about enough time.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
It's in the same boat as that "suicide bomber" flash game and the JFK game. The only thing that's interesting about any of these things is that the internet allows most anyone to create something and publish it. That's not a function of the games, but the ability for the creator to distribute. It's no different from someone's manifesto making it online, compared to the earlier method of sitting in a shoebox under the bed.
What about a Dahmer video game? Or how about you can pilot the plane into the WTC? Or WW2 game where you drop the bomb on Japan?
Shit man, some things you just don't do. Some things aren't fixed with time.
because you can't sell enough titles to make it profitable? yeah
because you'll get more negative press than possitive? maybe
because you'll get the story wrong? you'll do no better in 10 years
-Tim Louden
And just for once I would actually support Jack Thompson.
This is the sort of stuff that givers all gamers who quite like the way things are right now some serious headaches over what could become of their hobby.
...so that you can rape and torture eight year old girls in it? I mean, if you want to start a dialog about the dispicable acts performed by antisocial psychopaths, you really ought to get as much "discussion stimulating content" into it as possible. Perhaps a pre-level that involves power lawncare equipment and juvenile domestic animals would be a good addition as well (or, at the least, a FMV intro).
Murder is contrary to the laws of man and God. -- M-5 Computer, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3
I don't personally think there will ever be a time when it's "right" to make such a game.
But, free speech rights trump my personal sense of morality, dignity, whatever; so if they
want to make it, more power to 'em. I won't be buying it though, and I hope nobody else
does either.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
If the designer came out and said "I just thought it would be cool to shoot a bunch of kids at school" or "I just wanted to be famous and here's an easy way to do it" I'd respect that more than claiming it's only to promote dialogue.
That's horseshit, and if that's what he claims, then he's got no sack.
The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
<hat class="tinFoil">Who else would possibly have given them funding to make it?</hat>
Gaming site Kotaku "spoke" with Richard Castaldo, who was paralyzed from the chest down from the attack on Columbine, after he played the game in question. Link for the article.
The kotaku article will give you way more insight than any MSM report on the game (most of which won't even bother to d/l the thing).
90% of the naysayers here either have or will download the game and play it. ;)
To throw my 2 cents in, I don't think it's appropriate to make a game about a specific incident such as Columbine. Maybe it's splitting hairs, but I think it would have the same impact with or without the name Columbine attached to it.
Which is, very little.
It seems to me that "to create dialogue" is a very thin cover. I struggle to see what kind of productive dialogue that hasn't already been beaten to death repeatedly can come out of this game.
It's always too soon and never long enough for a game like this. What's next? Flight Sim 9/11 ?
What in the hell is wrong with people?
BTW -- Oddly appropriate slashdot fortune from the bottom of the page:
Murder is contrary to the laws of man and God. -- M-5 Computer, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3
Since each and every one of the comments posted as of this moment is against the idea, I thought that someone should defend the author. At the moment, that someone is me.
First of all, please put aside the idea that there is such thing as a universal sense of taste that this guy is violating. There is no such thing. For example someone might tell you that a joke about rape is never funny, while George Carlin has a joke he provides as a counterexample that gets good laughs: "I'll prove to you that rape is funny. Picture porky pig raping elmer fudd. Why do you think they call him porky?"
By the same token, I remember laughing about the joke about NASA meaning "need another seven astronauts". I was a kid at the time, and I know that doesn't necessarily prove anything because kids lack refinement, but I guess what I'm saying is that refinement is not necessarily a virtue.
Human often deal with difficult situations with humor. Have you ever been in such dire straits (whether physically or emotionally) that it made you laugh, albeit hysterically? Laughter can be a coping mechanism. Of course, from the screen shots, it doesn't appear that they were shooting for humor (pardon the pun, or not. It was unintentional.
The claim is that this game was intended to provoke thought and dialogue. The screenshots seem to back that up, although my primary thought was wondering if the author really believed that access to guns was the problem, since if you believe that, you're a bozo. Any asshole can steal a gun, and there are other weapons available... But let's look at this story. Even without people playing the game, the very issue is causing serious dialogue. This comment is proof.
Is it acceptable to write a book or make a movie about the events of Columbine, discussing the ramifications? If so, then making a video game is every bit as legitimate. It's just another kind of artwork.
Those of you who are not bothered by books and movies about it existing, yet are still claiming that the video game is inappropriate, should go drive off a cliff with any progeny of yours in the vehicle at the same time. You'll do the rest of us a favor by helping to clean the gene pool.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You can read the full interview with someone who asurvived that day at kotaku. His responses are quite interesting, and he says he has mixed feelings about the game.
I don't think the idea behind the game was to trivialize the shootings, but to comment on them. In other words, it's not trying to be entertainment, it's trying to be art.
Are you nuts? "Too Soon" ???? The headline implies that there will actually be a time when a game about Columbine would be appropriate.
Schmucks.
--------========+++Dont Feed The Lab Techs+++========--------
I mean, come on. Has there ever been a video game made after a tragedy?
'Can you bomb Hiroshima and end the war?'
That's not fun unless you're sick.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
Anyone who wanted to have a serious school shooting discussion would have found a better way to start the discussion than this.
Also, the headline. "Too soon for a Columbine videogame?" As though it will someday be something we can joke about?
Supporting someone who is PURE FUCKING EVIL on the one occasion upon which you happen to agree with them is self-defeating, and very very stupid. You have all the moral backbone of a jellyfish that sells crack cocaine to elementary school children.
Games are either a legitimate artform capable of addressing serious issues in our society, or they aren't. You can't have it both ways. If you think they are, then being willing to agree with someone who tried to ban this game makes you a hypocrite. If you think they aren't, then you're just an idiot. Either way, you're an ass.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Now that would make a good game
"The children will copy this game!"
"The children will think this behavior is acceptable!"
"The children will be numb to this sort of behavior and attitude!"
"Insert more unrelated bullshit excuses for lazy horrible parents."
Let the game come out, let it air the dirty laundry and serious underlying problems that give way to youth violence. Hiding and pretending it never happened or could never happen again will only yeild history repeating itself.
In regards to the children, where are the parents? What did the parents teach them? What did the parents instill in them? What do the parents do NOW with them? Start blaming who is responsible for the problem of kids out of control, prone to violence and hate, and lacking any tools and means of dealing with today's issues and problems for them. It is not any movie, it is not any video game, it is not the Internet. It is the P A R E N T S and their total failure, hold them accountable as they and they alone are the ONLY ones responsible for what they raised and how they raised it.
Yeah, it's in extremely poor taste, but they do have every right to make it.
I for one, wouldn't support Jack Thompson, even on this.
This "game" should not happen. End of story. I like the examples given by other readers here of other things people should NOT make games about. It's true that you could argue that a lot of games that recreate historic events could be considered offensive to some, but some things are just offensive to everyone. Some things are just simply wrong without blaming backlash on political correctness or some other made-up crutch of the politcos. I just don't want to see Jack Thompson, Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman or Tipper Gore waving this game in my face as an example of the way gaming is corrupting our youth.
No matter how [un]violent or [un]sexual you make a game, there will still be the same number of idiots out there who think it'd be cool to do what's in the game.
...Along with Halo, Ghost Recon, C&C Generals, or any other game where the point is to kill.
Also, there will be the same idiots no matter how much time has passed.
People who are disgusted by the idea of a game about mass murder probably won't buy it!
People who are alright with it will buy it, obviously.
Wouldn't it be nice if some kid who wanted to shoot up his school wasted all his time on this game, instead of doing it in real life?
But then, Jack + Hillary + Joe_L = 1st Amendment Annihilation
so I don't think it's a good idea to create a lot of publicity for it when there's a real possibility for them to ban (or restrict to require background check) "insensitive", "hate", or "violent" games.
Still, I wouldn't play it. Mainly because it's an RPG, and I find them boring. An FPS, maybe, but I don't see how could they make it long enough to be interesting. Maybe create some alternative reality where they go on a worldwide rampage tour...
It would never be made, but I would like an current, realistic political assassin game. First, let me make it perfectly clear that I have no intentions of killing or hurting anyone. But it would be sweet to (in a game) choose a goverment you work under (or free-lance) and have a choice of current government officials under opposing goverments that are your targets. You could go over and start grass roots movements or start a coup, or eventually sniper (or use various other methods) your target. Yearly you could download updates to make the government official list from multiple countries current.
Yes.
Oh, was this not a poll?
He'll be spinning in his grave.
But a lot of posts seem to claim it can't be done at all. But there are tons of games about some kind of tragedy, the first that come to mind are games about:
So, most likely there'll be a games about Colombine. And not only this relatively tame RPG, but also an FPS. And, given time, probably an 911 flightsim.
Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
It's not "too soon," this isn't about the amount of time that has passed. "Too soon" implies there will be a day when this is acceptable. This (and the other fictional games you speculate about) are just plain tasteless, regardless of the amount of time that has passed.
For example, even though it's been 2000 years, and I'm not a Christian, I would find a "Crucify Jesus" game tasteless.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
In other words, he's just a troll. We'd recognize him instantly if he posted here. (And mod his losing butt into the ground.)
Too bad internet gaming doesn't have /. moderation.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
the 1st amendment exists independently of the 2nd and you can look at other similar laws in western countries to prove this point. for the record, i support both amendments.
They cover each others "back", and if you attack one you will end up attacking both.
So, you're saying that in the game Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold are metaphors for the First and Second Amendments?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
There are many movies showing the horror of war. Maybe a videogame to denounce such a tragedy and to disgust people would be good. Make something in the lines of Manhunt, which will make people sick of violence and it may not be all bad.
I find it pretty entertaining to get your d**k sucked to improve your health then cap the bitch in the head afterwards (Grand theft auto) but this.... sick, i mean sick.
JFK Reloaded, anyone?
As tasteless as this really is (I for one wouldn't buy it), there's nothing to stop them from making it. Of course, there's always somebody looking to make a profit off of tragedy... just take a look at the documentary about the 9/11 Pennsylvania plane that's coming out.
I posted about this game elsewhere... in a nutshell, I think those who take time to play the game will be surprised at how nuanced it is. It really makes you think about the motivations behind the killings and the bullying atmosphere at Columbine, and what it is that pushed those kids over the edge when most kids who get bullied just get past it.
I find it totally shocking that the game author would use copyrighted images without seeking proper permission. Doesn't anyone take copyright seriously anymore?
(how to miss the point, #47)
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
The latter two you can do now, FS2004 pre WTC, still has the twin towers. Most any Combat FS allows for bombing runs. I have participated in an online event where over 100 sim pilots flew a mock Pearl Harbor attack, in which some survivors took part, held on the anniversary it was intented to honor those who fought and died on both sides.
The meaning is what matters, and I think this guy has about as much meaning in releasing this game as does the US honoring it's foreign [SIC] policy.
What really gets me are those "tinfoil hat types" who still swear no planes hit the buildings.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
Tom Fulp's "Pico's school" was considered pretty ground breaking back in the early days of Flash animation http://www.newgrounds.com/pico/pico.html
It is certainly inspired by Columbine.
Tom himself says:
1999 also saw the introduction of Pico's School, hailed by many as the pinnacle of Flash 3 "programming". I say that in quotes because Flash 3 didn't offer much in terms of programming - it didn't even support variables. I came up with a very complex work-around for tracking events and data, making Pico the most advanced Flash 3 game I am aware of.
It's very entertaining!
I'm not pro violence, but I will admit to playing the GTA games and I did enjoy them. That doesn't mean I'm going to repeat those actions in real life. What happens if we change the name and make it another sequel to GTA? GTA: Colorado City. Then it would be OK (ignoring the poor game play and graphics - no offense to the author)?
:)
He presented a topic of debate in an artistic way. Had he drawn a painting depicting the horrible events then people would praise him. But he's not a painter - so he did his painting on the computer. If you read his forums you'd find out that victims of this horrible event are not opposed to it. And if you read his forums then you would find plenty of discussion about the event. So it achieves what he was trying to do - get people to talk.
As an ancient slashdot proverb goes: "RTFA before you rant"
is this game moddable? I would like to see the issue compounded by 3rd party skin and blood mods, please.
Jesus said to his disciples: "If you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" - Luke 22:36
If the "designer" really wanted to create a dialog with this effort, the disingenuous little fu** would've put the players in the "boots" of the innocent children murdered.
The Columbine game will turn out exactly the same as Postal - much ado about a shitty game.
-gary cooper
It's gotten a bunch of people here to equate Columbine to 9/11, slavery, and the fucking Holocaust. Exaggerate much?
For the record, I'm intrigued by the idea of a Holocaust simulator. As long as you don't glorify the proceedings, it would be a great way to teach people about the banality of evil.
Rob
It's just kind of stupid to make a game based on a real-life massacre. This topic has already been exhausted in the year or 2 following the shootings. Remember Jon Katz with his daily updates on what he thought, and how nerds everywhere are now being harrassed? Yeah, me too. Right now it's just gratuitous, and he's getting the same response as he would be getting if he made a game where you're Hitler and you have to go around killing Jews. No more talking is going to go out about it. The creator is just viewed as an insensitive jerk.
Anyway, people should just chill out. He made a lame game in his own spare time using a click and create type game system. If it was any other topic the website would die out in obscurity, but since it got a couple of people's panties in a bunch, he got a newspaper article about it, and now a slashdot article. Basically, too much attention for something that's about the equivalent of a high school kid drawing violent sketches in the margins of his notebook pages. His website design sucks too.
Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
"a jellyfish that sells crack cocaine to elementary school children."
wow, that's something you don't see every day.
there is no need to sign your posts. this isn't usenet. your username is right there above your post. stop it.
Since we'll have a bunch of ./ers spouting off... might as well make room for someone who lived through the events the RPG depicts:
r vivor-talks-about-columbine-rpg-171966.php
" What did you think of it?
It probably sounds a bit odd for someone like me to say, but I appreciate the fact at least to some degree that something like this was made. I think that at least it gets people talikng about Columbine in a unique perspective, which is probably a good thing. But that being said there are a lot of things that are har to play or watch. And it seems to partially glamorize what happened. It shows a stark-contrast between fantasy and real life in an interesting way."
There is more of the interview at this site:
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/feature/columbine-su
That's what we learned on South Park... you can't joke about something until it's been 23 years!
How about one that goes like this:
One of them was seriously depressed. The other was almost certainly a psychopath. Shooting is not what they planned as the main event. The explosives did not go off as planned. It has nothing to do with videogames. Generally speaking, psychopaths and depressives should be kept away from firearms and explosives.
End of dialogue.
For some reason, people have this idea that they have the right to never have their feelings hurt. Well fuck them. If being offended by stuff is the worst thing that ever happens to you, then you've lived a charmed life.
I swear, when a people are so spoiled and safe that they can get upset about a VIDEOGAME, it's time for war. Spending a few hours every night in a shelter waiting for the tanks to stop shelling your neighbourhood is just the kind of thing people need to remind of how enormously trivial a videogame is. Seeing your neighbours being taken away to deathcamps is good too. I suppose going to a deathcamp yourself might serve as a reminder, but you would never really get a chance to implement that knowledge...
To summarize: it's just a videogame. Whoopitty shit. Find something serious to care about, like the fact that the USA is adopting fascism, or that Europe has become a power-keg for racially/religiously/economically driven violence. Those things matter. Videogames based on what was possibly the smallest massacre in human history do not.
911survivor http://www.selectparks.net/911survivor/ which I've never actually been able to get hold of but looked reasonably intelligent. This too looks reasonably intelligent, but perhaps not as well done... Is it too soon? Well personally I think it's too soon for the hoards of crappy unintelligent World War 2 murder simulators we have. Yea, it's sensationalist and it's trying to shock, but there might just be a point in there somewhere, even if it simply shows how shocking we find games about tragic events... better that than exploiting the deaths of millions in world war 2 for profit.
the 1st amendment exists independently of the 2nd
Only in terms of amendments - NOT in terms of inalienable human rights. By attacking freedom of speech, one ultimately attacks the right to keep and bear arms. And by attacking the right to keep and bear arms, one ultimately attacks freedom of speech. This is expandable to ALL natural rights - attack any one, you will end up attacking them all.
The sea changes color, but the sea does not change.
How many ./ posters that are saying "that's terrible, any time is too soon" or, "would you make a game about the holocost" play games themselves? Sure, most of us to. Any now many of them play the odd FPS here or there? Probably most of them again.
So why do you suddenly freak out over one game dipicting killing, when you play many other games that do the same? Because it's with children? So you have no problem mowing down endless droves of ADULTS but you draw the line when they are younger than 18?
While I do find the whole idea distrubing, I don't see a reason to stop it.
What happened at Columbine was a sad tragedy, though mostly a symptom of the underlying problems with our society. However, no matter how sad an occurance, I still can't see why we would need censorship about it. If the author of this game really wants to make such a game, he is free to do so. If someone wants to stand up and call the two kids, who commited these acts, heroes, so be it. Now, there may be some backlash, e.g. everyone calls you an asshole and no one is willing to associate with you, but then those are just the consequences of your actions.
Yup, this guy was stupid to make this game. Jack Thompson will probably be all over it, calling for censorship. Many normal people will also be so horrified by this game that they might agree with Thompson. The creator is probably going to face repercussions, like death threats and lack of job opportunities. I still support his right to make the game.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
Wasn't there a mod for Postal 2 or something that was Columbine themed?
Give me good ratings or I will close down the internet.
So, you're saying that in the game Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold are metaphors for the First and Second Amendments?
.. no.
Um
The sea changes color, but the sea does not change.
The game is made by a free program which basicly works like a HTML What-you-see-is-what-you-get editor. You rip some sprites (or make them, most don't make them) and basicly slap them onto the screen and add minor events. Any kid can make them and they're little more than basic Gameboy (original) quality.
So basicly this is a news story about some slag for 4chan or something awful making a crappy little game on free software. If this is news then I demand Slashdot covers a game a bully made of me 5-6 years ago which basicly revolved around everyone going "LOL HE'S FAT!! LOL!!!".
I like muppets.
Does that mean the amendments kill themselves?
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
If the Second Amendment was created to allow a revolution when things got bad, why did the Founding Fathers make treason illegal?
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Whoah! That's deep. I'm still trying to figure out what the Sharkasaurus is supposed to symbolize.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
People seem to be assuming that if a video game is made about the incident, then it is necessarily glamorizing it. Why is it that video games have this distinction, and not (for example) books or movies? It's certainly not too soon to write a book or movie about Columbine. What makes it too soon to make a video game about it? Are video games really so much different? And, if they are so different, why should they be protected?
...but is it art?
Why on earth would I be interested in those? Because its fascinating in a very morbid way. Hell....I'm Jewish, almost lost relatives in 9/11, and went through many of the torturous highschool situations that the columbine kids did. I would never do any of these things, but I think games based on them can be an interesting way of exploring the emotions involved in the events....on BOTH sides.
Everybody knows how horrible it must have felt for the families of victims...but I have to say I'd be interested in getting into the heads of the people who actually committed these atrocities.
It reminds me of a class I took in highschool called Nazi Mind. The class was a psychology class looking not at the victims of WWII, but of the Nazis, and what could lead people to do the horrible things they did. BTW over half the class was Jewish. The first day we were asked what we thought of the Nazis and people gave their standard responses about how they were evil and they should die. Then at the last day they repeated the question and most people said they understood why some of them did what they did and that they themselves might do the same thing.
Yeah....this game might touch a lot of nerves and might cause some emotional stress for the families of victims, but I say more power to the creator for making people talk about this. Could the game be a bit more tasteful? Perhaps. But would we be discussing it as much then?
Its funny...for my final project in a history class I did a presentation on why kids need to learn to respect each other to prevent something like Columbine from happening. I made 3 people in the class cry and one had to leave she was so upset because of how sad my presentation was. At the end of the class we had a discussion and one of the "popular jocks" said he just didn't get why they did what they did...even after I had explained everything. His girlfriend called him a heartless loser and proceeded to explain how years of tormet can drive a person to do that sort of thing. Then basically every other person in the class chimed in. The guy, to his credit then realized the truth of it and apologized for his comment and talked a bit about why he had been one of the people in the past tormenting "geeks" etc. So in essence, he was "converted".
And of course for all of this I got brought down to the school psychologist because they were concerned about the report I gave...even though I had gotten approval on the topic before I had even started on it, had said nothing but positive things etc. Yeah, I hit the roof when that happened....
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Idealouge.
The pro-gun lobby proclaims the intent of the Second Amendment based on the desires of the people who make a living manufacturing weapons and weapon accessories.
The gun-control lobby proclaims the intent of the Second Amendment based on their fears.
The Second Amendment is REALLY short.
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
The right to keep and bear arms is intrinsically tied to the necessity of having a well regulated militia to defend the nation.
The right to keep and bear arms does not exist independently of this need.
A militia is explicitly not a standing army, so the idea that this justifies limiting weapons to the military is just as bad as throwing out half of the SINGLE SENTENCE.
Everyone ahs the right to own and carry a weapon, but if they choose to weild that right then they are explicityl drafting themselves into the militia. They are explicitly putting themselves under the authority of local governments to be called out to perform duties to defend the nation.
That is what the Second Amendment says. Both active lobbies lie to everyone to promote their own agendas! Gee, who'da thunk it?
By featuring them on Slashdot we're only giving them more of that precious attention, IMHO.
You just got troll'd!
"The children will copy this game!"
"The children will think this behavior is acceptable!"
"The children will be numb to this sort of behavior and attitude!"
"Insert more unrelated bullshit excuses for lazy horrible parents."
Let the game come out, let it air the dirty laundry and serious underlying problems that give way to youth violence. Hiding and pretending it never happened or could never happen again will only yield history repeating itself.
In regards to the children, where are the parents? What did the parents teach them? What did the parents instill in them? What do the parents do NOW with them? Start blaming who is responsible for the problem of kids out of control, prone to violence and hate, and lacking any tools and means of dealing with today's issues and problems for them. It is not any movie, it is not any video game, it is not the Internet. It is the P A R E N T S and their total failure, hold them accountable as they and they alone are the ONLY ones responsible for what they raised and how they raised it.
Individual Responsibility (Located next to our Freedom and Liberty): R.I.P In America (I can sue and blame everything else everywhere else drawing focus away from the failure that is me!)
Rather than creating a freely downloadable game that tries to provoke insight into the tragedy at Columbine, the author should have sat on the couch and watched "Family Guy" reruns. As most of you know, that is such teh funney show. He wasted productive couch-sitting time, and I think that is the biggest tragedy yet. I'm glad most of you don't fall victim to creative urges like he did.
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
It's been done. Download KZ Manager Millenium (Windows, German).
[The game's creator] said he wanted to create something profoundly unique and confrontational that would promote a real dialogue on the subject of school shootings.
What? Are you kidding me?!? This guy isn't interested for a second in promoting a dialogue an anything except getting his name out in the press. He's using the ever-popular (and seriously flawed) assumption that there is no such thing as bad publicity.
OK, you want to talk about school shootings? That's easy. They are simply an extension of the workplace shootings we see from time to time. They are fueled by the same pressures and happen for the same reasons. People seem to think that just because they happen in school there is something different about them. But the school is the shooters workplace, right?
OK, dialogue is finished.
Must... think up... something... clever!
A "Columbine" tactical game would certainly be viable. Picture a first-person strategy game where you were a staff member of the school trying to evacuate as many as possible and/or trap and isolate the attackers. That would be an interesting intellectual challenge, offer some fascinating opportunities to examine ways to deal with such situations, etc.
This is merely a very very low-grade imitation of existing kill-em-all games (Postal, and some road-rage game from the UK) and offers nothing that is actually new, interesting or insightful.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
All the people judging this game without even playing it should at the very least read the article linked by the parent.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
[The game's creator] said he wanted to create something profoundly unique and confrontational that would promote a real dialogue on the subject of school shootings.
I guess all these artistic types must think that flame wars, misplaced blame, and name-calling constitute "real dialogue".
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
Mod me down, call me whatever, or slander my nation for fostering freedom of speach in my pointy little head (Canada, FYI)... If you dont like a creative work, wheather it be a game, a movie, a book or what have you, please feel free not to play, watch or read it, but what right do you have to prevent people from consuming that media for themselves (hint: none imo), so dont go DoSing websites, or burning books. However, you have rights to, and I encourage you to exercise them. If you feel that playing a Columbine game, or reading/ watch Micheal Moore, is bad, PLEASE PROTEST IT. However do so in a manner that does not hurt other people, try to be constructive while you bring your opinion to the attention of others. Playing as a bad guy, does not make you evil. Being evil makes you evil.
Indeed. I do think this game is in bad taste (Sacred cow? Maybe.) but hating the authors doesn't help anything. Hate only breeds hate.
Whoever thought of this is very sick & twisted and probably needs help. I can see the appeal to those who like "shooting" games...but this is going to be VERY controversial. Everyone saw the controversy surrounding "Flight 93" (the movie). How would you feel if a videogame came out where you flew the planes in to the buildings or something. Jees, people. Get a clue.
Ethernet (n): Device Used to Catch the Etherbunny
With the plethora of WW2 games out there, I've been waiting for one that allows you to play someone in a concentration camp, Jew, Homosexual, Roma, Japanese-American, it'd all be rather interesting. Also, just for shock value, I have to pitch an idea, "SimGhetto." oversee the building and day-to-day operations of your very own Auchwitz.
...I got nothing.
It's interesting. As I did a story on this on my blog 2 months ago, and it was rejected. Why wasn't this game worthy of slash-dotting 2 months ago, but suddenly, it is now? Why is that? Is it because slashdot only cars about stories done by big corporate media outlets?
On another note, I also broke the story on the whole "WGN video games are crack addicts"(I actually was the person who put the video on the web) a few months ago, yet the website that was slash-dotted actually took my story without giving me any credit.
Not fair.
I don't think you got what the author was saying. Its more of a "I may not agree with what your saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (please excuse my shotty quoting) typa comment. We should let this game be published regardless of its views or otherwise. We should tell the author/team how we feel about the game, and that it is a bad idea in general. What we shouldn't and can't do(according to the American constitution) is not allow the authors to express thier view even if we disagree with it.
I played through the game due to sheer morbid curiousity. Some of the dialogue between the anti-heros is interesting but the game is poorly made and not fun at all.
Don't bother.
A) It wasn't
B) If your revolution succeeds, that doesn't matter anyway.
Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
No offense but if you consider games like Call of Duty, Medal of Honor or Vietcong to be WW2 and Vietnam "simulators" you've got a very rosy view of war.
I have yet to play a WW2 game where you fight against Vichy French troops, to liberate a Nazi concentration camp, play as a Russian commissar and shoot Russian soldiers for retreating, to play as a civilian in London during the Nazi Blitz and I have yet to use any vehicle that isn't stuck on rails and doesn't use arcade-ish physics. (I'm looking at you Battlefield 1942/Vietnam.) Hell I have yet to play a WW2 game that lets me fight as a Nazi! Where are the Italian/Japanese/Nazi campaigns in these games?
When there are WW2/Vietnam games that lets me shoot civilians (intentionally or unintentionally) and not cause me to lose automatically, then we can talk about how video games that let you do 'evil' things should be censored (either by the creators/the ESRB/the government).
It's about taste.
On a larger scale, one could say the same about AOE and the liquidation of entire civilizations.
Shootin' aint shootin' if your killing cartoon adult men. Otherwise its baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaddddd.
Dictionary
taste: a property of a creative endeavor that allows it to provoke good thought for eventual commoditization as prolefeed.
Digg had this more than a week ago. The referenced article even had an interview with one of the victims, who played the game. If he can accept and play the game, others can.
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
I'm willing to bet that their real reason for making this is because they KNOW it will get attention. Dialogue about the event? Sorry, but there's been LOT's of dialogue about that event over the past several years.
Quite frankly, they're probably doing it for no other reason but to get some free press, get their "brand" out there in the "industry" and then later spin, "We apologize. We err'd. We would like everyone to know that it was not our intention to offend anyone in any way whatsoever, and we regret any inconvenience this may have caused."
Some people will still be pissed. Some will buy the apology. They'll go from being a nobody, to being a "somebody" (for how long that'll last, time will tell.)
I'd say the inflammatory tone is necessary. The problem doesn't really end with you avoiding these things, because there are more than enough cowards out there to convince governments that freedom of expression really isn't that important, when censorship and government regulation of the arts can win votes among the spoiled masses. It's necessary that we bitch-slap some sense into these people before they cause real harm, with legislations that are very hard to have struck-down.
Yeah, I hate people who say that.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Part of wishes to scream "FOUL!" about this - but then I sit back and ask myself, "Would I really mind a game being made about myself and my actions, as long as it taught people a lesson?" Then I'm forced to think about those that, on a day-to-day basis, need their asses kicked/killed.
I guess he got his killer instinct (Sorry, Nintendo) from my father's side of the family - they're all military brats/freaks/drill inctructors. As for me, I say no to wholesale killing. Yea, I'll go for singular-profit hits, but I'm a little beyond attempting genocide.
My take on my family's side of shit. Love it or leave it.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
This from a community that is usually quite happy to defend Grand Theft Auto or whatever game the media is attacking at the moment.
This is the standard 'you big group of independent people with different all sorts of different viewpoints are hypocrites' attack.
There is no monolithic slashdot community that subscribes to a single set of values and beliefs.
I'm 100% sure you can play as Germany in Close Combat 3 (and 90% sure you can do so in 1 & 2).
You definitely can play on the Axis side in original Close Combat. I've never played any of the other ones, but somewhere around I've still got the first one. One of the few decent products from Microsoft; I wonder where they bought it from.
A fun game, but not much of a "war simulator." In fact, none of those god-view RTS games are, much to the disappointment of actual military commanders everywhere, I'm sure. Of course, this is a direct result of the fact that the real experience isn't something that a whole lot of people would want to play (a real WWII command simulator would probably involve staring at a map table and listening to a lot of very confused radio broadcasts, and then spending 90% of your time trying to figure out what the hell is going on, and the other 10% reacting to it; you'd also do this for days on end without sleep).
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
What I do find somewhat uncomfortable is that you're always the "good guys" in America's Army, the enemy is always the terrorists no matter which side you're on.
You are aware who publishes America's Army, right?
I kinda bet that if Osama Bin Laden was in any position to make a FPS, the enemy would be "The Godless Infidels of the Great Satan" in every mission, too.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I made Doom maps of my high school long before Columbine. The damn place is still standing; the assistant principal is now the principal, and his head is still attached to his body. I don't see what the big deal is...
I won't play the game (not into RPGs, plus I don't like the idea of this game - it's creepy), but I'm not against it either. I think it's about time we start having some real dialogue on the subject.
What makes it OK for us to have a movie about people getting massacred on 9/11 but not OK to have a game about Columbine?
If the game is done right, it might actually give us some sort of insight as to why it happened. Or, more correctly, make us care about why it happened - everyone knows these kids were the "losers" of the school, and many just think "well everyone's been made fun of before", but maybe they'll really realize the extent when they see what series of events took them over the edge.
www.linuxpenguin.net
Err, no... Several problems with that:
#1) "The people" means every citizen in every other amendment. Why would it, in this one, simply mean "the militia?"
#2) This right is arguably the most solidly protected in the text. Compare "Shall make no law" (allowing governments like our current one to circumvent it using other dirty tricks like "executive orders") with the far more concrete "Shall not be infringed."
And this is the biggest problem I had with your position:
#3) Said 'militia' may be formed of the necessity to OPPOSE the government, not putting itself under the authority of it. This is what the drafters had done right before writing the thing!
Is it because this game reflects real events? Does the fact of reflecting actual events somehow make this more or less real than a game of GTA? Because it seems to make it a lot more offensive to everyone.
GTA never happend, Columbine did. So yeah, this is more real than GTA.
And yet we have WW2 and Vietnam simulators out there. They're some of the hottest selling games on the market, in fact. Not a lot of outrage on that front.
Yeah, we have simulators of broad events in history, which will never be anything close to what happend. Imagine there was a part in any WW2 game that involved you playing a nazi killing off Jews with nothing to stop you and no way for them to escape. Why not make sure that they all have the appropriate ID engraved on them so people can point out relatives just before you get to kill them off. Then you might amp the outrage over a WW2 game.
Columbine itself was a single, pinpoint event in history. There's no way generalize it since only one event occured. Why one would want to recreate that scene is beyond me. It was disturbing enough to know that Harris had transferred from my school to Columbine, I couldn't even imagine how creeped out people from Columbine would be if they saw that game.
Personally, I think the sooner our culture learns to let go of its sacred cows, the better. Because these sacred cows kill our perspective and inspire us to say and do things that are inconsistent with what are generally accepted as our principles.
Good idea, you should rant on about that in a KKK robe in the middle of Harlem saying something like you shouldn't be angry at me for wearing this. Let us know how that turns out.
I can't help but wonder what the public opinion would be like if this game didn't reference Columbine but only used the general theme and mechanics.
There are plenty of games out there that require the player to do equally violent things to in-game characters; why is it that those games are far more easy to swollow than one with a background story taken from reality?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Perhaps a better idea for a school based game would be to have 'sim high-school' where
the player could act as principal and make the decisions that affect the entire school.
(Focus school funding on one peer group and the others get pissed off, fail to stop overcrowding and watch the place turn into a pressure cooker. Have a zero tolerance policy towards fighting only, and watch the kids try and push each other over the edge instead. Enforce contra-flow systems to solve overcrowded corridors, and watch the ensuing traffic chaos).
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
I find it odd that you challenge the creation of the video game stating that it has been to early to be created. Alothough I believe that last week was release if the flight 77 movie that renacted the airplane hitting the pentagon. Last time I checked the 9-11 attack happened after the Colombine assult. So what now is more inappoporiate?
The text says that the right to keep and bear arms exists in order to ensure that a militia is available. Yes or no?
.. What part of the Constitution of the United States actively promotes the armed overthrow of the government defined by said Constitution? By your statement, the Second Amendment does! Incorrect. The Constitution of the United States provides peaceful means for the people to rewrite the Constitution, to replace the entire government leadership, and to provide direction for those who govern, none of which they had before the revolution.
The NRA and the gun lobby say that everyone has the right to keep and bear arms WITH NO RESTRICTIONS AT ALL. Yes or no?
The anti-gun lobby says that no one not in the military has the need (ignoring rights altogether) to keep and bear arms. Yes or no?
Why would, in the simple single sentence provided, the people refer to the militia? Who formed the milita? The people!
The statement made in the text of the amendment is that people must have the right to keep and bear weapons so that a militia is available to defend "the security of the free state". That is what is said. Nothing more, nothing less.
The right to keep and bear arms as provided in the text of the amendment is directly tied to serving as a defender of the nation. You have that right so that you can defend the nation. That is what is said. Everything else comes from lobbying and twisting of the text to serve special interests.
As for your third comment . .
The "security of a free state" is not a group of people holed up in a walled compound exchanging fire with federal agents. It is defending the nation's borders from those who would impose their government and restrictions upon that state.
There is nothing "sacred cow" about Columbine. It's a touchy issue because real, specific people were killed in the incident, which makes it more serious.
GTA is different because all the characters are fictional. You're playing a mob movie. In a Columbine game, you're playing a real-life tragedy.
What about the WW2 and Vietnam games? Frankly, I think they're almost as bad, and I don't play them. But I imagine those wars are far enough back that most players are able to abstract them. I'm not playing a *real* WW2 grunt, I'm playing Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan and every other war-movie stereotype.
And yes, I reserve my right to hate someone because of an idea they express. If we can't judge people based on what they say and do, what CAN we judge them on?
Hey Khyber, long time no chat :P
Anyhow, I have to agree with you on the "Love it or leave it.". But really, columbine wasn't that big of a event. There have been worse shootings, more people than 13 get killed alone in the States a DAY.
I suppose the only reason why Columbine (and even the term for this word) exists today, is because Bill Clinton braught it up on national television on that day (perhaps to draw attention away from the big bombings he was doing?).
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
This game, if real, is right up there with the two movies about 9/11 that are out/coming soon. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0475276/) No matter how good these movies may or may not be, it seems to me that they are only made to make somebody rich. The first time I sawa poster for the World Trade Center movie I wanted to break open the case and tear up the poster. I felt the same anger when I saw a Flight 93 trailer. After seeing it a few times (the trailer) I had to leave the theater while the trailer played. I've worked at theaters for a few years now, seeing lts of movies come and go only having been made to make money which is fine unless someone wants to cash in on a tragedy that is so recent. I know they were joking, but the post about South Park saying we should wait 23 years isn't too bad of an idea.
I'm curious, what would be more 'discusting' or more 'terrible'.
A game playing the soldiers liberating (the killing type liberation) Iraq
or...
A game playing the killers of Columbine
I feel that people in the States would be more outraged about the second game than the first one, thoughts on this?
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
The graphics blew me away in those screenshots. I think I am going to go buy a new video card TONIGHT so I can play this amazing game. The textures and models are just so real to life.
nothing
I think we're looking at the same point from only slightly opposite sides.
.. What part of the Constitution of the United States actively promotes the armed overthrow of the government defined by said Constitution? By your statement, the Second Amendment does! Incorrect. The Constitution of the United States provides peaceful means for the people to rewrite the Constitution, to replace the entire government leadership, and to provide direction for those who govern, none of which they had before the revolution.
The NRA and the gun lobby say that everyone has the right to keep and bear arms WITH NO RESTRICTIONS AT ALL. Yes or no?
The anti-gun lobby says that no one not in the military has the need (ignoring rights altogether) to keep and bear arms. Yes or no?
Yes to both questions, and I agree with you that both groups need to STFU. (At least that's what I think, from context,your position is. If not, it's mine).
The statement made in the text of the amendment is that people must have the right to keep and bear weapons so that a militia is available to defend "the security of the free state". That is what is said. Nothing more, nothing less.
Yes, but it says nothing about limiting defending that security only against foreign aggressors. See Below.
As for your third comment . .
Exactly. The Constitution provides for a great many things to keep the government in check. However, if the government was to try to sidestep those limitations, or ignore them outright (say, by cancelling elections in the face of a "crisis"), then what's left? The government becomes tyrannical, and there are more than a few writings by the framers of the document that deflate claims that a corrupt government is sacrosanct just because it's domestic. That's the eventuality that makes me disagree with your statement about militias "placing themselves under government control."
"Too soon for a columbine videogame?" Are you serious? Is there a time limit on garbage? To be honest i don't think such a game ever need to be written. Granted people should have the freedom to do this, but sometimes it isn't a question of fredoms. Good taste should be weighed in.
My inner self is ineffable, so don't eff with me.
The timing of this newspost actualy couldn't have been more on cue.
Last week some retarded, 18 year old, wannabee loser started shooting people in the city of Antwerp (Belgium) and killed two people (one of them 2 years old). Instead of blaming the malevolent actions on the lad himself, they started pointing fingers. Obviously games were immediately pointed at. Turns out they found GTA installed on his computer...
News papers later on: "Van Themsche speelde videospel na" (in English "Van Themsche (the murderer) followed a videogame". One of the reasons they had for blaming it on GTA was the fact that (hold on) you have to buy a gun in GTA prior to shootouts, the killer apparantly did the same. This relationship was enough to put the journalists in high gear and start blaming the known games: Doom, Counterstrike, Quake and GTA. Let's blame Need for Speed for speeding shall we ?
Now back on topic. I like the idea of making a game about the columbine massacre as a statement in the discussion. I think every gamer sees the humor in the project and what it is trying to say. Obviously it is not their intention of glorifying the actions of the killers, only to point out the ridiculousness of the crusade against videogames. Its people that pull triggers, not game designers. A violent person might as well get inspired by a violent movie, book, picture,
To cut it short: this scapegoating has to stop. Teens that lose it and have a shootout are a society problem. Its not something that can be solved by outlawing everything that could remotely be dangerous. We could start outlawing garden equipment, because most of it can be used to copy the behaviour of medieval lynchmobs
In Soviet Russia elephant rides you!
My first thought upon reading the title was a bit of resentment. I thought to myself, "This guy must be pretty cold to try to make money off the outrage effect."
Reading the description and article, I see that he's trying to spark dialogue and is offering the game for free. He wants to create intelligent discussion rather than make a profit.
Does that make it ok? For a moment let's look at this from an abstract view, seperate from this specific case. Should intentions really be a major deciding factor in judgement of the action?
And on a side note... this game involves a specific violent event, rather than a broad and fictional scenario like a war, or a make-believe city. The players of say Brothers in Arms, or Grand Theft Auto, do not feel as though they are killing people. They are simply progressing through a game, looking to achieve goals, and overcome a challenge. Take away the bullets and use paintballs instead, the player doesn't care. But then you'd have to explain why there's paintballs in the guns at Omaha beach. There's only so much suspension of belief the players will sustain before they grow annoyed. You'd have to recreate an entirely new setting around the paintballs and paint artillery guns, and why everybody decided to come out to the beach in a big group for a paintball fight. Say they're bullets and you're in WWII, and you've got a simple setting to understand.
I shoot my best friend in an online game. I didn't have fun because I got to live a fantasy of killing a loved one. I was playing a game with him and I scored a point. That's what is actually happening here.
A game set around Columbine is considerably different since the intention is not scoring "points" or making it towards a goal. It's to try to live out the killing of actual people while being aware of the moral connotation.
Gamers can blow chunks off people all day long. Set them in front of a car accident and they'd be just as prone to being sickened. It's not violence, it's a game.
Why not just make a pedophile game where you stalk kids in the playground and drag them into the lake to rape and drown them.
fucking fuckhead is all he is.
little shit.
Yes it is fine to hate some things. It is fine to NOT tolerate some things.
It is fine to hate Nazi ideology.
It is okay to not tolerate people bringing Neo-Nazi propaganda into your home.
What is wrong is when you break the law. What is wrong is when the government bans ideas, even ugly ones.
If the government was going to arrest the authors of the game than I would say that was wrong.
For me to say "you should have never created that game, that game is evil, I will not allow that game on my system and I will never buy ANYTHING you write in the future." That is freedom of speech. That hate breeds hate is crap. Sometimes some things are so bad that you have to get angry and yell from the roof tops, "THIS IS WRONG"!
That is what Freedom of Speech is all about. It isn't the freedom from judgment. It is the freedom from going to jail for speaking. People seem to get that confused all the time. It isn't the freedom for you to say what every you want with out any repercussions. It is the freedom to say what you want and not go to jail for it.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
It's ALWAYS the right time for free speech. ALWAYS. Without exception. It doesn't matter whether it's a time of war, tragedy, or whatever else. Free speech is an end in itself. It's people saying the most vile, wrong-headed things imaginable that keep the boundaries of social oppression from falling on those of us with genuinely important, yet contraversial, things to say.
"..play as a Russian commissar and shoot Russian soldiers for retreating, to play as a civilian in London during the Nazi Blitz and I have yet to use any vehicle that isn't stuck on rails and doesn't use arcade-ish physics."
Did you actually play Call Of Duty? You play as a russian with "commissars" forcing you to advanced against tanks while you hold a rifle or you ARE shot.
Then there is the mission where you are driving Russian Tanks through the woods with full control and realistic physics?!?
And not to mention the games where you CAN fight as a Nazi, do you actualy play the games you are complaining about?
I'm not real sure if an RPG was the ideal format for this game.
"Hold on! Don't attack, my ATB Gauge is still filling.....!"
The difference, to me, is that it sounds like an amazingly stupid idea for a game. Too soon for a game like this? I can't believe anyone would think that a game like this should exist.
Yeah, I have no problem with GTA....it's fiction. I have no problem with WWII games. They just use the weapons and vehicles of that era. You are shooting and others are shooting at you. A lot of us won't experience war first hand...it allows us to have that experience. Besides, as kids we all played some made up scenario where we are shooting at each other. Whether it be playing with tranformers/gi joe or having nerf weapons.
You may try to use my words against me and say this game allows us to experience something that we otherwise wouldn't have...maybe you'd have a point. But it is a stupid scenario. Do you play a potential victim and try to survive? Do you play the attackers and kill innocent children cowering before you? What a stupid concept for a game. It angers me that they would make something that stupid. It won't be fun. It is just people trying to find a way to make a buck.
I am all for them having every right to make this game. But I also have the freedom not to buy the game and hope they fail.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
that botheres the whinging little "I have a right not to be offended" pussies...
But in this case, I think he would have been more belivable about wanting to "get people talking" if you didn't have to fight your way through DOOM after shooting yourself in the library.
That's kind of silly. Maybe he did it for an emotional wind-down after the "endgame" slideshow of the two kids growing up?
Good point. Roger Ebert is basically begging the industry to think of itself that way.
How many of us saw this article and had an extremely specific idea of what the resulting game would probably be like? That's a measure, I think, of just how limited the range of games is at this point. If the comparison was to literature, games right now are basically along the lines of a pre-teen or teen series like the "Sweet Valley High" books. The more natural comparison would be to movies in terms of production costs and the process of producing the final work of art -- and even next to Hollywood movies, video games are tremendously narrow in their ambitions. Holy cow. I'm thinking about it, and movies like "Poseidon," the remake of "The Poseidon Adventure," start to look reasonably creative by comparison. If someone came out with a game in that setting, we'd think they were breaking the dang mold!
Just about the only area where games are transcending those limitations is in MMORPGs, where they're more of a social experiment -- and how moving, exactly, is a leveling-up model? How much does it tell us about the human condition when a guild goes mafia and requires protection money to get wood under someone's badly-balanced economic model?
Did anyone have, at first blush, the idea that this Columbine game might really startle us in any way other than by being so crass and exploitive it made us cringe? Seriously -- it's almost inconceivable. Whereas I anticipated Art Spiegelman's book about 9/11 because it could've really been... whatever, "moving." And even considering it a minor disappointment, I know his intentions were honorable.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.