Slashdot Mirror
Slamdance Festival Loses More Entrants
In yet more displays of solidarity with the creator of Super Columbine Massacre RPG, additional Slamdance finalists have withdrawn. The incredibly creative Toblo, as well as the titles Once Upon a Time and Everyday Shooter have taken themselves out of consideration in protest of the Columbine game's removal from the competition. Only eight of the original 14 finalists are still in the competition, with several of those having gotten together to write a letter of protest to the contest's organizers. Danny Leddonne, creator of the Columbine title, has spoken with Ars Technica and Next Gen in recent days, and touches on both his controversial title and the hoopla that now surrounds it. Update: 01/10 20:21 GMT by Z : It doesn't end. Slamdance has now lost a sponsor over this.
The smart thing to do is enter even more controversial titles. I'm sure Swinging Dictators of The Gallows would be a smashing hit. :P
Now how are we going to officially recognize games with lousy graphics and heavyhanded political and social commentary?
USC Interactive Media Division Withdraws Slamdance Sponsorship
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
It seems to me that anyone who thinks Slamdance made an idiotic decision ought to be contacting the producers of the seven games left in the competition (list is at the Slamdance website, and ask them why they haven't pulled out yet. The strongest comment on this sort of behavior will be made if they have NO games left in the competition this year.
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
Super Slamdance Massacre RPG! will be my next game depicting the fall of Slamdance festival(loss of sponsors and finalists). I hope I get it finished before next year's festival.
Right now, it really sucks to be Slamdance
Sponsors were threatening to pull out because the game was included.
Now game makers and other sponsors are pulling out because the game was excluded.
I'm guessing that Slamdance is wishing they had never suggested that Danny Leddonne submit his Columbine game.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
As long as you have fortune 500-1000 brand corporate sponsors in these "festivals", how does the content displayed provide "cutting edge", "provocative", and my favorite "innovative" impressions of an artists work? To me it's no different than going to a car show booth and seing "johnson and johnson" or "duncan hines" scrawled all over the dashboard.
Check the Alphabet News channels, the "journalism" and Nation-wide papers, the Pop music scene, the comic strips (my God!) and blogs/vlogs/fake blogs.
People, like me and you, will follow whatever generates traffic/page hits. We go to popular websites (cough myspace cough) because "everyone else" is doing it.
It's a weird community thing. We like feeling community, even if we find perverse/corrupt/strange/bad/evil ways of obtaining it.
My hope is that all the backers pull out untill we know who it was that put in the preassure.
I admit that I was defending the SlamDance people before, however my views are starting to waver (the biggest hit was from the blog post you linked to). It looks like they refuse to give any real reason, even to other sponsers, though it still could just them knowing that if they say "Well **** major contributor said they would walk if we didn't pull the game", that the exact same contributor WOULD walk for being publicly shamed. Kinda a bummer of a situation, admitedly it is probably their own fault for not sticking to their morals in the first place (unless the sponser(s) were responsible for enough of the $$ involved to make SlamDance fall apart right then and there).
Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
It's hard for me to jump up and say, "Yeah! Way to go!" at the so-called honorable actions of other games pulling out of the Festival. Sure, it was stupid of Slamdance to allow SCRPG to enter only to disqualify them at the end. It's like allowing a drug using, girl-gone-wild type into a Miss America pagent only to disqualify her later because she's a drug using, girl-gone-wild type.
Er... wait... what?
Seriously, although I am not for disqualifying the SCRPG, how would you feel about a new FPS entering the contest called Maryland Sniper? Remember the guy who was sniping innocent people coming out of the parking lot or attempting to use a gas pump? Would that be an acceptable entry as well?
I mean, look, after all the WWII and Iraq Desert conflict style games that are out, let's face it, this SCRPG is not much different. Anyway you look at it, the fundamentals are this, one group of people waged war against another, took lethal action, and tragedy ensued.
So at what point does one feel that a violent video game has crossed the line? Grand Theft Auto, a game where the player steals cars, kills hookers (Vice City) and pretends to be a stereotyped Uncle Tom gangster (San Andreas), has pretty much been accepted as gaming norm. Ironically enough, brain drained politicians felt the hot coffee mod where two 3D animated sprites humping one another was far worse than shooting a prostitute in the gut, stepping on her face, stealing a car and running over pedestrians.
And what constitutes the 'line being crossed' scenario? It seems in this case, the "too soon?" cliche is what crosses the line, although that argument gets shot to hell when Iraq War games hit the shelves three years after the conflict began. It seems to me there is no line when it comes to video game violence. There is only pushing the envelope by displaying contextual scenarios and situations that happen to be violent. For example, a game where I can, with graphic results, shoot a hooker in the face, no problem, but if I bring her up to my virtual apartment and, with graphic results, dry hump her, there's a problem with that. If I shoot her in the face afterwards, serious, serious problems, but only because I dry humped her first.
See? It's baseless. There is no line. There is only the ability of players to understand the level of realism they are simulating. This is obviously just Slamdance making a really dumb decision at a very poor time. If they would have refused the game in the getgo, well, then they'd have to come up with a pretty good reason why and I think they didn't feel like doing so as it might impede on their slamdanciness, so to speak.
Here's a question: What if this were called Super Columbine Simulator, instead of RPG? Too Soon?
The interview of the game developer is pretty funny. He sounds like a freshman humanities 101 paper using phrases like
and gems like:
Sadly being kicked out of Slamdance is going to give this guy far more press than he deserves. No, not because he created something controversial.. but because he created a crappy game with no subtlety and just expected everyone to accept that "all forms of art can be valid tools for societal exploration".
Here's a clue to this guy. If you want your "art" to be accepted as a "valid tool for societal exploration", you just might want to create something that doesn't suck monkey-dick. Then that whole "it's art and changing peoples opinions of what a game is" thing might have a bit more validity.
AccountKiller
Virtual Car Accident - Engineer the most violent and destructive car accident possible in 3-D!
We used to call that game Burnout.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
So, here's the one guy on /. who disagrees with the groupthink that maybe this Columbine game was a bad idea, and he gets modded down. How are any of his suggestions trolls? They are similar in theme to the Columbine RPG, yet no one would make them.
And, don't give me this slippery slope bullshit, this is a commercial endevor, not the government.
According to this, there might not have been a sponsor-threat:h tml
http://www.watercoolergames.org/archives/000718.s
I felt the same way for a while, and still feel that if they disapprove of a specific game they have every right not to accept it as an entrant.
But this is not what they're doing. The judges accepted the game. They played it and agreed that it was permissable. The reason for it beingejected seems to be for all the wrong reasons - groups who have not played the game, and implictely agreed not to interfere objected to it and had it removed. This changes the festival from an avant garde independent games and films event to a watered down corporate run promotion.
Now only half the original entrants remain. This whole thing is going to seriously hurt whatever reputation slamdance had and hoped to have in the future.
...Roll over
And it looks like we're down to 7.. Nick Montfort's Book and Volume is no longer listed with a brief statement here.
The baby-gathering game doesn't really have much precedent or comment on reality-- unless there's an associated news-story I'm missing. Gangbanging Retards needs more fleshing-out to become a similar type idea. There's no conflict. VCA, as others have mentioned, has been done. The last two could be made into a similar style of game, I suppose.
All in all, the GPP's "suggestions" give the idea that they either don't understand or don't appreciate the "commentary" angle of SCMRPG, but they did nothing to frame their argument by discounting these legitimate facets of the game (legitimate as perceived and commented-upon by other posters, writers, etc.), instead presenting counterarguments that completely overlook this part, so the comment comes off as underinformed, underexplained, or a troll.
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
By any chance, would you like to buy a large, red bridge in Northern California?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yeah, I know. What really gets me is that the same force is alive and well in art. I mean, if this looks like two humans on a beach, then I'm Yul Brynner.
Why don't you just admit that you don't get it, and save yourself the time of making such an ignorant statement?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"Hahaa" To Slamdance for losing its credibility for fear of a frivolous lawsuit.
Previewing comments are for sissies!
Just because you don't like the game, it doesn't mean that it hasn't made people think. "Monkey-dick" is just your perception but the game made you think. So it was a valid tool for societal exploration.
Is Pollock Jackson less of an artist than Hieronymus Bosch or than Botticelli?
The "Freshman humanities 101" reference makes you sound like you're a condescending jerk, but the "monkey-dick" comment was pretty funny.
I've got an original copy of Custers Revenge. I just thought, "Man, what a screwed up game". But now I know I'll end up thinking about it during a meeting, and kicking around the idea of it as art in comparison with Super Columbine.
riding round the world on an old motorcycle
Why don't you just admit that you don't get it, and save yourself the time of making such an ignorant statement?
The emperor has no clothes.
AccountKiller
The interview of the game developer is pretty funny. He sounds like a freshman humanities 101 paper using phrases like
"but for me it helps to inform one of the core ideas of the game: a criticism of the conventions of gaming in part to critique the limitations games currently have to deal with regards to genuine issues."
and gems like:
"It was a courageous, progressive gesture because it suggested that maybe gaming could be growing up a bit and face the music that all forms of art can be valid tools for societal exploration"
Sadly being kicked out of Slamdance is going to give this guy far more press than he deserves. No, not because he created something controversial.. but because he created a crappy game with no subtlety and just expected everyone to accept that "all forms of art can be valid tools for societal exploration".
Here's a clue to this guy. If you want your "art" to be accepted as a "valid tool for societal exploration", you just might want to create something that doesn't suck monkey-dick. Then that whole "it's art and changing peoples opinions of what a game is" thing might have a bit more validity. "Hitler agrees. Let's burn all the games we don't approve of."
I think that was meant to be "equating" not "equivocating".
An astute editor should have corrected it if it was not what was said, replaced it using square brackets to denote a substitution, or otherwise noted the error. As it stands, it isn't clear whether it is the interviewer's error or the interviewee trying to importantalize his statementarisms by inflaterizing his syllabilical count.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Just because you don't like the game, it doesn't mean that it hasn't made people think. "Monkey-dick" is just your perception but the game made you think.
What a load of bullshit. You know what it made me think? It made me think "Why the hell did the idiots at slamdance ever think this junk was worth considering for a competition?"
Sheesh. Making someone think is hardly worthy of note.
Is Pollock Jackson less of an artist than Hieronymus Bosch or than Botticelli?
I don't know what being more, or less of an artist means. I do know what shitty art is. SCMRPG is shitty art.
The "Freshman humanities 101" reference makes you sound like you're a condescending jerk
No, I just think that flowering something up with specialized type language doesn't make it a more educated or accurate point of view. If you've ever read anything in the humanities, a lot of it is mindless garbage disguised with smart sounding words to make it sound like the author is saying something important.
But now I know I'll end up thinking about it during a meeting, and kicking around the idea of it as art in comparison with Super Columbine.
Your problem is you're throwing art into some special category that's above reproach. Can "Custers Revenge" be considered art? Sure, why not? But that doesn't mean it has anything interesting to say, says it in an interesting way, or is any more relevant than the art created by a 4 year old.
AccountKiller
There was a physics simulator that did that with a skeletally-animated ragdoll stick figure a year or two back. Also one that involved the guy falling down a flight of stairs.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
A pity there aren't any reports of new groups coming forward to offer their sponsorship dollars on the condition that SCMRPG be reinstated to the competition.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Stair dismount is the one i recall.
They also had a truck dismount one where a truck was smashing into a wall.
Both can be found here:
http://jet.ro/dismount/
Tonights forecast: Dark. Continued dark throughout most of the evening, with some widely-scattered light towards morning
You know what it made me think? It made me think "Why the hell did the idiots at slamdance ever think this junk was worth considering for a competition?"
Look how worked up you are about it. It's more than you thinking "why was this worth consideration"?
Art isn't easily defined. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make any difference.
I've been in plenty of bands and I never think of them as "art" even if other people do. It's just something fun. A lot of people think of bands I'm in as "shitty art". I think of the Star Trek punk rock band as an on-stage drinking contest with a sarcastic take on 1980s punk rock show violence.
I've also got a tattoo of art drawn by a 4-year-old, so my point obviously isn't valid.
riding round the world on an old motorcycle
There's no subtle emotion, no master grand image, no deep lessons, no delving into the minds murderous teenagers. There's nothing to "get." Really. Sometimes monkey poo is just that - monkey poo.
And what I'm saying is that art made out of poop is still art, even if it's poop. It doesn't have to be great art to be art; any art is worthy of protection just as any other expression that doesn't hurt anyone is.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Look how worked up you are about it. It's more than you thinking "why was this worth consideration"?
I get pissed off at the moronic government of George W Bush too. Is he now "good art"? You seem to think I really care about SCMRPG. What pissed me off is the people trying to fool other people by dangling the word "art" in front of something, hynotizing them until their brains shut off. It has nothing to do with SCMRPG, and everything to do with the people who're in the "art above all" camp.
Art isn't easily defined. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make any difference.
I don't care if it's "art" or not. Call it art, fine. Say it's not, fine. All I know is that it's a poor game.
My problem with the whole "art" defense is that it becomes the ultimate shield for some people. Say to such a person you think it sucks, and they come back with "Ohh.. well you just don't UNDERSTAND IT!" As if the given is that it's "art" and if you don't respect it in some way, you've "missed the point".
AccountKiller
For some of the developers who's games were nominated for the finals, this was a dream come true. Now the best they can hope out of the situation is to make a statement by withdrawing...
It doesn't have to be great art to be art; any art is worthy of protection just as any other expression that doesn't hurt anyone is
And I don't have any problem with the game existing, with someone entering it in a competition, etc. What I do have a problem with is someone calling garbage a rose. This game is garbage, it doesn't convey anything of value. I'm not even really offended by it, I just think it's a bad game that should have been remained obscure and unknown. I won't get into the "is it art" debate, as I think that's a meaningless label.
AccountKiller
Vellmont pretty much nailed it. The "line" is a red herring. The problem here is a double-standard with other media. Why is it okay to have controversial movies at these festivals, but not controversial games?
I have no mixed feelings about this at all. The double-standard isn't acceptable.
Finally someone who has played the Columbine RPG
t w=rss.index
Clive Thompson over at Wired wrote an article entitled "I, Columbine Killer"
http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,72491-0.html?
You had me at merlot