Game About Killing Poachers Vies For Top Prize In Microsoft Student Tech Contest

theodp writes: GeekWire reports on a group of students from Nepal who will be competing for the $50K top prize in Microsoft's Imagine Cup student tech contest with a first-person shooter in which players track down and kill poachers. "Until and unless the player kills all the poachers," reads the description for Defend Your Territory, "he/she cannot progress to next level. To make the game more interesting, there will be lots of weapons and vehicles unlock." So, is this the inspiration Google needs to take their anti-poaching drone program to the next level?

Comments

Ever killed a poacher?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have. It's fun. He was there on his knees in his tattered clothes, all trembling and mumbling and pleading for his life "have mercy have mercy I have a family to feed, I can't find a job, they've all been taken by foreigners, they don't even make me flip burgers because they say I'm too old. I have two little kids! please!". Of course I didn't care: I shot him just under the throat, cut off the head, skinned the body and cut it to pieces for the forest animals, then had the head stuff and mounted. I had it delivered to his family so he could be near them forever. :)

Re:Ever killed a poacher?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because poaching is the only solution in the whole world... Dumbass.

Since I have an education and I have a lot of work experience, "whatever it takes" means looking for a job eight hours a day, every day, until I find one. Perhaps those people should think about such things before deciding to raise a family.

Re:Ever killed a poacher?

[Opportunist]

Funny. Have you noticed that you could replace "poacher" with "burglar" and it would just work out, too?

With maybe the difference that you wouldn't be modded insightful but flamebait, because it's A-OK to blow someone's guts out over your stereo rather than some rhino horns.

Re:Ever killed a poacher?

[DarkOx]

it's A-OK to blow someone's guts out over your stereo rather than some rhino horns.

Burglary is a very specific crime. In most places. It usually requires breaking and entering a residence at night. The reason its more serious than theft or simple B&E is society has a strong interest in people feeling safe in their own homes. People are likely to be home at night so there is greater danger. Those are legal reasons.

The practical ones are:
The burglar may decide to hurt or kill you and your family so that he isn't reported and described to the police. As you are not the one committing the crime and did not create the situation I think you are well justified in removing the danger, without waiting around to see what he or she is going to do. Sorry I don't see any moral or ethical problem with a shoot first ask questions later approach to someone who has invaded your home.

Re:Ever killed a poacher?

[DarkOx]

I take you point but we there is a very real and tangible difference between someone taking a deer out of season in the north woods of Minnesota and hunting a Rhino, Elephant or endangered Cat. Its entirely possible the first was done by mistake, ignorance of the hunting season etc, or the person really is trying to put some food on the table. I the Rhino case I will extend this benefit of doubt to say an aboriginal hunter using his peoples traditional tools etc. It strains credibility on the other hand to suggest the guys cruising the savanna in Jeeps with high power rifles, scopes, bait, chainsaws to dismember the corpses don't know exactly what they are doing. Its also hard to imagine they don't have at least some other options, given the found the money to acquire the vehicles, chainsaws, fuel, expensive weapons etc.

I think at some point we may have to recalibrate or moral compass a little bit to point somewhere besides humans are always the most important. There are 8.5 Billion of us. Its hard to get more commodity than that. As individuals we are all important to someone, but possibly near worthless to the world as a whole and perhaps even a detriment. So what should the collective we do when faced with someone who is bent on destroying something rare and possibly irreplaceable. Should we allow them to deprive the rest of us now and forever on an entire species like the black rhino? These people don't fear prison they know they either won't be caught or corruption will soon have them out. I am not saying its a simple calculation; certainly condoning or even looking the other way with regard to vigilantism is a slippery slope and its easy to imaging that path leading to all kinds of horrors or abuses but blindly accepting a philosophy of human life is fundamentally and always more important may not be right either.

Re:Ever killed a poacher?

[Opportunist]

And why is the life of some random Joe supposedly more important to me than the life of some random, say, rhino? I know neither, and there are more Joes about than rhinos, so technically the loss of a rhino would be more of a loss, due to scarcity.

Or so the laws of supply and demand tell me.

I'm all for "shoot first, ask later", but why does it apply to burglars but when it's applied to poachers it's suddenly causing some moral bullshit?

Re:Ever killed a poacher?

[DNS-and-BIND]

Gosh, better not break into people's houses and rob them, then. There's a thought! Or at least do it somewhere else. My, this whole "people voting for the laws they want" thing is hard to understand, isn't it? We would all be much better off if the Council of Alphas made decisions for us, since they're more intelligent and therefore much less likely to make bad choices. (chuckle)

Re:Ever killed a poacher?

[DNS-and-BIND]

Because there's a wide, yawning gulf between breaking into an occupied home at night and breaking the fish & game laws? Seriously, people aren't aware of this? There are hundreds of years of precedent. You gotta crack open a book one of these days and learn about your own culture. "Reason is the life of the law," and all that. Here's a good place to start. Remember, education is always a good thing. Then, you can learn the answer to your question. You're welcome in advance.

Re: Ever killed a poacher?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then he shouldn't have gotten her pregnant and he'll destroy another life. Too bad.

I'm sick of you fucking entitled sacks of shit who think that you can do whatever you want without taking on responsibility.

As long as there is demand

[invictusvoyd]

There will be supply . Can't kill all the poachers . Kill the demand .

Re:No chance of winning

[N1AK]

If 'politically correct' means not wanting to award a prize to a game encouraging vigilante, or state sponsored, murder of low level minor criminals then I suppose that's what you should call it, personally I prefer 'not being a dick'.

Just because poaching is a major issue doesn't mean that routinely killing poachers is the best answer. We don't encourage people to stalk and kill murderers, rapists etc.

Re:No chance of winning

[guises]

We don't encourage people to stalk and kill murderers, rapists etc.

... Well, we make games about it. And movies. And books, and comic books, and we plaster the faces of our fictional vigilantes all over billboards and buses and soft drink cups and onto the toys that our children play with.

I mean, we don't encourage it. ::wink:: But yeah, we encourage it.

Re:No chance of winning

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't encourage people to stalk and kill murderers, rapists etc.

It would be better if you got to play as a lion/hyena/rhino. More original and less morally ambivalent.

We don't encourage people to stalk and kill murderers, rapists etc.

No, we don't.

That's still every Batman game.

Batman/comic book industry generally had a no kill rule. That's a very weak example of a dark vigilante.

Wouldn't be much of a batarang if it just stuck in the dudes.