Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Too Soon For A Columbine Videogame?

Posted by Zonk on Tue May 16, 2006 03:36 PM
from the touchy-subject dept.
Entertainment Games News
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.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Cranky Editorials About Videogames 205 comments
GamePolitics has a roundup of some game-related weekend editorials. Some of them are awful cranky and not terribly well thought-out. From the Peoria Journal-Star: "Many of my college students... seem to be less familiar with books than earlier generations. In part, you can blame the influence of video games in pre-teens' lives. If the choice is 'Moby Dick' or Playstation, I think we know which one a kid will pick... In other words, good writing means good salaries. Think about that the next time you choose between taking your kid to the video store or the library..." Another piece rails against the Columbine videogame, while papers in Louisiana are duking it out over the recently passed videogame legislation.
[+] 'Columbine RPG' Creator Discusses the Dawson Shooting 127 comments
Back in May, Brian Crecente of Kotaku and the Rocky Mountain News had a chat with the maker of the 'Columbine RPG'. Today, he talks again with game-maker Danny LeDonne about possible connections between his game and the Dawson shooting. From the article: "My very first reaction, frankly, was to head to my toilet bowl and throw up. I knew what was in the works and I knew the next week would be spent keeping my head above water while the press tried to bury me with guilt-laden questions and implications of complicity in murder. I also knew that this was no time to fold or get weak-kneed. I made a game. I believed in it. Now it was time to defend it. No one would do that except me."
[+] What We Owe the Columbine RPG 66 comments
Gamaustra's Soapbox this week touches on the lessons learned from Slamgate and the Super Columbine Massacre RPG!. Author Patrick Dugan explores the ways in which SCMRPG challenged the media and gamers alike to think about what the medium of games is all about. Covered by everyone from Newsweek to Game Informer, it opened the eyes of non-gamers to the possibilities of the format and forced gamers to rethink their assumptions. "Game Informer's benchmark of game-specialized print journalism may very well inspire other major publications to follow suit with their own coverage, and in the capacity of Game Informer's readership, paints a symbol of solidarity. The twelve year old kid who thinks Gears of War is the best thing going can take a look at these graphics, popular before his birth, and get a sense that his beloved past-time is part of something greater, something he can defend to non-gamers as being inherently valuable." This issue is also explored in the final part of N'Gai Croal's interview with Jamil Moledina, which we talked about last week.
[+] On the Advent of Controversial Video Games 343 comments
eldavojohn writes "At some point in the history of video games, violence became uncomfortably real for censors and some parents. In addition to that, realistic use of narcotics has entered mainstream games. While gamers (of adult age) have by and large won the right to this entertainment, a large amount of games have arisen lately that challenge a different aspect of video games — inappropriate or sensitive topics. We've covered it before on Columbine to Fallujah, but I noticed through GamePolitics recently a large trend in severely controversial video games. Where do you stand on these titles?" Read on for the rest of eldavojohn's thoughts.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Too Soon For A Columbine Videogame? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Are you kidding??? (Score:5, Informative)

    by DougLorenz (964249) * on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:37PM (#15345036)
    Well, I have a couple of things to say...

    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/ [columbinegame.com]

    By the way, it appears that the game was designed using a program called "RPG Maker 2000" [chello.at]

    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.

    • OK, this game is flamefest material. It will put people's belief in Free Speech to test.

      • Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by LWATCDR (28044) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:50PM (#15345202) Homepage Journal
        "It will put people's belief in Free Speech to test."
        Should the game be banned?
        No.
        Should anybody buy it?
        No.
        Should every living person on the face of the earth tell the company that published this game that this is a bad idea!
        Yes.

        Freedom of speech means you can have the right to say anything and not go to jail.
        It doesn't mean that every person on the planet doesn't have the right to hate your guts for saying it.

        • Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by vertinox (846076) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @05:37PM (#15346179)
          "Should every living person on the face of the earth tell the company that published this game that this is a bad idea!"

          No. Ignoring and going about our lives is the better solution.

          What irks me about society is that it makes problems of non-problems.

          Will "Columbine The Game" make anyone go out and do a copy cat? Only if they were going to go postal anyways.

          These are one of those situations where making a fuss will just get it more attention.

          Secondly, everyone just needs to get over it and get on with their lives. Digg had a story a week or two ago about one of the Columnbine victims who was paralyzed giving a subjective review of the game. That is an extreme thing that happened to him and logically reviewed the game without any sensitivity of his own plight.

          From the interview [kotaku.com]:

          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.

          That guy is stronger than any of us.

        • Hate: Definitely the Best Answer (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Alaren (682568) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @05:40PM (#15346196) Homepage

          I'm intrigued by your response, because while you rightly support the free speech involved in this creation, you suggest we should hate people who express things we don't like.

          I'm frankly shocked by the amount of outrage I'm reading in highly-moderated comments. This from a community that is usually quite happy to defend Grand Theft Auto or whatever game the media is attacking at the moment.

          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.

          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. And when it comes to being evil in games, there seems to some interest [slashdot.org] in it. What a way to explore our humanity, eh?

          Are we just trying to "think of the children?" We Slashdotters like to condemn people for using that line, too.

          Personally I don't see how this game is any more or less offensive than any other violent video game--but much the way the holocaust or 9/11 hit sore spots for a lot of people, Columbine has become a bit of a sacred cow as well. 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.

          Like, for instance, embracing hatred as a positive response to people who scarcely deserve our attention, let alone our hate.

          • 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. And when it comes to being evil in games, there seems to some interest in it. What a way to explore our humanity, eh?

            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 libera

    • Other than WW 2 simulations I really don't like the idea of making a game based off of a real tragedy. That'd be like creating a '911 simulator' where you try and fly 757s into the world trade center. It's just stupid, and it riles up the anti-gaming crowd rather quickly
      • I really don't want to start a flame war here, but it needs to be said.

        As pertains to your example of the 911 game, do you mean in the same way you can take GTAIII SA and crash planes into buildings or people, or go into any crowd and level them with a gun because it's fun? I'm all for making the author of this game realize that it will never be time to remember Columbine or any other shooting with some sort of game. I also understand that GTA doesn't simulate particular situations, but the ides can be th

        • Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Fallingcow (213461) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @04:29PM (#15345611) Homepage
          I do believe that the WWII and other war simulators are a good way to remember the wars because, as it should, the games tend to glorify the heroes. I'm not sure I can think of a WWII or other war game where you play the definative "bad guys." I could, however, easily be wrong.

          WWII makes a good setting for a game for a number of reasons.

          It fits a basic good v. bad story model, as it's hard for there to be much of a grey area when one side is shoving people into furnaces and gas chambers.

          The combat was very mobile and the weapons are interesting--no boring trench warfare (I imagine a WWI game as playing more like Oregon Trail than an FPS; "Billy has trenchfoot!") and no fire-then-reload-for-a-minute (the ONLY reason a Revolutionary War FPS hasn't come out, and the community total conversion mods that have tried it were never very popular).

          There's machinery like tanks and aircraft, but it's not fire-and-forget yet. You still have to see the enemy, dogfight, etc. Fast-paced and up-close action.

          Luckily, the WWII setting also makes for some great experiences for the player. One can experience just a little bit of the horror of infantry combat in the mechanized age. It's hard to get across some of the horrors of other wars in the medium of the video game--again, trench warfare would be silly (It's the WWI choose-your-own-adventure game! *you are being shelled AGAIN. Do you a) wait it out or b) go 'over the top' and get mowed down by a machine gun?*), while much of the horror of wars like Vietnam weren't the *action*, but rather the way that day upon day of tension might play out after a close call that lasted maybe a minute.

          I really do feel like a have a better handle on what that war was like after playing several WWII games. I'm NOT trying to compare it to the real thing at all, but I know that the first time I played the crossing-the-river scene in Call of Duty and "our side" (the Russians) called in a massive artillery strike less than 100 yards from where I was sitting, I was physically shaken afterwards. It's 1/2 of 1% of what the real thing is like, but it's more than you'd get anywhere else (outside of actual war, I mean). It gives a person a new respect for what a bunch of ordinary people went through over there, and what they accomplished in spite of it all.

          Just expanding on what you said, not disagreeing--or at least, I don't think I am.
      • But where do you draw the line? WW2 is ok, so what about Korea? Vietnam? Iraq in the early 90s? Iraq now?

        This question is the same one that came up when the recent 9/11 movie was released. How soon is too soon?

        (I'm presuming that older wars you have no issue with; the Civil War has been featured in more than a few games.)

        The game is Windows-only, or I'd have tried it and been able to give a more educated position.

        • Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by donscarletti (569232) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @05:14PM (#15345988)
          But where do you draw the line? WW2 is ok, so what about Korea? Vietnam? Iraq in the early 90s? Iraq now?

          Compared to WWII, all those other wars (plus Columbine and 2001/9/11 for that matter) were about as tragic as a guy stubbing his toe. No disrespect intended for the veterens of these events, but compared to 62 Million deaths from combat, bombing, starving, nuking and mass genocide, every other nasty event in the four thousand odd years of written history of violence seems like a jolly piece of fun.

    • So everyone should download the game, delete it, download again, repeat until bankrupt?
      Nasty, but some how tempting.
    • Outside of being tasteless to the point of obscenity, the big question is, will it be ready for PS3 in time for the fall rollout? Sony executives might as well add yet another disaster to high pricing, Blu-Ray, and slow-to-market. Mass murder would fit right in.
    • This is interesting, particularly the "too soon" idea. If it's wrong to talk about something horrible, then it's wrong to talk about it at any time, surely?

      But World War II killed a lot more people than Columbine. And there are WWII games falling out of every tree lately. No one is talking about how horrible it is to glorify all that violence (well, a few people, but they're in the minority). Why is Columbine more offensive? Is it really just a matter of time?

      Personally, I have no problems with this game

  • The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Crowhead (577505) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:40PM (#15345071)
    Is it too soon for a Haulocaust video game? Seriously, it would promote dialogue and what-not...

  • Never is too soon. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Kaessa (924806) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:40PM (#15345073)
    I have NO idea what these people were thinking. Mass murder of children is NOT entertainment. Sheesh.
  • That is pretty much the textbook definition of tasteless.

  • I smell BS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by faloi (738831) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:41PM (#15345083)
    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.
  • I will give my personal guarantee that Jack will be all over this shit.

      • 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 thi

      • 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.
  • 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.
    • I actually wouldn't mind seeing games like that. Simply telling people that racism is bad isn't nearly as effective as showing them why it's bad. I'm not talking about making a game where Nazis and slavers are genericly evil and cackle madly as they go about their (no doubt nefarious) business, I'm talking about something where they're just people doing what they believe is right... and ignoring the suffering around them that is obvious to the player of the game.

      If we're going to address painful issues

  • Too soon? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by EggyToast (858951) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:44PM (#15345129) Homepage
    This is just someone cashing in on a recent event in a rather crude way, in an attempt to "address school shootings." You need to address things that happen often and repeatedly, such as a drug or crime problem. You can't address something that rarely happens; it's like addressing "shark attacks" or "mountain lion maulings."

    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.

  • 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.

  • He also has no balls (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Johnny5000 (451029) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:46PM (#15345153) Homepage Journal
    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.

  • Columbine Victim Played It (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    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 [kotaku.com].

    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).

  • 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.

      • A movie like Roots may show slave labor and the brutalities that accompany that, but that is different than me playing a game where I beat slaves for fun.

        How? If the game is presented in the same tone as the movie, which clearly seeks to give the viewer empathy for Mr. Kinte, then what's the difference? If anything, it should be a stronger example of negative conditioning because the acts relate more closely to the viewer (or in this case, player.)

        Also, I don't personally know of any books or movies that glorified the Columbine events. They always recount the events.

        Presentation is as material as content. While they do not glorify the events of Columbine, they do sensationalize them by using evocative and typically inaccurate adjectives, and by using dramatic music, lighting, and so forth. Anything put on video professionally is "punched up" to make it more interesting because video production is expensive.

        The evening news is more about entertainment than it is about recounting the facts, regardless of what channel you're watching.

        A book or movie can even be done from the perspective of the perpetrators, useful for giving insights into their minds. Games have not yet been able to do that, and I suspect the reason is because games are interactive and have too much of the minds of the player to be useful in gaining insight into the characters.

        The usual method of doing this in a roleplaying game is through cutscenes. It's entirely normal. Happens in pretty much every RPG. Do you only play java games on webpages or something?

        Video games are done from the perspective of the player's character and give their internal conflicts all the time. Hell, even Duke 3D has the main character talking to himself, giving you some idea of his [amazingly shallow] internal processes.

        But there is only Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. They are the way they are, and games don't allow us to see that.

        I don't know what makes you say this. Have you played the game? Maybe it's filled with insight into their lives. Well, actually I doubt that, but it's still possible... The right game would show us that. It would also show us how they became the way they are but it would be a bit tedious playing a game in which you are consistently abused by their parents, fellow students, and teachers, which is pretty much mandatory for kids to come out this way. Remember, raising kids is the job of the parents, this is definitely the fault of their parents :P

        In short, movies and books are passive, games are interactive, and thus while both are forms of entertainment, they are vastly different beasts.

        They are only superficially different. Sure, games are more interactive, but you are not completely passive when watching a movie, you're just not making decisions. Someday, of course, there may not be any non-interactive entertainment - would you rather watch a movie, or be in the movie? Once upon a time pictures didn't move...

        The only difference between a video game and a movie is how real it can look (a movie will probably always be able to look better than a game, because you can prerender) and whether or not you're making decisions. Granted, that last is a significant difference, but not significant enough to change whether a video game is art or not (insofar as the concept is valid at all, video games are art) or whether it can address the same issues as a movie (which of course it can.)

  • See what a survivor says about the game. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by the_demiurge (26115) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:51PM (#15345214) Homepage
    You can read the full interview [kotaku.com]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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
    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! ...Along with Halo, Ghost Recon, C&C Generals, or any other game where the point is to kill.
    People who are alright with it will buy it, obviously.

    Wouldn't it be nice if some kid who wanted
  • 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...

  • Assassin (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nightspirit (846159) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @03:58PM (#15345297)
    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?

  • Hookers (Score:3, Insightful)

    by moberry (756963) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @04:10PM (#15345421)
    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.

  • The best part of this game (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Pluvius (734915) <pluvius3@nOspam.gmail.com> on Tuesday May 16 2006, @04:17PM (#15345502) Journal
    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

  • Columbine Survivor Talks About Columbine RPG (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Malk-a-mite (134774) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @04:17PM (#15345511) Journal
    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:
    " 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-sur vivor-talks-about-columbine-rpg-171966.php [kotaku.com]

  • Has it been 23 years? (Score:3, Funny)

    by pinqkandi (189618) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @04:17PM (#15345512) Journal
    That's what we learned on South Park... you can't joke about something until it's been 23 years!

  • Reactionist (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Lord_Dweomer (648696) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @04:51PM (#15345801) Homepage
    This is an interesting story. I haven't played the game so I'm not sure how it portrays things, but I say WHY NOT! In fact, I wouldn't mind a couple other simulators....like one of shooting jews in a concentration camp or flying planes into a building.

    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....

  • Dont like it, leave it alone (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 9mm Censor (705379) * on Tuesday May 16 2006, @05:55PM (#15346335) Homepage
    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.
    • Flight Sim 9/11 was out before 9/11. It's called microsoft flight simulator and it will let you crash a jumbo jet into several large buildings. In fact it has whole new packs of terrain that you can purchase in order to find new buildings to run into.

    • Too Soon (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Mark_MF-WN (678030) on Tuesday May 16 2006, @04:22PM (#15345543)
      I can't stand cowards/whiners/pussies and their "it's too soon!" bullshit. Immediately isn't soon enough for things that offend people.

      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.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.