Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Columbine Game Kicked From Slamdance Festival

Posted by Zonk on Fri Jan 05, 2007 09:21 AM
from the pressure-brought-to-bear dept.
Censorship Entertainment Games
Imaria writes "A Kotaku post has the news that Super Columbine Massacre RPG! has been kicked out of the Slamdance Gamemaker Festival. After reaching the finals, the organizers were forced to remove the game from the running to appease mounting external pressure. According to the post, this is the first time in the Slamdance Festival's 13 year history that they have removed either a game or film due to criticism. From the article: '[Game creator] Ledonne said that he bears no ill will toward the festival, but that the decision to pull the game does raise concerns about freedom of speech and video game development. "I don't want to paint them as the villain in this," he said. "I don't think the real issue is a couple of guys at Slamdance who decided to reject my game, it's the larger pressures placed on them."'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] '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."
[+] Columbine RPG Kickout Has Repercussions 118 comments
As a direct result of the removal of the Columbine RPG from the Slamdance game competition, two games (so far) have pulled out of the judging process. The Forge has extensive commentary on the first pullout (the game Braid), as well as the removal of fl0w from the competition. From the article: "Regardless of the artistic merit, the facts as I understand them are that Slamdance had actively courted the creator of SCM RPG! to enter it into the festival, which then judged it to be a finalist before bending over for the corporations and shredding their credibility by removing it from the competition. Imagine Dominoes Pizza deciding it objected to the theme of Brokeback Mountain and told the Academy Awards to remove it. Imagine them doing it after it was already a finalist."
[+] Slamdance Festival Loses More Entrants 62 comments
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.
[+] Columbine RPG - How Real Is Too Real? 118 comments
westlake writes "Washington Post columnist Mike Musgrove offers a rare and balanced view from the mainstream press of the Slamdance Competition and Super Columbine Massacre RPG. Surprised by the effective use of flashbacks and the authentic dialogue of the Columbine game, he goes on to say: 'But when it came time to start creating mayhem in the school's halls, I couldn't bring myself to push the buttons to continue. Odd, I suppose, because I have killed thousands of video game characters over the years. And though the game's chunky graphics are primitive...no game has ever made me feel nearly as queasy. I didn't want to be responsible for the real-world violence that happened that day, even in a game.' Ledonne figures that games will either grow into a medium in which it is acceptable to confront and challenge an audience with titles like his, or will devolve into a stagnant, failed format."
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.

Columbine Game Kicked From Slamdance Festival 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Fools. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Irish_Samurai (224931) on Friday January 05 2007, @09:28AM (#17472826)
    If they didn't want to deal with this sort of thing they should have never accepted the entry. But letting it get to the finals and then kicking it out?

    Cowards. I am losing respect for almost every aspect of today's society and its dogma propped institutions. If it negatively affects our commercial viability, our image, we must condemn it. Never mind what the game is actually trying to do, move the medium forward by using it as a means to address complex social issues - not just shoot space baddies.

      • Re:Fools. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Jabrwock (985861) on Friday January 05 2007, @09:51AM (#17473200) Homepage
        Arn't there better ways to "address complex social issues" than in a game where people are supposed to have "fun" with it?

        There's a new type of game out there, Serious Games. The flash games MTV sponsored to raise awareness of Darfur are another example. They're not meant to be "fun", they're meant to explore their subject material using an "interactive medium".

        If it was an educational game that actually teached something, i'd have less problem with it, but this one was clearly meant for the entertainment value.

        Have you tried playing it? Or have you just decided that it's "clearly for entertainment" just because NBC said so? Please don't fall into that trap. As I mentioned in an above comment, think of this as an interactive documentary, with some fictional elements added in (the trip to Hell for one) in an attempt to walk you through the thought processes of the killers. You're not meant to have "fun", you're meant to understand what happened. Demonizing the killers and leaving it at that does nothing to prevent the next crisis. Understanding their emotions, their thoughts, what they were going through, will help you to better figure out WHY.

        When confronted on the controversy of it's games, the game maker said: "it is freedom of speech, it gives me the license to do whatever i want".

        I disagree. I read it to say "Freedom of speech allows me to discuss controversial issues that would otherwise be banned by the mob." Besides, movies doing the exact same thing (Elephant, Zero Day) got film awards for walking you through the exact same material. Were they "fun"? Of course not.

        • Re:Fools. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by sesshomaru (173381) on Friday January 05 2007, @10:15AM (#17473552) Journal
          Mark Ames recently wrote a book, called Going Postal. One of his theories about the phenomenon of "Going Postal" both in the schoolyard and the office, is that there are powerful, institutional forces at work that have a vested interest in people NOT understanding this phenomenon. If they can't get people to drop it with, "they were just kooks," (which becomes difficult when it becomes a trend) they have to come up with an excuse (video games, antidepressants, etc.) to explain the trend without getting to actual causes.

          Basically, these events are an inevitable result of certain situations that are allowed to go unresolved, relentless pressure that causes a mental breakdown in certain people in our society, leading to these kamikaze missions. Demonizing these killers is useless, many of them intend to die either by their own hands or at the hands of the authorities. It's not like even the ones who survive get off with light sentences.

          The plaintive "Why" at then end of one of these massacres is an important question that needs an honest, rational and thoughtful answer. However, such an answer will lead to calls for reform, which the people who push irrational, demagogic explanations for these events want to avoid.

          Slamdance is supposed to be a place for controversial media that is to hot for even Sundance, so being too hot for Slamdance is something of an honor.

          • Why is it necessary for some idiot to invoke a conspiracy theory to explain some event that happens on average maybe once a year at most? A trend, you say? You might as well call serial killing a "trend", then. Or people being hit by runaway bus tires. Or people being stung to death by bees! There's no need for any bizarre explanation to explain something as incredibly, phenomenally rare as spree killings. Haven't you noticed that every single time there is one, everyone knows about it and talks about it fo

      • Re:Fools. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Irish_Samurai (224931) on Friday January 05 2007, @09:52AM (#17473202)
        Arn't there better ways to "address complex social issues" than in a game where people are supposed to have "fun" with it?

        If it was an educational game that actually teached something, i'd have less problem with it, but this one was clearly meant for the entertainment value.

        Have you played the game? I have, and let me tell you something - it has zero entertainment value. It's entertainment level is just enough to keep you progressing through it. Also, this is an attempt to move the medium forward. You need to get off the nomen of "game" as it is outdated. A lot of these things aren't "games" anymore. Using your mentality we never should have let the "talkies" move into a training or education tool. We never should have let radiotelegraphy and spark gap transmissions move into the realm of entertainment.

        Like someone else said: it is of poor taste.
        Poor taste is not a viable criteria for art or education.

        In other news on /.: a game maker is making a game about nazis gas chambers: a simulator of people choking to death and a second game about kidnapping and raping people. When confronted on the controversy of it's games, the game maker said: "it is freedom of speech, it gives me the license to do whatever i want".
        Welcome to the downside of free speech. Deal with it. Seriously, if you don't like it - don't view it - but the opinion that you should be able to categorize and then subdue some content based on your fragile sensibilities is not only fascist, but downright ignorant. Free speech comes with the requirement that people can self regulate what they choose to consume.

        • Poor taste is not a viable criteria for art or education.

          That explains a lot about modern society.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Jabrwock (985861)
            Actually the author originally objected to being nominated. Unsure why, probably forsaw the media circus.

            The criticism is that the festival first nominated him, persuaded him to change his mind because he'd created "an important work that needed to be acknowledged", and then bowed to sponsor pressure when they figured it would be a PR nightmare. The article mentions that several sponsors had threatened to withhold all funding unless SCMRPG was taken off the list.

            So basically a supposedly independant fil

      • Re:Fools. (Score:5, Funny)

        by Das Modell (969371) on Friday January 05 2007, @09:53AM (#17473218)
        I face complex social issues in video games every day. Silent Storm [gamespy.com] presents me with difficult situations: should I sneak behind him and empty my pistol into his back, or should I kill him with a frag grenade? Where should I place this anti-personnel mine to maximize casualties? There are no easy answers.

        • I do recall people having fun with an JFK shooting re-enactment game.
          And considering the reports from the people who have actually played this Columbine game, this sets it apart from the Columbine game.
      • I guess I'm more than a little suspicious of the whole "addressing complex social issue" dodge. Can someone who's actually played the game tell me how exactly it does that?

        Did you come away from the game understanding more about what kind of pressures and personal decisions helped shape the events of that day? If so, then the game did it's job.

        Simply demonizing the participants does nothing to prevent the next crisis. Understanding the motivations (and remember, that's different from sypathizing with t

  • I say "good" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bilbravo (763359) on Friday January 05 2007, @09:32AM (#17472908) Homepage
    The article didn't give much of an overview of the game (as stated that they did not get a chance to get the storyline), but I'd say "good" from what I speculate the game is about. I'd imagine it's about being the killers, and that is just sick. Everyone hates that video games are "the cause of violence", per certain lawmakers--but this type of game just fuels that fire.

    In a very sensitive area of school-related violence, Columbine is one of the biggest--and also happens to have a violent video game associated with it--DOOM.

    I'm not against violent video games, I happen to enjoy quite a few myself. But the idea of an RPG where the player is becoming one of these 2 kids is sickening. It's not "too soon", it will never be time for a game like this. I guess it's a double standard to say that reliving WW2 in so many FPS games is the same idea, but to me being a kid going through a school killing your peers is something nobody should WANT to do...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mdozturk (973065)
      I agree it is tasteless, but this kind of thinking is what causes things to eventually be banned. It is never OK to ban creativity because you think that it is "just sick".

      I wonder how long it is going to take Clinton to come out and say something about this game?

      • I agree, censorship is a touchy area--but nobody banned the game, they just removed it from their competition. It's a slippery slope to say that removing games from a competition is going to lead to them getting banned... but maybe you are correct. Maybe they shouldn't have bowed to the pressure, but I can understand it. Peer pressure is a big deal, don't you remember high school? :-) Just kidding...

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by projektsilence (988729)
      But it's cool to play as the Nazi's in some of those WWII FPS games? Or it's ok to play GTA and kill cops and hookers? Most people don't object loudly to these games because we're relatively desensitized to this type of violence, but when it hits so close to home, something we all read about or saw on the television, then the games is WRONG! I don't know what the game is about so I can't say whether or not it's a game that should be condemned like this. I think it is impressive that someone is pushing a
      • I wonder if someone did something similar but relating 9/11. Like going all the way from joining al-quaeda to the final sequence with a flight sim over manhattan.
        And I don't mean a simple flash thingy, I mean something serious like this 'game'. What do you think would happen?
        (or maybe it already exists and I haven't seen it?)
        • I wonder if someone did something similar but relating 9/11.

          The commission that made the 9/11 report authorized a comic-book version, because the visual medium made some discussion of timelines and events easier to follow...

          There is also a "game" where your job is to try to escape from the Towers after the attack. Some missions you "win" by escaping, others you are forced to either perish in flames, or jump. The idea was to illustrate what people had to go through on that day.
      • I think this would be more similar to a GTA mod/clone where you are a specific real-life serial killer, and your victims are the real-life cops and hookers killed by that guy.
    • I guess it's a double standard to say that reliving WW2 in so many FPS games is the same idea, but to me being a kid going through a school killing your peers is something nobody should WANT to do...
      Yes, it is a double standard because the reality is, being a kid going through a school killing your peers is something quite a lot of people would like to do.

      There's a lot of posts in this thread about how this game is tasteless, has no merit, has only shock value. That no one would want to play it. Is that really tue? Think about it. There are people who think about doing this kind of thing everyday. So how is this game any more wrong than street racing simulations or computer generated pornography? What's the essential difference?

      I tell you exactly what the difference is. Debate on Columbine is taboo.

      Stray outside the accepted interpretation and you are "dishonoring the memories of The Children(TM) who died". Just ignore the fact that the average second level school is closer to The Lord of the Flies than normal society. Just ignore the millions of young people who waste their time day in day out in an institution they loathe. Just ignore the fact that the institution most closely resembling secondary schools is public prison. If you dare to highlight such things, you're "no better than the killers".

      So, no; running through the corridors of Columbine High School killing your fellow students is not really much more morally repugnant than killing American or Chinese soldiers in BattleField 2, or launching nukes on cities in Civ 4. It's just more politically incorrect, because that is how the media have decided to treat it.

      If Slamdance wants to follow the media/party line, that's their business. But they should stay off the moral highground when they do. That's for people with actual beliefs and integrity.
    • You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but yours is by your own admission an uninformed opinion. You haven't played the game and you say that the article didn't give a very good overview of it and yet you can feel justified in opposing it?

      This reminds me of the people who protested against Kevin Smith's film Dogma before it was even screened. I'm not comparing Dogma to this game, but in both cases people were against it without even knowing the details about it. Jack Thompson the anti-videogame lawy
      • Actually, I'd prefer you get therapy. I was a geek in high school, and picked on a lot. Some nights I would cry myself to sleep over it (yes, I'm man enough to admit that). However, I never dreamed and/or fantasized about killing my classmates though. Maybe tripping them in the hallway, but not mass-murder!
          • yeah but not everyone's you. and few are going to go out and get therapy.

            Especially since guns are cheaper.

      • Re:I say "good" (Score:5, Insightful)

        by irc.goatse.cx troll (593289) on Friday January 05 2007, @10:24AM (#17473738) Journal
        Pretty sure it was.

        You don't need any sort of "freedom of speech" to agree with the general consensus-- Nobody is ever going to stop you from parroting their views and agreeing with everyone. Hell, at worst you'll just end up being elected to an office.

        Now, if you want to actually go against the grain and vocalize something controversial that most people wouldn't agree with or find acceptable, THAT is when you need freedom of speech protecting you.

        As for this game specificially, I don't know enough about it to say anything. If it really puts you in the kids mindset by telling the story and really putting you in the experience it could be a great thing to help people understand something few can.
        Or maybe it will be a really bad game hidden under the veil of some columbine references. Too early to tell. Think of it like this: Theres a world of difference between what most would consider child porn and Taxi Driver, but "a movie about a 12 year old prostitute" could cover them both and if you immediately discard it based on it being a touchy subject, you'll never know.

  • artists statement (Score:5, Informative)

    by rednuhter (516649) on Friday January 05 2007, @09:35AM (#17472948) Homepage Journal
    artists statement
    http://www.columbinegame.com/statement.htm [columbinegame.com]

    excert

      Somewhere between April 20th, 1999 and September 11th, 2001, America entered into a new, terrifying, and desperate era. Citizens can no longer afford to believe the necessary illusions of modern society. In an age when hastily-formed scapegoats and false dichotomies of "good" and "evil" run rampant, SCMRPG dares us into a realm of grey morality with nuanced perspectives of suffering, vengeance, horror, and reflection. In the words of Harris' friend Brooks Brown, there are "no easy answers" to such a socially indicting tragedy. As humanity teeters precariously on the threshold of collapse--politically, ideologically, and environmentally, the days of comatose media coverage and a subservient populace cannot remain. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, through their furious words and malevolent actions, can be understood as the canaries in the mine--foretelling of an "apocalypse soon" for those remaining to ponder their deeds. With 'Super Columbine Massacre RPG!,' I present to you one of the darkest days in modern history and ask, "Are we willing to look in the mirror?"
      • What issues would those be?

        The content on that page doesn't point to any classifiable mental illness. Maybe you would just like him to go to reeducation camp so he will only touch on things that you agree with.

  • Market Pressure == Censorship? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by andphi (899406) <phillipsam@@@gmail...com> on Friday January 05 2007, @09:46AM (#17473120) Journal
    FTA: Ledonne said that he bears no ill will toward the festival, but that the decision to pull the game does raise concerns about freedom of speech . . .

    I'm confused. How is the decision by non-governmental entities that something is undeserving of their support or attention a threat to freedom speech?

    The game developer did his talking when he made the game. If Congress was directly shutting him down, that would be a problem. Other people deciding that his game is in poor taste or too soon or just plain wrong, and taking their money with them when they leave, is perfectly normal and legal. There is no constitutional right to be heard, only to speak freely. The intended audience can blow the speaker off at will.
    • There is no constitutional right to be heard, only to speak freely.

      Even that is debatable. The original text of the constitution was that "Congress shale make no law..."

      That doesn't mean you have some inalienable right to run your sock. It means that the government has no right to shut you up. Society as a whole on the other hand, can largely do as the like to promote or bury your words. 200 years of case law have altered the exact interpretation of that line, and I am not a case law expert, but I agree wit
      • I disagree that it's censorship in the legal sense. But market pressure can cause "chilling effects", and it's disappointing when the market refuses to support indie artists just because they're afraid of complaints from the mob, most of whom don't even know what the game is trying to do.

        Did any of these sponsors equally threaten Sundance financially when it aired/nominated Elephant or Zero Day?
    • I agree fully and hate censorship being thrown around like that, but it does show what the general population's consensus is, and all these people get to vote.
      • but it does show what the general population's consensus is, and all these people get to vote.

        But did they? They never even got a chance to vote, because it got pulled from the ballot, essentially by PR departments. Isn't that short-circuiting the voting system, by allowing corporate interests to decide what candidates even get to be heard in the first place? I know it sounds hokey, but it's something to consider. If the population truly rejected the nomination, then it should have gotten to the vote, an

  • Double Standards (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MeanderingMind (884641) on Friday January 05 2007, @09:53AM (#17473232) Homepage Journal
    I find it interesting that when a hyper violent game was made to poke fun at Jack Thompson, it was widely applauded here on Slashdot despite begind grotesquely violent and rather lacking in artistic merit. Meanwhile, someone else's attempt to confront us with the horrible but murky truth of Columbine is labeled as "just sick" and "going too far".

    I wonder how many of us here played either game.
  • I want to know how a shitty RPG maker based game even got to the finals, it looks terrible and I doubt it plays any better.

  • Is PTFG a proper acronym? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gregtron (1009171) on Friday January 05 2007, @10:30AM (#17473862)

    The major problem I've encountered with the replies above is that no one seems to have actually played the game before labelling it as an afront to morality.

    I found it to be insightful, in the least, and at points disturbing. It didn't glorify the actions of anyone, but went great lengths to take information that most people have become jaded to, and present it in a light that inspires us to avoid the sort of finger-pointing that wrongly accused Marilyn Manson and ID Software of corrupting our youth.

    If we can't use certain media to portray catastrophic events in a way that helps us gain better understanding of why we do the things we do, then what good are they? This type of thinking reduces video games to neat electronic parlour tricks, not the viable form of entertainment and and education that it could be.

  • Slamdance was created partly as a response to Sundance, when a lot of people felt that they couldn't get their films into Sundance because they were too edgy.

    This was caused by the growth of the Sundance Film Festival, and no doubt influenced by their acceptance of donations from large sponsors.

    Now Slamdance is rejecting a piece because it's too edgy, and their sponsors are putting pressure on them. So much for the "independent" scene.

    • It doesn't sound like a very tasteful game.

      Neither did Elephant [wikipedia.org], but it won a Palme D'Or at the Cannes Film Festival. Or Zero Day [wikipedia.org], which also won several independant film awards.

      If a movie touches a controversial subject, it's considered avant-guard and the director worthy of praise for daring to tackle such a "hard" issue. If a serious game that uses an interactive medium to try to do the same (SCMRPG is basically Zero Day in RPG form), it's not even worthy of consideration?

      • It doesn't sound like a very tasteful game.

        Neither did Elephant [wikipedia.org], but it won a Palme D'Or at the Cannes Film Festival. Or Zero Day [wikipedia.org], which also won several independant film awards.

        If a movie touches a controversial subject, it's considered avant-guard and the director worthy of praise for daring to tackle such a "hard" issue. If a serious game that uses an interactive medium to try to do the same (SCMRPG is basically Zero Day in RPG form), it's not even worthy of consideration?

        If Elephant had been named "Super Columbine Massacre" most people would never have considered screening or viewing it. If the game developers really want to convince people that they've produced a game that assists people in thoughtfully examining the nature and causes of school shootings, they should try re-releasing the game with the respect, decency, and gravitas that anything dealing with those events deserves. I see know reason to sympathize with people who claim to be producing thoughtful content but

        • I see know reason to sympathize with people who claim to be producing thoughtful content but treat it in a way that is inexcusably sophomoric.

          I'll grant you that it may have been a poor choice of title. But isn't it also a commentary on the fact that a) people judge a book by it's cover (would you play "Super Gory Nazi Slaughter Simulator, now with Extra Blood!", aka Castle Wolfenstein), b) people who can't get past the title maybe shouldn't be judging it at all, and c) possibly to make you think about h

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by xappax (876447)
              If the game was a tasteful discourse on the Columbine shootings, and it was named "Tasteful Discourse on the Columbine shootings," that's reasonable, but with a title like that, what else could you expect about the game other than an offensive piece of garbage.

              Anyone who judges the merit of art or political discourse on the basis of whether it's "tasteful" can kiss my distasteful, profane, but ultimately insightful ass.
      • There's rather big difference between addressing a tough subject matter and not using a real event or even turning a real event into a movie and turning a real event into a game. I haven't played the game so I don't know how it actually plays, but it really doesn't sound like it crosses a line that should not be crossed. Should it be deemed illegal or prevent from distribution? No. But if I was head of an event like I'd kick their ass out on the street too. That would be MY right just as much as they h
        • There's rather big difference between addressing a tough subject matter and not using a real event or even turning a real event into a movie and turning a real event into a game.

          Forget game. Try wording it as follows: "There's rather big difference between addressing a tough subject matter and not using a real event or even turning a real event into a movie and turning a real event into a interactive movie."

          MTV can tackle the horrors of Darfur through interactive flash animations, why can't an interact

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Attrition_cp (888039)
          I believe the complaints actually come from it being a business decision.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Jabrwock (985861)
          The sponsors felt that this game would offend more paying customers than it interested, which would be bad for corporate PR both in the short run and the long run. It was a sound business decision.

          Just felt I had to clarify that. The sponsors basically told Slamdance that they were pulling out just because of the controversy surrounding the nomination. The judges clearly felt that SCMRPG was a worthy selection, or they wouldn't have chosen it in the first place.

          Ironically, the author initially resisted

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Broken scope (973885)
      Taste only comes into it if the game is meant to be enjoyable or fun. It is a game in the same sense that Saving private Ryan is a movie. It reexamines a terrible and violent event, not for the enjoyment of the viewers but because there is a lesson to be learned.

      However last time I said this I took hell for it but so be it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mdozturk (973065)

      What if I wanted to make a Hitler RPG, would that be freedom of speech?

      Yes. There are tons of content (movies, songs, etc) that feature Hitler. Some even don't portray him as a monster [imdb.com]

    • Depends.

      The Columbine game did not glorify the violence that occured there, instead it does the opposite.

      Would your Hitler RPG glorify him? Besides, isn't any WWII game in a way about Hitler too?

      One question that the Columbine game raises is whether games can only have value as entertainment or whether it can be an art-form, able of dealing with non-entertaining subject matter. You seem to be thinking the former.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by cowscows (103644)
      There's no real freedom of speech argument to be made here, because no one has stopped these guys from making the game, no law was passed to restrict or bury it, and no one has been arrested for being involved. The developers have been able to make their statement, and another group of individuals has decided that they don't want to help the developers spread that statement. Your freedom of speech does not require that I, or anyone else, or even the government help you spread your message. Only that the gov
    • Meh... as others have said it was a sound business decision and has nothin to do with cowardice. Music labels drop bands everyday for lots of different reasons, or simply never sign them, and no one cares.
    • You're right about it being a business decision, but it is ironic that the very thing which contributed siginificantly to those killings (social alienation) is then used again on the game about those killings.
    • Was there a need for the exclamation mark at the end? Makes it look like: "Super Hyper Fun Fun Happy Columbine Massacre RPG!!"

      That's the point. It's poking fun at the fact that game titles hype up violence. It also pokes fun at the fact that some people are unwilling to get beyond the title to serious look at the game, essentially judging the book by it's cover...

    • Re:Good for Slamdance (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Friday January 05 2007, @11:39AM (#17474976)
      But the truth is, these guys have made a truly offensive game that is super deliberatly made to be offesnive/controversial.

      More "truth" from someone who hasn't even tried the game.

      How the hell do you know the truth when you haven't even experienced the truth? Why do you think it is OK to go around spouting off about things you have no understanding of? Sure its your right to make a fool of yourself, but in what warped universe is it personally a good thing for you to actually preach from ignorance? Is that how you make decisions about everything else in your life?

      What's worse is that there is no reason for you not to have found out the truth yourself - the game is freely available from the author's website:

      http://www.columbinegame.com/ [columbinegame.com]

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.