Digital Praise Takes Up Christian Gaming Cause 180
Thanks to GameSpot for its article discussing the formation of a new Christian videogame developer, Digital Praise, formed to create a "planned line of non-offensive games." CEO Tom Bean notes: "Digital Praise is founded on the principle that fun, exciting computer games don't need to be flooded with violence, sex, hate or images of horror", and the company's official press release discusses "development on two games based on the Adventures in Odyssey radio theater series", arguing: "As long as new game titles are top quality - offering exciting game play and high production value - we believe that interactive Christian games will skyrocket in popularity much like Christian music did 15 years ago."
Re:Bad Analogy Time? (Score:5, Interesting)
Article: "As long as new game titles are top quality - offering exciting game play and high production value - we believe that interactive Christian games will skyrocket in popularity much like Christian music did 15 years ago."
Well, if that is their baseline for success -- we can only hope.
You may not be familiar with it, but the amount of Christian music being sold isn't small -- 47 million albums/year [tennessean.com] according to one source.
Or how about "$800 million in [Christian music] sales [that] topped sales of classical music and jazz combined..." [nwsource.com] (from a story talking about, oddly enough, the piracy of Xian music).
Christian music is big business, with its own famous bands, concerts, and record lables. And don't think that its all old time gospel music either -- it runs the gauntlet from folk music to pop to Christian metal.
A Couple of Issues (Score:5, Interesting)
All of that being said, I don't really like they way this company seems to be headed. Christian music has become to popular, to the point it is often difficult to tell the difference between sacred and secular. It is my entrenched belief that once you cannot see the line anymore, it isn't there. Christian games should strive be the best out there, not the most popular. Christians these days often lose sight of it not being about money. You do what you are called to do, not because it is easy or popular but because you were called. You needs will be met, and by that I don't mean your need to drive a Lexus and live in a 3000+ sq. ft home. (unless of course it is a generational home or something similar).
Christian games can be fun, exciting challenging etc. All to often, however, they are cheesy, shoddily made, or quite droll. The Christian life isn't some go stick your head in the sand way of living (though again some have made it that). People forget that it is a Christian world view that shaped Tolkien's works and yet I would argue that there are a fair number of
In any case I will leave you with the following quote ascribed to CS Lewis regarding one of the many conversations he and JRR Tolkien had on issues of myth, storytelling and its effects"
Re:Here we go again... (Score:2, Interesting)
- most games today actively promote violent and/or sexual behaviour;
- any kind of violent and sexual behaviour is a bad thing.
Starting with the second point, I think that we can all agree that this is utter nonsense.
The only sexual behavior that is not bad behavior is that which occurs privately within the exclusive bounds of a faithful, marital relationship between one man and one woman. Even if a game were to depict this good sexual behavior, that very depiction of it would be wrong. No sexual activity, good or bad, real-life or fictional, is to be put on display for the world. Marital sex is a private matter between the participants sharing their bodies and souls, one with another, as one flesh [gospelcom.net].
You might argue that it should be okay to watch "marital" sex between artificial "people." But this is laughably a moot point when it comes to computer games (except possibly for the Sims). When we have a game with a Mr. and Mrs. Anderson [tvtome.com] getting frisky in the master bedroom, then we can address this issue further.
What makes good sex good is its exclusive and secret nature. The husband is the only one (ideally) who has ever seen or ever will see his wife's nakedness. The wife is the only one (ideally) who has ever seen or ever will see her husband's nakedness. Their bodies are a special secret they guard for themselves. Anybody else can have a sexual experience, but not with the individuals who are committed to each other in matrimony. Each side feels special and unique that with over 6,000,000,000 people in the world, they have chosen and continue to chose each other - and no other - to share their sexuality.
The man can say, "She wants to have sex with me and no one else!" The woman can say, "He wants to have sex with me and no one else!" Man: "My body is ALL for YOU!" Woman: "My body is ALL for YOU!" You can imagine what that does to the hormones! And the mutual love. A third person, whether a participant or spectator, contaminates the marital purity and spoils the "one flesh" sexual intimacy.
From the Christian standpoint, the only sexual behavior (whether a real act or a fictional depiction) that you should ever see is your own sexual behavior with your spouse.
Qualification: The above applies mainly to gratuitous depictions of sexual behavior. Pictures, diagrams, and other media presentations that are created for medical or academic purposes that benefit humanity are acceptable as long as the media are used only for their intended, noble purposes.
Re:Here we go again... (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, attitudes on both subjects changed at roughly the same period of history. So did attitudes and laws regarding race in this country. Your argument has only slightly more merit than saying a Christian views on love and marriage are to blame for Jim Crow.
Now, I think sex is 'special' and not because of historical matters. It's just the closest you can be to someone. It's intimate and great.
I do find it amusing that you take the poster's most sensuous point (ALL YOU YOU!) and can only respond with a trite remark about threesomes. Every piece of relationship advice I've ever seen, be it at church, in the newspaper, online, in Cosmo... has said that if you value the relationship, don't do a threesome. More often than not, someone is going to be jealous and the relationship will be strained.
I think that if you ask people who believe in the sacredness of the marriage bed, few will say that women should only concern herself with family and home duties. The "rules" are as strict for men as women and are geared for the joy of each.
Re:Here we go again... (Score:3, Interesting)
Did I? I'm sorry if that's how it appeared to you. I merely tried to describe some of the, now outdated, views held by many before the sexual revolution and feminism.
Now, I think sex is 'special' and not because of historical matters. It's just the closest you can be to someone. It's intimate and great.
If that's how you experience it, that's fine. Just realize that not everyone thinks about this subject in the same manner.
I do find it amusing that you take the poster's most sensuous point (ALL YOU YOU!) and can only respond with a trite remark about threesomes. Every piece of relationship advice I've ever seen, be it at church, in the newspaper, online, in Cosmo... has said that if you value the relationship, don't do a threesome. More often than not, someone is going to be jealous and the relationship will be strained.
Then you missed the point of the remark I made. The parent made it sound like to a man, having sex with a single woman is what any man instinctively craves, whereas it's a commonly known fact that monogamy is definitely not natural behaviour for humans, and might possibly contribute to the sharp rise in genetic defects we're witnessing.
Perhaps I should have elaborated on this point, but I refrained from doing so, lest I might inadvertently 'feed a troll', so to speak.
I think that if you ask people who believe in the sacredness of the marriage bed, few will say that women should only concern herself with family and home duties. The "rules" are as strict for men as women and are geared for the joy of each.
Again, I apologize if I made it sound like monogamy and the suppression of women's rights are directly related.
On a sidenote, according to the statistics, individuals who believe in the 'sacredness of the marriage bed', let alone marriage, are a dying breed. Apparently the views held by those individuals are not that convincing to younger generations. One might consider this to be the continuing 'sexual revolution'.
Some games we won't be seeing from them ... (Score:2, Interesting)
"Digital Praise is founded on the principle that fun, exciting computer games don't need to be flooded with violence, sex, hate or images of horror," said Bean."
We won't have the following titles show up any time soon.
The Adventures of Jephthah [bibleexplained.com]
Punish the Midianites [bibleexplained.com]
The trial and execution of Jesus [bibleexplained.com]
Inquisition - Heretics [rice.edu]
Inquisition II - Torquemada's Rack [ronaldbrucemeyer.com]
Does it really matter that they're Christian? (Score:3, Interesting)
It'd be nice to see people try and keep an open mind about games like these instead of just immediately writing them off with "Oh, a God game. It'll suck."
Re:Here we go again... (Score:2, Interesting)
The parent made it sound like to a man, having sex with a single woman is what any man instinctively craves, whereas it's a commonly known fact that monogamy is definitely not natural behaviour for humans, and might possibly contribute to the sharp rise in genetic defects we're witnessing.
How might monogamy contribute to the rise in genetic defects? I can see that in excessively small and isolated populations, it would be best for women to have children by different partners to maximize genetic diversity, but I wouldn't think it would have any significant effect in the large modern gene pool, given that actually having children with close relatives is rare.
Poor History is no reason not to change the future (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Here we go again... (Score:3, Interesting)
This is something which I personally find distasteful. Not from the perspective of wanting to see others doing it, but because secrecy allows those in a position of power to take advantage of it. This can lead to rape, even in a marital situation, but even if it's just discomfort, secrecy does not allow the uncomfortable party the freedom to discuss it with friends and family because they will feel they are breaking the sanctity and secrecy of sex.
This is very, very dangerous and is still very common among churches and followers.
If, as society, we force people to keep quiet about these sort of things, then we will also silence those who genuinely need help.
An open and honest society is safer for everyone.
Might be Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe they could invent some sort of sim game where you run a church and have to deal with the same types of things that most church administors have to deal with. That could be interesting, letting you build and expand the church, while trying to run programs that increase the amount of worshipers coming in. You could try to generate aditional income by using different donation collection methods all the way to installing a cell phone tower in your steeple for 12,000 a month. Throw in some events, such as weddings and funerals, and you've got an interesting game.
This could be interesting, but I know it will result in some people making crappy games trying to make a few bucks by using the term "christian" in the title and marketing it as the safest video games EVER for concerd parents.