Columbine RPG - How Real Is Too Real? 118
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."
Ahh, finally (Score:4, Insightful)
Context (Score:5, Insightful)
Few people would have a problem with a World War 2 game, whether you're playing for the American, Canadian, British, Russian, Austrailian, German, or Japaneese armies because in the context of war it's kill or be killed; in other words, society in general does not see a problem with killing an opposing soldier when you're a soldier at war.
In contrast I suspect that people would be outraged if you produced a game where you're a german soldier at Auschwitz and you're required to kill jewish prisoners.
Re:Historical games? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ahh, finally (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose in one sense, the designers of the game failed, in that they didn't evoke enough empathy with the characters to get the player to react in the same way as the people did. But in another respect, they certainly garnered enough empathy for the victims. And that's what art is all about; evoking emotions.
Here's my 2 cents... change goes in the penny bowl (Score:3, Insightful)
Having said that, I agree that censorship is the absolute wrong thing to do. I can deal with unpalatable games far better than I can deal with someone saying, "This is taboo, you may not show it."
It's a case of the cure being worse than the malady.
Re:Historical games? (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, his reaction makes sense to me. Like he says, he's killed thousands of video game characters. Yet rarely do they attempt to draw you into understanding your character as the killer, and understanding your victims, the whole scenario surrounding the killing. Rarely do they cover historical events, real murders, with any attempt at accuracy. So when he plays a game that does, it is as disturbing to him as watching a documentary about Columbine that then asks the viewer "So given you were them, would you have shot your schoolmates?" That's bound to create an emotional reaction that no FPS tries to.
Basically it supports what I've been saying all along -- despite all the "conditioning" he's received from playing video games, when the situation even got close to real violence, his natural reactions kicked in. Conditioning only works if you believe you are experiencing real consequences or rewards. The "real" rewards and consequences of an FPS are completely divorced from those of a real life murder spree, and no amount of Doom/BF1942 will forge an artificial connection in a normal person.
Normal people have no problem separating reality from fantasy, and thus no amount of "fantasy" killing will actually train them to kill in real life or be desensitized to real life killing. Only insane people who are incapable of this separation will directly transfer simulated killings into the real world, because for them the difference is blurry or non-existant to begin with.
Here's a good question...where's JT? (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh wait, that's right, it's not a Rockstar game. Doesn't matter if the hot coffee company isn't involved.
I certainly don't support him, but he's sure doing a half-assed job of being an asshole.
We seem to be glossing over something here. (Score:3, Insightful)
When somebody sits down to write a game called Columbine RPG, they're doing something different - they're provoking people. Provocation isn't good or bad though, basically just makes people think.
Now I don't know if this was the intention of the games author, but is has made people think a lot more about the content of their games. Germany bans a game for blood and we ridicule them. We spend an evening slaughtering thousands of 'space aliens' or 'WW2 germans' and we shrug it off, it doesn't register what we're doing represents. We are jaded by it all
A game like this gives us a kick up the back-side and makes people feel uncomfortable. We have to explain why we think one thing is right and the other isn't (and people seem to be having difficulty with this). This is a good thing. This is art.
Games whatever people might wish to think aren't even touching emotional depth. Oh we may all post about how we felt when Aeris died, but ffs, compare this to literature and it's nothing. The emotional peaks in games are so few, that we trumpet every single mediocre one of them. Well here's another one, just as valid, just a different type.
so you're saying it will be really popular? (Score:4, Insightful)
So you're saying - big potential audience amongst school aged kids?
Not just time difference (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not just time difference (Score:3, Insightful)
The very event you talk of doesn't resonate nearly the same for someone on this side of the Atlantic. I am very aware of it, and watched the news very closely that day, but it just doesn't hit the same way as an event that happened in my own country, on my own soil. I am sure that the same could be said relating Columbine to 9/11 (though that did have a Worldly feel to it in it's impact).
Still, IMHO, the point is that they approached a subject in the completely wrong way.
RonB