Columbine Video Game

Disturbing? Or example of the power of free speech?
Here's the article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/arts/28chap.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin

My friend played it, said it was terrible...

Not a good example of free speech, not a good game.

Plus, that was made in RPG Maker. Probably took about 30 minutes to make.

Probably just wanted attention.

I'm all for free speech, but there's a difference between 'free speech' and tasteless video games.

That's just sick.

Um no. Just ... no. There is nothing else to be said.

No.

I disagree completely.

Why can't someone make a video game about the Columbine shootings? There are hundreds of video games (and movies for that matter) about even greater tragedies such as World War II and Vietnam. Shouldn't we censor them too?

In the Columbine RPG, you play the role of the two gunmen, killing a dozen innocent humans. In, let's say...Call of Duty (I don't play video games) you play the role of a soldier, killing hundreds of not-so-innocent but still human beings.

The creation of this game wasn't a call for attention. The 25 year old who made the game was frequently bombarded by the media covering the story. He was new to the RPG maker program thing, and just decided to create a game on something affecting his life at the time.

electricbluemonkey wrote:I disagree completely.

Why can't someone make a video game about the Columbine shootings? There are hundreds of video games (and movies for that matter) about even greater tragedies such as World War II and Vietnam. Shouldn't we censor them too?

In the Columbine RPG, you play the role of the two gunmen, killing a dozen innocent humans. In, let's say...Call of Duty (I don't play video games) you play the role of a soldier, killing hundreds of not-so-innocent but still human beings.

The creation of this game wasn't a call for attention. The 25 year old who made the game was frequently bombarded by the media covering the story. He was new to the RPG maker program thing, and just decided to create a game on something affecting his life at the time.

Because it is based on real life, happened "recently", and there is the generation that experienced it.
If it were renamed to something different, and perhaps altered just a bit, no one would really care.

Think about it, a First Person Shooter based in Iraq/the Vietnam on the side of the Iraqi gunning down American Soldiers, or a First Person Shooter based on the British side in the Revolutionary War, gunning down Successionists?

Both are based in real events. However, the Iraqi gunning down modern soldiers is a lot more appaling because it is a recent and still happening event.

electricbluemonkey wrote:I disagree completely.

Why can't someone make a video game about the Columbine shootings? There are hundreds of video games (and movies for that matter) about even greater tragedies such as World War II and Vietnam. Shouldn't we censor them too?

In the Columbine RPG, you play the role of the two gunmen, killing a dozen innocent humans. In, let's say...Call of Duty (I don't play video games) you play the role of a soldier, killing hundreds of not-so-innocent but still human beings.

The creation of this game wasn't a call for attention. The 25 year old who made the game was frequently bombarded by the media covering the story. He was new to the RPG maker program thing, and just decided to create a game on something affecting his life at the time.

There is a difference between killing soldiers and killing innocents. Plenty of games have been created with regards to war, that is true. None have been created where you are in charge of implementing the holocaust.

Where in war games, the theme is usually focused on nobler goals (defending the homeland, defeating injustice) this game is for sadists.

War is immoral, but it can be just. Columbine was immoral and unjust.

That is why this game is in poor taste.

well said, grif. i agree wholeheartedly, that game is in extremely bad taste and mr. danny ladonne should be ashamed of himself.

P.o.V.
Just, Unjust, point of view.
A man sueing a car company may think his point is just, and that he should be compensated for what he believes is just, while the company being sued will think this man's claim is unjust.

Columbine, touchy touchy. The kids who shot everyone, I'm sure they didn't particularly like a few of them. If the game is in poor taste, the event was too.

Of course Columbine was a crappy situation. War is also a crappy situation, even if some people believe it is for "noble" goals.
War upsets me. I wouldn't play video games that involved killing people even if I played video games. Columbine upsets me, too. Still, this guy has every right to make a game. If the public doesn't like it, he has to deal with that, but he still had a right to make it.
Sometimes people try to make light of a situation by creating play from it. They just have to know where to draw the line between role-playing and reality.

cadmium wrote:Of course Columbine was a crappy situation. War is also a crappy situation, even if some people believe it is for "noble" goals.
War upsets me. I wouldn't play video games that involved killing people even if I played video games. Columbine upsets me, too. Still, this guy has every right to make a game. If the public doesn't like it, he has to deal with that, but he still had a right to make it.
Sometimes people try to make light of a situation by creating play from it. They just have to know where to draw the line between role-playing and reality.

Right, some companies make "toys for adults and couples" that are deemed... I guess sinful by some religions. But does it make it totally wrong? Hardly so.

People make light of situations by becoming a comedian. Don't stone them to death for that.

He has a right to make the game. We have a right to our opinion of the game.

What else is there to discuss?