Super Columbine Massacre RPG

Remove all ads!

I would bet that the first few deaths in any school shooting rampage are chosed for a reason. The Bullies that made these people's live a living hell or whoever else was perceived to have hurt them would be the first dead. I don't know why they go for more deaths beyond that...

 

Because they would view the inaction of those people in protecting them as acceptance.

I've never been bullied, mostly because I was too physically intimidating at school I guess, but I think they'd follow that line of thought... "If you're not with me, you're against me."

Or they probably figured they were going to hell anyway so might as well take some more down with them... *shrugs*

 

Not in this case - They just wanted to kill a ****load of people. Hell - Eric Harris was diagnosed as a psychopath (in the psychological meaning of the word) -> his motive didn't necessarily have anything to do with bullying.

However, that's beside the point - because what we're discussing is an interpretation of the event, not the event itself. Now, maybe my interpretation of the game is wrong and the author really was just trying to glorify the two - but I suspect not. I suspect that the same points I read into it could have been made in a fictional story or using some other event - however, Columbine is *perfect*, and has clearly made people stand up and take notice.

It doesn't matter that the true motives of the killers were different - this is using the event to make a point - a point which I think is driven home really well (especially with the use of real photos and such) by using an event that actually happened and is fresh(ish).

Eldular - honestly, you're grasping at straws to attack this guy. What exactly are you basing your claims that he only made it for fame and admiration of the murderers?

Not everyone holds the same moral values as you - not everyone thinks that going to violence at such provocations is a bad thing (hell, I sure don't). I don't support the random killing of innocents - but I can see how someone really driven to the edge might go for it (the game's version of the killers shows that a lot...). There's no reason to bash the developer for having a different view on the legitimacy of violence to you - it's not like he danced around screaming 'Whee! Murder of innocents is GREAT!'...

Columbine was tragic. This game shows why such tragedies may occur, and has pushed the issue back into people's minds. That, I think, is an excellent thing, and when more games do it then finally we may start seeing games as art, rather than mindless entertainment (and I suspect that one of the reasons that there's such a cry about this is because it's a game - if a great work of literature were written on the matter not so large a fuss would be made...)

 

I had a nephew at Columbine.

I sincerely hope the designer/manufacturer of the game gets the holy dogpiss sued out of him. All the money he's ever made, all the money he's ever going to make. Make an example of of him and people will be reluctant to do something this callous and ignorant again.

 

I'm sorry to hear that Bruno, I hope he did not see any of the shooting, much less be hit by a stray bullet.

@Aik: I don't have that whole "violent games are evil" view, I was talking about murder (real life) being wrong. What supports my claims on this guy? Nothing, I choose to believe what I've stated, I'm a harsh judge when it comes to certain things.

 

My

Murder is wrong. Using violence to solve preceived problems is wrong.

I believe in the right to self defense but I don't see the Columbine Murders as in any way self defense.

Basing a game on Real Life, especially current or fairly current real life is an iffy proposition at best. Imo there are people (a few hopefully) that could be influenced.

We are responsible for our actions, including creating games, and should stop and ask ourselves "will this hurt someone".

 

This game is obscene.

btw? whats next? holocaus reloaded? Civ style? build the third reich and organize the whole thing?


Some times i think i miss the times when peoply could bunch up and grab forks and sticks and be an angry mob...

 

Well *why not*?

A game that puts you in the shoes of Hitler would be sure to make people think on *why this stuff happens*. As you were probably told when someone asked the teacher 'why are we learning this crap?'; 'So it never happens again.' - what better way to really hammer the point home than to put yourself in that role and see how utterly ****ed up it was?

 

Because it always bears the inherent danger that it actualy starts to be FUN.

It starts with jew jokes ("What are 2 jew childs doing on the roof? Waiting for their parents...") continues with the "kill da jew's" game and we end up with 1 out of 10 ppl get a brainfart.


If i want to show them how ****ed up it was, id hold public "be a jew for one day in Germany 1945" events. Of course you have to attend. Spend a day under KZ conditions with le loving care of an SS division and finish it with the walk to the gas chamber. Of course we randomly roll dices and pump in real gas, just to keep the atmosphere.

 

'Putting yourself in that role' glorifies the role. Mass murderers should be nameless, faceless entities that get no coverage, no recognition, and no moment of fame.

 

Such a 'joke' could, in the right context, be a very strong anti-Nazi statement. If people are playing anti-Nazi games for a pro-Nazi brainfart - well, that doesn't work -> they might as well go and play the pro-Nazi games already out there, rather than be offended by a game attacking their ideology...

That joke isn't funny, and people who see it are more likely to think 'wow, Nazis are really stupid' upon reading it than 'Hahaha! Hitler was right after all. Aren't fascists such funny people?'

Well I suppose that's one way of doing it - a video game is simply another medium for transmitting the message. I propose that your scenario there could be turned around the other way to make the people attending as the Nazis and it would be just as horrific and effective in showing how ****ed up things can be as casting them as Jews.

Sweeping things under the carpet doesn't make them and the underlying problem which they represent go away. Being put in the role of a mass murderer in a video game gives nowhere near the amount of coverage which they'll already have received from the media, and seeing Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold's corpses in Super Columbine Massacre RPG did not give them much glory at all - they were just dead.

 

Reviving this thread based on recent events in Montreal...
'Columbine' game was gunman's favorite

Granted, the game did not kill anyone. But when you glorify an event or person, someone will try to imitate that event or person.

I still believe the game creator is irresponsible and callous. I hope the victims sue him.

 

It was only a matter of time. Is anyone surprised?

 

I don't believe there could be any possible link between the game and any reason for the gunman to go on his spree at Montreal. If the game existed or not doesn't matter since he would obviously have been more influenced by the Columbine incident itself than the game that was released about it.

I'm disgusted about the game he made but i'm also disgusted at this type of stance to take - suing people all the damn time. There are so many contributing factors towards the gunman's spree that if you were to sue all of them you'd probably end up suing everybody from some of the students at the school who picked on him to the teachers who didn't council him or even the Church for not teaching him enough moral values. The person who should take the entire blame for the Montreal shooting is the gunman, he pulled the trigger, nobody else.

 

There are plenty of movies/music/games that glorify the actions of an event or people. They wouldn't exist if there wasn't a market for them. I guess people like to see others getting tortured, mutilated, blown up, shot randomly and eviscerated. Maybe people should take a look in the mirror at themselves and society first before blaming games.

 

You may be right Abomination; however, the nearly ritualistic desensitizing of youth to violence is a factor. I have no problems in making some half-witted computer geek, who refuses to think of any consequences to his callous and violent images, pay thousands of dollars defending himself in a lawsuit. I think the entertainment industry will not change until it costs them money. And I strongly believe there need to be changes.

 

People are entitled to express their thoughts however they wish as long as it doesn't infringe on somebody else's rights in the process.

The problem about limiting one person's rights in this manner opens up a can of worms of "since we could do it then, we should be able to do it here" and it simply shirks personal responsibility away from the guilty parties. Blaming media for somebody else's violence implies that it was not the offender's fault and we fall into the 'pass the blame' game.

 

*sigh*

Okay - here is a question for those who are blaming this game;
Would you - if this was possible (which it's not seeing that this is a freely distributed indie game) - like to have this game banned?

And why is the creator of the game responsible for the actions of those who play it?

 

No, I don't believe in banning anything. I just wish people wouldn't always try to cater to the lowest common denominater. The developer couldn't think of a better subject or title?

 

Well - he wanted to make a point about Columbine. It's not like he was going out to make a game glorifying shooting random people (as some would have you believe). You could fictionalise such a thing ala GTA and fail to make any impact at all. By using Columbine as the subject he actually did manage to get his view across.

The game is impactful not because it's a good game (it sucks - gameplay is boring and tedious), but because of the subject matter and the position on the massacre which the author takes through how he portrays it.