posted
SO the shooter in the Canada college killings was obsessed with this game, and RPG of thee columbine shootings. Honestly, what sick creep comes up with this.
posted
Wow, there's actually a game about the Columbine shootings? And an RPG? Without asking for a link or anything, is there actually a serious company out there doing this?
I really would hope this would be the product of some twisted schmucks making a 'game' like that, and not a serious for-sale product. Ugh, terrible all around
----------
I'll bet a game like that doesn't make youth violence more likely, right? Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I've heard of at least one game based on Columbine, as a Half-Life "total conversion".
For that matter, I've seen video games based on trying to escape from the World Trade Center.
Although the former was probably a sick joke and I never saw game content for it, the second one went as far as to display a fully rendered WTC exterior and interior, including stairwells and areas engulfed in fire.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's also a game where your only goal is to successfully take the shot on JFK. Supposedly has a great physics engine, though I've never played it.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So those who think it is appalling -- think nothing, though, of shooting cops in games like Grand Theft Auto??? Where do you draw your line?
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The cops in GTA aren't real representatives of any real people. They are fake police in a fake city. The victims in the Columbine game represent real people, that really died. I think that is a huge difference.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sheesh. I had serious moral problems with playing the stormtroopers in 'Star Wars Battlefront II.'
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Soo.... then you're saying games that re-enact you, for instance, being a soldier in the Civil War (a specific event) are okay just because they are so long ago and they don't seem very real to us, and we don't know the survivors or have anyone really hurting for them at this present day, that is different, right?
So in fifty or a hundred years, will it be okay to play Columbine?
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
(I'm not trying to pick a fight. I'm really musing on our society's thinking on this. I admit to having played a couple shoot-em-up games in my day. However, usually vs. aliens or nameless ships, etc.)
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, let me just make note that I have serious problems with ALL violent games. Killing is killing. Not to mention that video games are such a worthless waste of time. If you're going to waste time, at least do it on the internet.
That said, I can see a difference between a Columbine game and a war game. At least in wars, soldiers go out knowing there is a possibility they could get killed or that they might have to kill another person. That's kinda what war is about. School is not like that. So if you pretend to kill soldiers, morally, I do think it is different than pretending to kill innocent students.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think pretending has any kind of moral implications, though I know several major religions that disagree with me.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Sheesh. I had serious moral problems with playing the stormtroopers in 'Star Wars Battlefront II.'
Don't ever run an RPG -- you'd have to play the bad guys!
------
I think the difference between a civil war shooter and a Columbine shooter is partly the time difference, but mostly the tone difference. For example, WWII shooters don't have you shooting up schools, even in parts where you play as the Nazis.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hope everyone keeps in mind that while vicious, sick people often play violent video games, the two do not have a causal relationship. Many more people play violent video games who never hurt another person, commit a crime, or kill anyone.
I don't think anyone here has argued that yet, but people frequently seem to entangle violent representations and violent reality.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Don't ever run an RPG -- you'd have to play the bad guys!
You know, it's odd-- I can write really horrible characters (Quincy Umble, for example, in Eviction Notice) with no problem. But I can't play one in an RPG, and I dislike being the bad guy in video games. I think with RPGs and videogame characters, there's more of a sense of 'This person represents me.'
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
So is there a difference for you between writing a villain in a short story and writing one in a forum-based RPG as a DM? In both cases, you know that they're the antagonists, but in the latter case, you don't also get to write the "good guys." Maybe that's the mitigating factor?
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I hope everyone keeps in mind that while vicious, sick people often play violent video games, the two do not have a causal relationship. Many more people play violent video games who never hurt another person, commit a crime, or kill anyone.
I'm not sure I believe that there is no causal relationship. It might even be that there is some causal relationship going in both directions -- someone who is vicious and sick might be more likely to play extremely violent video games, and someone who plays extremely violent video games might be more likely to become vicious and sick.
But if you meant that there's no absolute causal relationship (if you do X, you'll then do Y), then I agree with you.
Cause you start out stealing songs and then you're robbing liquor stores And sellin' crack and runnin' over school kids with your carPosts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:For example, WWII shooters don't have you shooting up schools, even in parts where you play as the Nazis.
Do they have you slaughtering unarmed people, including old people and children? Or are they not that true to life?
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We have an x-box and a computer, and we have a rule: sports or "city-building" or "business-running" or puzzle games only. (And we'd probably allow something like Oregon Trail, which we both played as a kid.) It works for us. We'll never have to tell our kids, "No, you can't play that, that game's only for grown-ups."
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's Mario Cart? Racing games are included in "sports" as long as the violence isn't over-the-top, if that's a racing game.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oregon Trail is horribly violent, if I remember. I killed more people in that game than in Mortal Kombat. "Your family gets dysentery from drinking out of a dirty water hole. Four people die."
mr_p_h: I'll concede that there is probably some causal relationship, but I would argue that any reasonably well adjusted person can separate reality from fantasy.
I disagree with the people (I'm talking to you, Mrs. Clinton) who try to lay the blame for violence on the video games. It seems logical to me that people who are violent and possibly disturbed will seek violence in many areas of their life, including video games.
It does not seem very logical, as a person who has played lots of video games, and has no violent inclinations, that the video games cause violent behavior. I spent a couple hours yesterday slaying undead soldiers and minotaurs (God of War is a pretty awesome game), and not once today have I considered hurting anyone, cow-headed or otherwise.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:For example, WWII shooters don't have you shooting up schools, even in parts where you play as the Nazis.
Do they have you slaughtering unarmed people, including old people and children? Or are they not that true to life?
I've never played one, but my understanding is that in an individual level, WWII shooters generally depict specific battles, rather than the day-to-day lives of the soldiers on either side. So as the Allies, you might attempt the landing at Dieppe, for example, with support from computer characters.
I think that means the answer to your question is "no."
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
We had some kind of video game system at the Y (I have no idea which). We only allowed rated E (for everyone) games. Being Richmond, the kids all played a NASCAR game. I broke up more fights over that game than anything else. I had a 5th grader go after another kid with a stool and an 8th grader, who was much bigger than me, go after another kid with a folded chair. I think that video games are fine in moderation (20 minutes per day max), but I have never seen them played non-obsessively.
Farmgirl, I personally find Grand Theft Auto repugnant. I'm also horrified that you can play a WWII game as Nazis, especially considering that most of my husband's family was slaughtered by them. I just don't understand how anyone can enjoy games like that.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
We had some kind of video game system at the Y (I have no idea which). We only allowed rated E (for everyone) games. Being Richmond, the kids all played a NASCAR game. I broke up more fights over that game than anything else. I had a 5th grader go after another kid with a stool and an 8th grader, who was much bigger than me, go after another kid with a folded chair. I think that video games are fine in moderation (20 minutes per day max), but I have never seen them played non-obsessively.
Farmgirl, I personally find Grand Theft Auto repugnant. I'm also horrified that you can play a WWII game as Nazis, especially considering that most of my husband's family was slaughtered by them. I just don't understand how anyone can enjoy games like that.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: We'll never have to tell our kids, "No, you can't play that, that game's only for grown-ups."
I wouldn't count on you NEVER having to say that, KQ. Once your kids are old enough to visit their OTHER friends' homes, the subject will come up!
Believe me, it did with us, and my kids are about as protected as kids can get. They hardly ever socialize at other kids' homes, since we don't live in town. But it did come up.
posted
I guess I've played video games all my life, so to me they're no different than any other game. Nobody blames RISK or Battleship for violent behavior. I've never heard anyone suggest that kids shouldn't play Axis and Allies, because two players will have to be Germany and Japan during WWII.
Sometimes games are just game. All my friends and I played cops and robbers with toy guns, played with G.I. Joe, played video games of all sorts, and to the best of my knowledge, none them have ever been to jail or attacked anyone.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I so knew this thread would become this discussion .
What makes a video game "bad"? I know some would say killing, and I can see where you're coming from, though I don't necessarily agree. But for those of us who play games in which killing is common place (Halo comes to mind for me, and I've also become an assassin in Morrowind), why is this Columbine game repugnant, even to us? I should say me, since I don't want to presume to speak for other people. For me (and this is going to seem stupid), my standard is to not do anything in a game that I couldn't concievably do IRL. GTA is completely out for me, because I find the whole premise distasteful. But war games I have no problem with, as long as I'm on what I see as the morally right side (ie. I wouldn't play the Nazi's). I justify multi-player Halo with the fact that the other people respawn in a matter of seconds. I'm not ending their life, I'm pausing it. This Columbine game really repulses me, because nowhere can I find any semblance of justification for what they did, much less attempt to apply it to my own psyche.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mrs. M, what about the board game Axis and Allies? Or the movie Downfall? For that matter, it's easy to be a bloodthirsty tyrant in a game like Civilization. Essentially, I'm trying to figure out where you're drawing the line.
I think the game I was thinking of was Battlefield 1942, a primarily multiplayer game:
quote:Each battle takes place on one of several maps located in a variety of places and famous battlefields in all of the major theaters of World War II: the Pacific, European, North African and Eastern Fronts. While the combat is always Axis Powers versus Allies, the location determines which specific armies are used (for example, on the Iwo Jima map, it is Japan versus the United States, while on the Battle of Britain map, it is Germany versus the United Kingdom). The maps in Battlefield 1942 are based on real battles, but are not necessarily realistically portrayed; an example of this is the presence of American forces on the Operation Market Garden map, even though, in reality, the Americans had no participation in the battle at Arnhem where this particular map takes place.
As to my own position on where the line should be drawn... I'm not really sure. It's a complex question -- how different is playing as the evil undead in WarCraft III or playing an evil assassin character in an RPG like Oblivion from playing a multiplayer shooter as a soldier from a fascist country? Does the fact that one loosely depicts reality make it so much worse that the game shouldn't have been made?
Added: MightyCow and Dr Strangelove kinda beat me to it, though I'd say that while I don't own any of the GTA games, I don't have a problem with them being made. I don't think children should play them, though.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that there is a major difference between war games then a columbine shooting game. for one war is (i know this sound odd) socaly acceptable and a nesesity of life,it may be said that vilence never solves anything. but thats not true, if you want to knwo what it solves ask the founding fathers of ether heroshema or nagasace. war is treated as honorable and a way to great political power. where as columbine shooting is nothing but a cowardest act that is rightfully scorned by both socaity as by any normal human being. no honor no grace just horror and abomination. (just my thoughts not nesisarly my belives on the topic, excpet the columbine bit.) sorry for all the horrable spelling im tying in a hurry.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
FG: you're right. I meant about a game at our house that we play. We want to set an example, and if something is not appropriate for our kids, it's probably not appropriate for us, either.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
twink - and in thinking about your post -- I personally don't have much problem with armies vs. armies games (Civ, Warcraft), as much as I do with first-person shooter games. Where instead of strategy, it is a "put a gun in my character's hands and let me go around shooting people and blowing things up".
(and I have played both -- just found the latter to be distasteful.)
posted
Yikes, I love shooters. Played Half-Life, both Halos, and while the war based soldiering games aren't my favorites, I have played them.
My husband plays them a lot. I see a huge difference between playing a WWII game and a Columbine game though - war games are based on soldiers who went out to fight a war and were combatants, whereas in Columbine you had the deaths of innocent minors who were just plain murdered. Maybe the distinction is only in my mind, but I do see a distinction there. I would not allow a game based on Columbine in our house, but do allow WWII based first person shooters. (not that anyone really plays them but my husband and he's old enough to make his own decisions.) GTA glorifies illegal activities and violence against police officers so it would not be allowed.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
the thing about gta is, its not really based on life, its based on hollywood. its really not much different then some of the action movies in theater aswell as on tv. not quite the same as columbine. still though i wouldnt recoment it to anyone that has problems with vilent movies or a heavy distaste for vilents in gen. and dont let youre kids play it any more then youd let them stay up late watching terminator or snached.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Making a simulation of Columbine is just sick. I mean I have nothing against violent video games. I played them as a kid, as a teenager, and even now at the age of 21. I don't have any violent tendencies and have no desire to lift a finger against anyone. There's a large difference between violence and a simulation of a tragic event. I'm disappointed that someone took the time to make this (the same with the WTC stuff and the JFK stuff). It's just not good.
Posts: 1960 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My parents always prohibited video games of any sort at home and felt violent games should be more comprehensively banned from young children (they are pediatricians.) I think I will raise my children the same way, although I have been asked if I am Amish, and no, it wasn't a joke. Of course, my Aunt was a Mennonite, as were the couple that baby-sat for me as an infant....
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I support video games under free speech, and generally don't see a problem with violent video games, I do think the idea of a Columbine video game just shows horrible taste. I support urinating in the woods when you're camping, but I don't think anyone should do so in a graveyard.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: My parents always prohibited video games of any sort at home and felt violent games should be more comprehensively banned from young children (they are pediatricians.)
Aren't they banned from young children the same way movies are? It's not like a 7 year old can walk into the store and purchase Mortal Kombat. Most places I know won't sell it to you unless you're over 17. Just like some books and movies, video games have content that may not be suitable to young children.
quote: First, let me just make note that I have serious problems with ALL violent games. Killing is killing.
I have a real problem with this viewpoint. Killing in video games is not even remotely the same as killing in real life. It's like playing laser tag or something. Sheesh.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep, games are rated by the ESRB like movies. Stores are supposed to get in a lot of trouble if they sell an M-rated game to anyone under the age of 17. I remember my mom had to purchase an M-rated game for me when I was 16.
Posts: 1960 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That reminds me, I went to see a movie called Crank last weekend, and while I quite enjoyed it, I noticed that it was essentially Grand Theft Auto -- The Movie in terms of the mayhem caused by the protagonist.
The movie was essentially a re-imagining of Speed where, instead of the bus not being able to go below a certain speed, it's the guy's heart that can't beat below a certain rate. So he causes all of this mayhem in the process of tracking down the guy who poisoned him, while maintaining his heart rate to stay alive.
Farmgirl, that makes sense. What about the case of Oblivion? It's a first-person roleplaying game set in a fantastical world, but you're free to do essentially whatever you want. There's a guild you can join called the Dark Brotherhood -- to gain membership, you must first commit a murder -- where you can essentially carry out contract killings (i.e. be an assassin). There game has a spectrum of moral options open to you, and laws are enforced if you're caught, but it's entirely possible to play the game as an evil character and do some pretty awful things if that's what you want to do. Would that be classified with the WWII shooters under your framework?
With respect to shooters, I agree with Belle, though I have a more charitable view of the GTA franchise than she does (largely for its laudable design acheivements in terms of open-ended gameplay, but still).
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
My understanding is that the so-called "Columbine RPG" is far more satirical and thoughtful than any of the media presently surrounding it would lead you to believe, and it's far from a glorification of the events of the shooting.
We have chosen as a society to presume that adults are capable of ingesting media in a thoughtful manner, and that, by and large, playing a game that involves shooting people is no more likely to cause one to shoot someone in real life than reading romance novels is to make someone leave their husband for a pirate. That assumption does tremendous good for us as a society, meaning that topics and ideas cannot be easily removed from consideration on the basis of a minority's preconception of what is "good for us". It also means that occasionally we face a tragedy and wonder if there might have been some trigger in the media that brought it about.
I don't doubt that people seek out things that seem to justify and vindicate their views, whether its listening to Alanis Morisette after a nasty break-up or reading Sean Hannity or Michael Moore after a politician does something that strikes us as particularly agregious. And while we're free to speculate that x may have played a part in y, I would oppose anything that tries to enforce policy on the greater whole on the basis of such speculation.
Consider that violent youth crime was at a low when games like "Mortal Kombat" and "Night Trap" were released.
Or the amount of violence that surrounds organized sports events around the world, with far less media comment.
Video games have come a long way; their audiences are older, and their ability to convey narratives and ideas have progressed tremendously. I hope a day will come when there isn't an automatic latching on the "new kid" for daring to engage the contraversial.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: someone who is vicious and sick might be more likely to play extremely violent video games, and someone who plays extremely violent video games might be more likely to become vicious and sick.
I agree with this, but I think the first statement is more often the case.
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not going to post the link to the game directly, but a quick search on Google yields instant results for those that are curious.
From the bottom of that site (which has the lovely title "Super Columbine Massacre RPG!")...
quote:"I said this game is one of the most important in gaming history, which I meant for two reasons. First, [the creator] has used a video game (successfully, I might add) to explore an important socio-cultural event. This is, hopefully, the first step towards the acceptance of video games as a legitimate medium for the expression of serious thought. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, it is one of the only psychological explorations of the Columbine killers ever completed, and its sincerity is evident in the care displayed in the design of the game. It reminds us that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the murderers of Columbine, were victims of Columbine, as well." - Ryan Moore, The Pale Writer
Emphasis is mine.
Even more disturbing is the "Artist's Statement" on the site, in which he tries to justify why he created this.
And, for that matter, there's also a Wikipedia listing, which I won't directly link either.
quote:Controversy
Ledonne, anticipating a negative reaction to the game, sought to remain anonymous after its debut, using the alias "Columbin" on the few occasions he was contacted by a reporter. His identity was revealed by Roger Kovacs, a 22-year-old web developer who said his search to identify "Columbin" was a response to his anger over the game. Kovacs was a friend of one of the Columbine victims, Rachel Scott.
"The game does not glorify school shootings," Ledonne told The Washington Post. "If you make it far enough into the game, you see very graphic photos of Eric and Dylan lying dead. I can't think of a more effective way to confront their actions and the consequences those actions had."
2006 Montreal Shooting
Kimveer Gill, who shot 20 Dawson College students killing one on September 13, 2006, expressed his love of the game on his internet blog[3].
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Played Half-Life, both Halos, and while the war based soldiering games aren't my favorites, I have played them. 
