Controversial Games

[Tharticus]

It isn't strange that video games are controversial, politicians put up video game laws and Jack Thompson isn't giving up his crusade. I'm not talking about that type of topic.

I'm talking about controversial games like developers make it for a specific reason. Such games like Columbine RPG, Virginia Tech Rampage, and Muslim Massacre. These games offend people such as the survivors of the shooters, specific ethnic groups, and the parents of the children who were killed. Other controversial games like trying to last long before the twin towers crash.

I played many controversial games and while the makers of the game did for the lulz and was considered a joke for themselves (Muslim Massacre and V-Tech Rampage), and some people did it to spread their message. (Danny Ledonne of ColumbineRPG)

I have a mixed opinion on such games like these because the recent games that just came out the makers of the games doesn't have a message to give out, rather have 10 minutes of fame just to have a specific group to be mad and pissed off at the maker. However, Danny Ledonne of Columbine RPG is an exception.

Discuss what are your opinions on these controversial games.

If this thread is very offensive, kindly close the topic Mods.

 

[YouGetWhatsGiven]

Everything offends everybody these days. Some people have to know the limits though.

 

[Bofus Teefus]

I think a good line not to cross is to make a game directly based on an actual event where a bunch of people died. Here's what I mean.

Not crossing the line- in a game like GTAwhatever, being able to crash a plane into a building. You can crash cars into people, you can shoot people in the streets, this should not be a problem, but I've heard (and this may be baloney) that while you can do this in GTASA, that in other GTAs, the decision was to not allow us to fly planes because people could crash them into buildings, reminiscent of the 911 attacks. Feel free to tell me that this isn't true, it's just an example which may or may not be fictional.

Crossing the line- a game where the point is to recreate the 911 attacks.

Notice that the difference (at least in my head) is that one of these examples would pretty much poke at a real event that had real effects on real people. The other doesn't. Feel free to disagree, this is just how I look at games.

 

[Comeonnow]

I remember I got hold of a US copy of Thrill Kill for the PS1 (im in the UK, never got released over here) which apparently got banned in quite a few places.

It was a simple yet very playable 4 way beat'em up in a square room with very warped characters like an S&M Mistress, a mental patient in a straight jacket, a psychotic surgeon, a gimp and various others.

Probably wouldnt be seen as much today as it was back then but from what i can remember it was very perverse but and excellent game which me and mates loved hammering lol.

The fatalities were something to be seen man, the S&M Mistress rode you around like a horse for a few seconds before jamming a cattleprod down your throat.....Then feeling herself up afterwards...

 

[AfricanSwallow]

I think a good line not to cross is to make a game directly based on an actual event where a bunch of people died. Here's what I mean.

.....Crossing the line- a game where the point is to recreate the 911 attacks.

And here we have the problem.
Do we stop making games about the the Second World War, or the Vietnam War because people might get offended?

I'm always amazed at the American tendency to view the events of September 11th as something absolutely off-limits to parody or satire.
It wasn't the first act of terrorism in the world, nor will it be the last in the world.... and yet it somehow occupies this island in the American psyche that is untouchable to the media and entertainment industry.

Slaughtering endless hordes of Muslim or Arab extremists or insurgents is fair game, same with Germans and Japanese (as infantry or bomber pilots).... but as soon as the casualties are American some imaginary line gets crossed.

I would say we need more games that tread on the "controversial", not less.

Being one of the Games-are-art hippies.... I really don't care if people get offended.
Living in countries with freedom of speech means sometimes you get offended.
If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Games like those mentioned above may be tasteless, but it doesn't somehow make them "wrong".

 

[Trace2010]

I believe there were several games that were designed and sold by Neo-Nazis and other racial supremacists, but that is unconfirmed.

 

[RufusMcLaser]

Good, capital-A Art isn't about spectacle. These games always give me the impression that they're so intentionally offensive because they're trying, really hard, to make a scene and get attention. It's stupid and I'm not impressed.

 

[dragonburner]

911 killed civilians and destroyed families. What if I ripped on your dad getting blown up unprovoked.

 

[Bofus Teefus]

I think a good line not to cross is to make a game directly based on an actual event where a bunch of people died. Here's what I mean.

.....Crossing the line- a game where the point is to recreate the 911 attacks.

might get offended?

I'm always amazed at the American tendency to view the events of September 11th as something absolutely off-limits to parody or satire.
It wasn't the first act of terrorism in the world, nor will it be the last in the world.... and yet it somehow occupies this island in the American psyche that is untouchable to the media and entertainment industry.

Slaughtering endless hordes of Muslim or Arab extremists or insurgents is fair game, same with Germans and Japanese (as infantry or bomber pilots).... but as soon as the casualties are American some imaginary line gets crossed.

I agree, people could just as well stop making fun of other tragic things if they can't make fun of 911.

Yeah, I was rushing a bit when I used the 911 example, but the point had nothing to do with 911, and no, although I live in the US, I do not view that as more untouchable than any of the other which AfricanSwallow mentioned. The general point that I was making, crappily chosen examples aside, was that in general, whether or not it relates to a US incident, there are lines which probably shouldn't be crossed in a game. Use the OP's Muslim Massacre as an example if you want. My point was not to wave the American patriotic garbage in anyone's face.

 

[ihatefullmetalalchemist]

If a game is controversial then its the esrb's fault because they license and rate games. I think games are only controversial because most people don't pay attention to the ratings despite the fact that you need id for certain games.
I know it is pretty random but games are only controversial because people wat to express themselves, or because they want money so they rip off everyone they can while tryig not to get sued.

 

[Trivun]

I think a good line not to cross is to make a game directly based on an actual event where a bunch of people died. Here's what I mean.

.....Crossing the line- a game where the point is to recreate the 911 attacks.

might get offended?

I'm always amazed at the American tendency to view the events of September 11th as something absolutely off-limits to parody or satire.
It wasn't the first act of terrorism in the world, nor will it be the last in the world.... and yet it somehow occupies this island in the American psyche that is untouchable to the media and entertainment industry.

Slaughtering endless hordes of Muslim or Arab extremists or insurgents is fair game, same with Germans and Japanese (as infantry or bomber pilots).... but as soon as the casualties are American some imaginary line gets crossed.

I agree, people could just as well stop making fun of other tragic things if they can't make fun of 911.

One thing to note here, Family Guy had an episode where Peter (impersonating Ron Woods) makes fun of 9/11 by pitching a film to parody it. That seems to have been widely accepted as a decent joke in America, I heard very few complaints and no-one I know who knows anything about America (surprisingly quite a few people fall into that group) knew of anyone being offended. It would, however, be different if Ron Woods himself pitched such a film in person in real life. That is the question right there. Where do we draw the line? I know this is only a single example but it applies up and down the board. It isn't just what the OP said either, but applies to all forms of entertainment and media. Where can we draw the line? It's a very grey area and it can be very difficult to come up with clearly defined boundaries for offensive material. Another example is the Achmed the Dead Terrorist puppet, by US comedian Jeff Dunham. What do other people think?

 

[shatnershaman]

If a game is controversial then its the esrb's fault because they license and rate games.

The controversys are always about the games content. The ESRB could give a game an "AO" and people will still complain.

 

[StcAllstar52]

I think that any thing that could be fun in a game is offensive to somone like shooting a gun blind people get offended, going into a house offends homeless people, and a guy girl relation ship offens the liber... I mean idiots

 

[Cliff_m85]

Everything offends everybody these days. Some people have to know the limits though.

1st Amendment = No limits. No matter how tasteless, it should be allowed.

 

[C. Blackwood]

My personal take on it is that it isn't appropriate to make parodies about something tragic until five years after the event so there's a little separation.

However, I also think it's okay to make a game/movie/book/whatever about anything. It's called Freedom of Speech and it should cover everyone and everything.

 

[inkheart_artist]

Some people just want attention be it bad or good. I'm sure the people that make them like to feel infamous, who wouldn't? People remember Hitler a lot better then they remember Mother Teresa. I don't condone it but I really don't care what people make. If you don't like it then don't pay attention. In this day and age its that simple to make something die.

I'm surprised no one mentioned Custer's Revenge or any of the other Atari porn games. Those were games that were extremely offensive, yet if I remember right suffered little controversy.

Also another genre that has little controversy surrounding it, Japanese Hentai games. I swear if Jack Thompson found out about those he'd make a bigger explosion than a nuke.

All of those games were and are strictly targeted at adults. They're porn and treated as such. Their controversy only goes as far as pornography's controversy goes.