Poll: Should games like "Super Columbine Massacre RPG!" be allowed?

[ph0b0s123]

Other. The game should get the same treatment as a book or movie was made with a similar plot line. This is a no brainier and even the supreme court agree.

 

[Stall]

Of course. Freedom of speech and press are essential aspects of American culture.

Freedom of Expression cuts both ways.

Um, you do know that freedom of expression isn't guaranteed by the US Constitution? It's really incredibly annoying when people say this, since it shows that they have never read the Constitution.

 

[Leg End]

Almost no one who criticised the game played it, almost no one who comes on here to defend it will have played it.

It honestly makes it more than a little difficult to have a proper discussion about it.

I've played it.

OT: There is no reason why they should not be allowed. Also, the game was fun.

 

[xvbones]

Of course. Freedom of speech and press are essential aspects of American culture.

Freedom of Expression cuts both ways.

Um, you do know that freedom of expression isn't guaranteed by the US Constitution? It's really incredibly annoying when people say this, since it shows that they have never read the Constitution.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/First_amendment

first amendment: an overview

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. (See U.S. Const. amend. I.)

Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. See U.S. Const. amend. XIV.

Freedom of expression.

Guaranteed in the Constitution.

You're right. It is really annoying when people pontificate on things they don't know about.

(how does the foot taste? is it a delicious foot? i hope it is delicious.)

 

[Virmire]

I think it is offensive. Lets be honest here, games are NOT books or films, they are games, a variety of media that enables you to do an act in a (usually) fictional setting for your own enjoyment, for fun. In the game in question you are killing representations of REAL PEOPLE for enjoyment. I would find someone doing a fist pump over getting the highest score in killing my child/sibling/friend in a video game insulting, and you would probably think the same. It's like making a video game where the protagonist is a member of al-Qaeda hijacking one of the planes that flew into the world trade center, it is an inappropriate medium for the event.

Freedom of speech is an important thing, but this I would find this kind of insulting if a loved one had died in the murders. Should we hold freedom of expression over common decency?

 

[xvbones]

Freedom of speech is an important thing, but this I would find this kind of insulting if a loved one had died in the murders. Should we hold freedom of expression over common decency?

Yes.

Because your interpretation of 'common decency' may differ from mine.
Because 'common decency' must not be permitted to rule the courts.
Because your hurt feelings are not a fraction as important as you think they are.

Freedom of expression cuts both ways.

 

[DanDeFool]

-

In your personal opinion, should games like "SCMPRG!" be made? Should they be allowed to document tragic events, or is the very nature of a game, interactive and immerse, that should restrict it's topics?

Personally, I think this sort of game is fine, even positive, as long as it takes the subject matter seriously and has a legitimate message.

It's my opinion that games which trivialize tragic events like the Columbine shooting and other school shootings should be regarded as offensive and perverse, but games such as SCMRPG, which actually try to put the player into the mindset of the killers, allowing the player to experience the events which led them to such desperate and destructive acts, have a lot more to offer as legitimate commentary on these tragic events. While arguably not entirely successful in this regard, SCMRPG was actually trying, which is a lot more than can be said for other games based upon similar subject matter.

 

[Leg End]

The argument is still the same as Eminem talking shit about gay people in his lyrics. Free speech is very very important. Also, people who mention the game and use it as a teaching tool (sociology, criminal justice, et al) or who just want to understand why bullshit like this exists should be protected against harassment and surveillance by law enforcement agencies.

Yes.

* * Colossal however- * *

People who obsess over the game and talk about how great it is

The game is actually fun and worth a play. :L

and post in forums about how Clebold and Harris are heroes to them and they sometimes wish they had the stones to off everybody in their school

Those people are douchebags.

should suffer the same fate as people who fill up their hard drives with animated kiddie porn and/or barely legal shit and write amateur fiction about adults having sex with minors.

Now, why do you need to shift into that direction with this?

They should be surveilled, and perhaps harassed, by law enforcement.

Pretty sure that's violating a few civil rights right dere. Suppose the minds behind Saw should be monitored too?

Several years ago I saw a news report about a porn company that made purely fictional enactments of women being beaten, raped and murdered (the beatings, however, were real, albeit consensual). The shaky legality of these films ended up being the downfall of the company, which no longer exists.

Yet are still available errywhere, with numerous other sources doing the same.

When I heard this, I thought, they're interviewing a whole lot of male porn stars who seem like they're fairly nice guys who would never actually harm a woman. Why not put these guys to work weeding out those who would?

Not sure I'm reading you right/at all. :/

So there's another reason why games like this should exist. They can be used, only with certain conditions and constraints, to identify people who are planning to kill someone.

Yeaaahhhh... no. I think then a lot of people here would be on a watch list then.

The day any form of monitoring like that is legal is the day I pull a Rahu.

To anyone who may get up in arms over those statements, please pay attention to the part I bolded. I'm not suggesting that some a-hole FBI agent or judge start looking at violent video games in general to identify possible criminals.

Well, that's not quite why I'm up in arms.

Also worth noting, and I am in no way trying to remove Clebold's or Harris' guilt, this very well may not have happened if these people weren't treated like shit everyday, and told that they already were a freak because they were different. So the greatest antidote to a potential revisiting of Columbine and similar massacres is still not treating the person who lives near you or attends school with you, whom you suspect may be a little crazy, as if they are a freakjob and deserve no respect.

I'll be sure to tell mah nearby high-school then.

 

[mitchell271]

In a world where The Human Centipede 2 exists, we are already far over the callous insensitive violence line.

more like the instant human Centipede was made

 

[Leg End]

I think it is offensive. Lets be honest here, games are NOT books or films, they are games, a variety of media that enables you to do an act in a (usually) fictional setting for your own enjoyment, for fun.

You are right, they are better than both of those things.
Example,

In the game in question you are killing representations of REAL PEOPLE for enjoyment. I would find someone doing a fist pump over getting the highest score in killing my child/sibling/friend in a video game insulting, and you would probably think the same. It's like making a video game where the protagonist is a member of al-Qaeda hijacking one of the planes that flew into the world trade center, it is an inappropriate medium for the event.

You should not play a side-chapter in mah gaem I'mma developing den. :L

Freedom of speech is an important thing, but this I would find this kind of insulting if a loved one had died in the murders. Should we hold freedom of expression over common decency?

That is exactly why the Supreme Court weaseled in "Obscenity", AKA "Laws you have not known you have broken until you have broken them". Which, of course, completely defeats the concept of "Free Speech".

 

[Lucem712]

-

In your personal opinion, should games like "SCMPRG!" be made? Should they be allowed to document tragic events, or is the very nature of a game, interactive and immerse, that should restrict it's topics?

Personally, I think this sort of game is fine, even positive, as long as it takes the subject matter seriously and has a legitimate message.

It's my opinion that games which trivialize tragic events like the Columbine shooting and other school shootings should be regarded as offensive and perverse, but games such as SCMRPG, which actually try to put the player into the mindset of the killers, allowing the player to experience the events which led them to such desperate and destructive acts, have a lot more to offer as legitimate commentary on these tragic events. While arguably not entirely successful in this regard, SCMRPG was actually trying, which is a lot more than can be said for other games based upon similar subject matter.

You make a fine point. I think there are all sorts of stepping stones into new genres. I think people (mostly outside of the 'gamer community') tend to look at a game and say, it's a game, therefor it must be for enjoyment.

I don't think that's the point at all, I don't watch a movie like "Dear Zachary" and say, 'gee, that was fun.' Maybe he was just being a dick, but if someday it means having a game like "Six Days in Fallujah" released, I would gladly take a few "SCMRPG!"

 

[probunk]

Made? Meh, that's personal choice.

ALLOWED to be made? Absolutely. No question.

 

[Leg End]

Here's a rather thoughtful review of SCMRPG: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAtYiWcACik
(I'd rather embed this in the post, but I don't know how to do that.)
I don't have anything to say that he hasn't said.

Tutorial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAtYiWcACik
[youtube.com/watch?v=kAtYiWcACik
[youtube=kAtYiWcACik
[MEDIA=youtube]kAtYiWcACik*[/MEDIA]
Remove the * for the method.

Also,
Enjoy. :>

 

[Virmire]

xvbones@ Can you honestly say that you would not be the least bit insulted if someone put your murdered loved one in a video game for people to kill, for fun?
I don't expect the game to be banned in any way, or for the people involved to give out any form of apology, my point was that I think that this was a morally wrong thing to do, it's insensitive to the families of the deceased. What I am saying is that the makers of the game should remove it out of curtosy, and by saying that 'freedom of speech is being held in higher regard then decency' I wasn't refering to any sort of law, but rather the people supporting the game in this topic. I find it to be an insensitive thing to do, and I think that a lot of people are ignoring that fact. It's like making a comedic cartoonized anime of the bombing of Hiroshima, it is just not the most appropriate medium for that event. It makes light of a serious event that is still affecting people today. It's legal, but it isn't right.

 

[Benpasko]

Postal 2 is still one of my favorite shooters for the computer. You guys should try it some time, it's a true classic in my eyes.

 

[rayen020]

allowed to be made sure. and to be played , no. well within reason, like make it rated M or don't like put on a free flash games site or something.

 

[Leg End]

xvbones@ Can you honestly say that you would not be the least bit insulted if someone put your murdered loved one in a video game for people to kill, for fun?
I don't expect the game to be banned in any way, or for the people involved to give out any form of apology, my point was that I think that this was a morally wrong thing to do, it's insensitive to the families of the deceased. What I am saying is that the makers of the game should remove it out of curtosy, and by saying that 'freedom of speech is being held in higher regard then decency' I wasn't refering to any sort of law, but rather the people supporting the game in this topic. I find it to be an insensitive thing to do, and I think that a lot of people are ignoring that fact. It's like making a comedic cartoonized anime of the bombing of Hiroshima, it is just not the most appropriate medium for that event. It makes light of a serious event that is still affecting people today. It's legal, but it isn't right.

Tell that to everyone who used the Atomic Bombings as a way to feel better after their country lost to Japan in a game of women's soccer IIRC.

Or(controversial viewpoints errywhere) people laughing, dancing and cheering at the death of Bin Laden. Or even all the games made on that.

Or the new game being made about Blackwater.

Same thing. :\

 

[tthor]

please fix the poll, the poll says "should these games be made?" when it should say "should these games be allowed?" those are 2 very different things. should games like this be made? no. but should they be allowed? yes.

 

[TheBritishAreComing]

It is very offense, inappropriate, just plain immoral. But our countries have free speech. This is a very good right, but like with all good things, there is some negative bullshit that's part of it. If we give everyone the Right to Free Speech, we'll get some assholes that abuse it. It's the same concept as the Westboro Baptist Church.

 

[Xan Krieger]

Speaking as a guy who played it (I made it to hell so far, doom monsters ftw) I'd say the game is a work of art that does a great job of telling the story from the perspective of the shooters. It's similar to how Letters from Iwo Jima tells the story from the side of the bad guys, should that movie not have been made?

um no thats a horrible analogy. For one in war the only "bad guys" are armchair generals, for the most part (other than the nazi's) in war frontline soldiers are only there to protect what they love.

(the nazi's actively participated in anti-civilian practises which is less forgiveable than soldier on soldier violence)

Speaking as a guy who played it (I made it to hell so far, doom monsters ftw) I'd say the game is a work of art that does a great job of telling the story from the perspective of the shooters. It's similar to how Letters from Iwo Jima tells the story from the side of the bad guys, should that movie not have been made?

If you're equating the morality of two kids going on a killing spree against unarmed teens with a war, fought between the soldiers of two superpowers then perhaps you've missed the point.

Because only the nazis actively targeting the innocent look at the wikipedia entry for the Nanking Massacre
"hundreds of thousands of Chinese civilians and disarmed soldiers were murdered and 20,000?80,000 women were raped by soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

"Deaths: Around 10,000-40,000 from inside experiments and 200,000-600,000 from field experiments."

It's like the Japanese looked at what the germans were doing and thought to themselves "They're not torturing hard enough, surely we can be more cruel"