Video Game Violence

I don't think we were arguing that point Imago. That said, I agree with you 100% concerning the data you present.

I still maintain, however, that it's one thing to make a game about a violent situation, it's another thing entirely to make a game in which you carry out a violent act that actually occurred. I would liken (although not quite place on the same level), this Columbine game to a RTS or Sim game that had you playing as Hitler, trying to take over Europe while eliminating Jews. Everyone would agree that is in poor taste, why is this Columbine game not?
 
True, GTA does allow you to do some horrible things. But the difference here is that GTA is a fantasy. GTA allows you the freedom to make your own choices in a fantasy world of carbon copy NPCs that have the same canned voiceovers. You can beat a hooker to death if you want to or you can drive around aimlessly listening to the radio. It is your choice and it doesn't resemble reality except cosmetically.

The difference with the Columbine game is that it takes a REAL event, utilizes real footage and images from that event, and then gives you the task of killing real, innocent victims...you can choose to kill few or a lot, but that is still the point of the game on the surface. Perhaps it should give you the freedom to drop your weapons and walk away.

Another thing that bothers me is that comparison to Elephant. In a movie like Elephant, you get differing inputs to give a non-judgmental view of the act of violence itself. The inferences are left up to the viewer...but, it gives you the tools to work with. The lack of any editorializing in the Columbine game gives players no differing viewpoints to work with...they are allowed to make inferences only from the point of view of the shooters. This is the nature of the game itself.

Still, we're pretty much on the same side of the issue here, ImagoX. I don't believe in censoring games or putting restrictions on developers. Sometimes, I just wish the industry would use better judgment on some of the content they work on...like, oh, maybe someone should have red-lighted Daikatana, heh.
 
ALl good points... although I'd point out that, unless the Columbine game actually PLAYS ITSELF that you CAN in fact choose to not shoot a single soul. If it were a good game (and again, I've not played it), then there would be consequences for not shooting up the school- maybe the "popular" kids would taunt and tease the player until popping a cap in their asses would seem reasonable- but I suspect that the game isn't that dep from what I've read about it.

As for the Nazi concentration camp thing- funny you should mention that. Because that's EXACTLY the scenario I sometimes trot out when people start talking about game violence vs. "real world" violence, and in fact I have a novel outlined already that tells the tale of a company that decides to create just such a game- a really in-depth and technically winderful RTS title that, it just so happens, has the player in the role of a "Camp Commander", building and running a death camp. the real story, as in real life, would be the world's REACTION to such a thing, and would doubtless be 100X more interesting than the game, itself.

Oh, and as for the "fantasy" arguement in GTA, I'd argue that it would be a lot less "fantasy" if you had evre been carjacked at gun point, had a family member killed as the resuly of gang violence or any of the dozens of other very plausible violent scenarios in that game. Or, to put it another way, if I wrote a Kiddie Porn Tychoon game, with an engine that allowed me to create and sell virtual child pornography using TOTALLY FAKE VIRTUAL KIDS (no actual people or settings used), then would it be any less disgusting? This is worth thinking on and not just answering with a knee-jerk reaction, because the arguement CAN be made that if you're a person that can only get off by looking at pictures of little kids (gross, but hey, for some poeple its Brittany or Angilina Jolie, and that's equally baffling to me), then it's probably better to make those images with virtual, electronic models rather than REAL, abused and exploited kids...
 
Last edited:
True, as we head closer and closer to photorealism in graphics, a lot of lines are becoming blurred. I have to admit, my mom was once carjacked (in Newark, NJ...carjacking capital of the world). It's probably my own personal detachment from what I deemed to be unrealistic (or fantastic) representations that allowed me to be able to play GTA III without being mortally offended, and really, personal responsibility is what the argument over the appropriateness of violent media really boils down to. I certainly have no compulsion to drag a person out of a stopped vehicle.
 
I was watching the news last night and they had on there something about a Columbine High School Shooting RPG. Pretty messed up if you ask me.
Link about it
 
Last edited:
Well I decided to download the game I only got through the first half of the game. It really is not what you guys think it is. The game does not try to make fun or light of the Columbine event. In fact so far of what I have played it does a very good job of not taking sides. The dialog and scenes in the game are very well crafted. Don't get me wrong this game is about reenacting the Columbine incident, but the way the game is executed, it takes the same approach as a person making a play or movie about Columbine would. There is a surreal, poetic kind of feel to the game. It will stir your emotions.

I challenge anyone who is not very offended by the idea of a Columbine game to play it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom