super colombine massacre RPG

[whatfruit]

I was looking through the poltics and philosophy forum and came across worse things that computer games have influnced in my opinion the only truely bad thing was tron (im going to get shit for this for months)

Some people belive that the columbine killlings were inspired by violent video games. Im not getting onto that debate but i was wondering has anyone played this game super colombine RPG. In this game you play as the killers as they go on the rampage in an snes FF game setting.

I was wondering has anyone played this game and what are your thoughts?

[Cyanide cr MK]

I haven't played it but I heard about it several months back. I think that regardless of the "statement" the creators are trying to make, it's digusting for this game to even exist. I don't think it was made to be sold though, just downloaded (I could be wrong), so at least no one's making a profit off of it. But still.

[The Author]

I think its funny how society views videogames in relation to these events. I mean, politicians can spin these tragedies to make a point but when regular people use a tragedy to entertain themselves, its horrible.

It's okay for CNN to show footage of US army attacks (which kill a lot of people) but hey, there is gonna be hell because in one game, you get to see a nipple.

This whole thing is just bullshit and well, society is just society's newest evil, like rock music or the printed word.

[Steben]

Judging from the official site, the creator seems to want to provoke discussion, not celebrate the actions of the shooters.

Nonetheless, I'm really not sure how I feel about this. I mean, it has a right to exist as per the Freedom of Speech. But I'm not sure what ethical value I could put on it, personally...

[Kanthos]

According to Jack Thompson, at least one school shooter (can't remember which incident; maybe the one in Montreal last fall?) has trained on Super Columbine Massacre RPG. Clearly it will turn us all into killers and should not be played.

[Cerrax]

If this was a movie or a book, there wouldn't behalf as much controversy. I haven't played it, but I feel very compelled to play it as it seems that the creators weren't trying to be sadistic sickos, they were trying to make a very important statement.

[Broken]

I don't see what kind of positive statement this game could make, especially since you play as the killers.

I mean, there are other ways to provoke discussion about the killings. This just seems like another violent videogame to me and an old one at that. I can't comment on any gameplay merits this may have, if any, because I've never played it, but this doesn't seem like the kind of game I'd ever want to play.

The forum discussion is thought provoking, as well as the author's notes, however.

[The Author]

Yet people don't mind playing soldiers in stuff that repeats the WW2 events...

[eternal Zero]

Yet people don't mind playing soldiers in stuff that repeats the WW2 events...

I think is mostly due to a false sense of distance. This can be seen not only in situations like this, but within programs like AIM or even these forums. A false sense of closeness is generated in the digital realm. You could be anywhere in the world, and still read this post. Not unlike if you were right next to me as I said this aloud. This is present in WWII games where you "relive" the action. You get to be closer to that scenario than ever before. But what happens when you realize this sense of closeness because it actually did happen close to you either physically or in this current state of mind? You'd be scared. Suddenly you realize that what games and the internet shows you isn't always so far off. That it just may be very real.

This all stems from philosophy that my buddy and I bounce back and forth regularly.

[dsx100]

Yet people don't mind playing soldiers in stuff that repeats the WW2 events...

To many, the events of WW II are justified, at least on the allies side which is the side you play on most of these games. The events of the Columbine Massacre, I'm sure many would agree, are unjustified and senseless. It would be different to play a game where you play the role of a person who can justify whats he's doing as compared to someone who just commits mindless murders. I personally have nothing agianst the game but I also don't see what point its trying to make either. Then agian, I have never been a fan of very voilent and sadistic games (Ex. Manhunt) or Turn-based RPGs.

[Barnsalot]

I read an article about this game a while back, but I never bothered to download it because the premise disgusted me. Games are meant to be pleasurable, not to explain something like a massacre. There are news articles for things like that.

It's worse than a war game, because most often war games will put you on the "good guys" team, you may have justice in mind, and you're playing with anonymous characters, anyway. The guy that made this game used all of the real peoples' names and faces, even used quotes. How do you think the families of the victims of such a tragedy would feel if they knew their deceased relatives were being put into a game like this?

[Final_metroid]

I agree with the premise somewhat, no one is forcing the families to look at this. I personally do not feel much empathy (unlike many zealots who jump on the bandwagon and spout nonsense), i played the game myself and I have realized that its an absolution for tragedy to be interpreted in different ways by people. Sadness may be a universal emotion but its causes for people are different

[ProjectSpam]

I haven't played the game, but I find it impressive that the makers could get a game they made with the old RPG Maker 2000 to have so much press, negative or not.

I, however, feel that the game was made with good intentions, but it's just not far enough away from the shootings themselves to really be released and promoted on the internet. Even if they give it another 15 years, it still wouldn't be long enough because school shootings are always a threat, and there's not much someone can do to stop some psycho once they have their mind set toward shooting some classmates.

[Nick Hyral]

I read an article about this game a while back, but I never bothered to download it because the premise disgusted me. Games are meant to be pleasurable, not to explain something like a massacre. There are news articles for things like that.

It's worse than a war game, because most often war games will put you on the "good guys" team, you may have justice in mind, and you're playing with anonymous characters, anyway. The guy that made this game used all of the real peoples' names and faces, even used quotes. How do you think the families of the victims of such a tragedy would feel if they knew their deceased relatives were being put into a game like this?

Well then.. that makes me kind of wonder what all the descendants of Chinese Emperors and historical figures we've placed in games would think. Games are not just entertainment. Gaming has been proved to be an efficient learning tool. Chess for example is enjoyable.. but it's also making one think ahead and focus.. That is teaching something.. War games are used to teach strategy. I could go on and on with that point.

But anyway, I myself haven't played the game.. I looked at the trailer, screen shots. Read some of the responses about it all and honestly.. He took a bold step with this one.. Ofcourse not all of society will view it the same. But I feel from what I've read, it served it's purpose, and was well done. I enjoyed it was put together using the "evil gaming" tool that was blamed for it all. But it needed to be done I think.

[The Author]

Good guy or bad guy, I'm sure these distinctions don't matter. In fact, the columbine shooters felt very justified in what they were doing.

But that justification means nothing to the people who died at columbine, as the "good guy" idea means bull to the people of hiroshima when that bomb was dropped.

Death is death. Be it from the rifle of a soldier on the beach of normandy, or from the hand of an angry guy at school.

Heck, in fact, by the end of WW2, conscription was in full motion in the allied country as well as in the axis, which means that most people doing the fighting did not want to be there.

[Barnsalot]

Well then.. that makes me kind of wonder what all the descendants of Chinese Emperors and historical figures we've placed in games would think.

What I'm trying to point out is that the family and friends of the victims at Columbine are still alive and still grieving. I don't think it's very respectful to or conducive to their grief for their dead friends that they are put into a game like this. The descendants of Chinese emperors never knew their ancient ancestors, so their grief can't be as strong.

Neither do I agree with placing anyone recently dead into a game for fear of hurting that family further.

That's my personal opinion, though, and maybe it's just my right-wing conservative, Christian bias speaking.

[JackKieser]

At DigiPen, we had a big classwide debate about this game, so I know plenty about the situation.

One of the controversies, for those not up on the game, was that the creator entered it in the Slamdance Games Festival, one of the Northwest's biggest indie gaming competitions. Yes, the creator was trying to make a statement (I'm not sure what it was, because I never asked, but when I saw the game, all I could think is, "Wow, this guy must really think the argument that Doom did this is retarded."). The people at Slamdance, however, saw the word "Columbine" and went, "Oh, no no no. No way." and disqualified the entry. Industry wide, people were split, as many thought that the game should be given fair chance regardless of subject matter, while others thought that the subject was too out there for the competition.

Personally, I, as I said, interpreted the game as a cry of senselessness; the game was over-the-top to illustrate the absurdity of blaming violence on games in general and of blaming Columbine on Doom.

What gets me, though, is how little respect not only the game, but games in general, get in this discussion. I mean, sure, right now games are entertainment. But so were movies in their infancy (as evident by the Nickelodeons and quarter-shows of the past); now, movies are recognized as being able to make grand statements about society... Why do games get written off so easily, especially when people actively try to make statements using games?

Yes, I think a stigma is at work here, especially since we can stomach Saw, Hostel, and The Hills Have Eyes, yet we cringe at SCMRPG and Manhunt 2 (another banned video game based on violence). I think people really need to face the fact that the times, and the standards people live by, have changed. This sort of thing can be welcomed and can even have something to provide to society. Unless we stop banning these things before they can get a word off edgewise, games will never become as respected a medium as even movies, much less music and literature.

--Jack Kieser

PS: Just read the above post... there are still victims of the Holocaust and WWII alive, and I doubt that they will ever stop hurting from those events... but we still make games about them. Why aren't we protecting them?

[The Author]

Why not blame burnout for car accidents?

I mean, we all know of someone who died in a car crash, so why dod they make racing games still?

[JackKieser]

Exactly. Society (or rather, the preceding generation, because WE know the absurdity of all of this, but those in power don't) will always have a scapegoat for tragedy, instead of taking the blame itself; it's easier to blame Columbine on Doom than on mental insanity and bad parenting...

Really, we all just have to wait it out until the USA gets a president who played Halo 3 deathmatch online. When our generation finally gets some say in society, then society will have to move on. What is important is that we learn from our preceding generation and learn how to take the blame for our own actions, instead of finding easy targets and scapegoats.

--Jack Kieser

[TSori]

While I definately understand that the intentions behind the Columbine RPG aren't bad, I do think its an increidbly inappropriate thing to make.

First of all, Any game based on a tragedy like that shows an increidble lack of regard for anyone who was close to it, whether they were killed, survived, or knew someone who was killed. This applies not only to this game, but all of those WWII games as well. The WWII games are far more accepted because the events are very distant from the people who make them and play them. I personally am less offended by them than I am by somehting like a columbine game, but I also don't play them, and I've often wondered what WWII Veterans think of them. I'd imagine not all of them are oo happy about it.

And as was already mentioned, in that case you are using actual places and events, but not representations of specific individuls involved. To do have specific people in the coclumbine game is sick and takes an already distasteful concept and makes it abhorable. Also it shoudl be noted that in a war game, You are dealing with two, or more, warring sides. They are fighting each other. IN th ecase of a game about a school shooting, there are clear, defenseless innocent victims. In principle, thats like having a genocide mission in a war game. I'm sure the response to that wouldn't be too good.

Secondly. I don't care whether the intentions of the maker are good or not. I don't care if he's a random guy, a "freedom fighter", or whatever other title one may give themself, using a tragedy to forward an agenda is despicable. WHether you are using it to forward your newest bit of gun control legislation or trying to show people that video games aren't too blame. Tragedy is not a tool too be used. In many ways that shows even less regard for the victims and their families than even making the game does.

Now, someone pointed out earlier that this falls clearly within the realm of freespeech, so in conclusion, Somebody who makes a game liek this has every right too under law. I think though that making a game like this Is sick and and disrespectful to all involved. I think that using a tragedy to advance an agenda in politics or anywhere else, is horrible. I would love to hear that this game has been deleted, and I would love to never hear about games like this being made again. This crosses a line, in my opinion, that should not be crossed.

So, while you all decide what you think of this game. here's a what if scenario

Imagine your best freind(s). Imagine going to school one morning, now neglecting all the panic and fear that woudl be associared with an actual shooting, imagine what you woudl feel liek if you lost that/those freind(s). Now imagine that a video game shows up on the internet, imagine how you'd feel if you found a game where you could shoot your best freind(s) yourself.

It doesn't sound appealing to me, a school shooting survivor.

[Cerrax]

So, while you all decide what you think of this game. here's a what if scenario

Imagine your best freind(s). Imagine going to school one morning, now neglecting all the panic and fear that woudl be associared with an actual shooting, imagine what you woudl feel liek if you lost that/those freind(s). Now imagine that a video game shows up on the internet, imagine how you'd feel if you found a game where you could shoot your best freind(s) yourself.

It doesn't sound appealing to me, a school shooting survivor.

As long as the message is a good message, I wouldn't mind. If the game's sole intent was to kill your friends, no I would hate that game. But if the intent of the game was to open people's eyes to the true causes of such a horrible incident, then I would say its a great way to prevent such a thing from happening again. Dwelling on how people died instead of how they lived is a terrible way to go through life. I have lost several family and friends to various tradegies, but I don't wallow in thoughts like "Oh he died of cancer" or "He had a massive heart failure". I think about how happy they made my life, and how comfortable they must be in their afterlife. If retelling their death will prevent others from their fate, then I would retell it a million times.

When I play a war game, it reminds me just how terrible war is and just how lucky I am that there are people willing to do this for my safety. I can't remember how many times I've died during a single campaign in Call of Duty, but it makes me think that in WWII, those deaths were all real, and some one actually took that bullet and left behind a family. Its a very humbling experience on a scale that not even movies can match, because you are there doing it. Even after watching Saving Private Ryan, I thought war was scary, but I still detached from it. After actaully playing a D-Day scenario in a WWII game, I really understiood how dangerous it was and how many people gave their lives to take that beach. It gave me a whole new level of respect for all soldiers past and present.

SCMRPG is not about giving respect to the shooters. It is about why the shooters chose to kill. Why our current beliefs of what caused it are wrong, and how devastating it can be if we don't start doing the right things to fix the problem instead of simply blaming the first thing we see as a threat. As the shooter, you never feel glorified, your enemies are never armed, there is no victory, only more emptiness as you slaughter more and more innocent people. You are a misguided youth, seeking gratification in way that will never gratify and ultimately render the world fearful and dark. To see that evole right before your very eyes gives you a very clear p[erspective of both sides of the event simultaneously, and brings attention to tehreal problems at the heart of it all.

[JackKieser]

Cerrax, I think you hit the nail right on the head. What I feel is important here is the bigger picture. Yes, I agree that if I had survived Columbine, especially if one of my close friends hadn't, I would be pissed at this game. I'm not doubting that because it is a base human reaction.

But are my feelings of hurt more important or hold more weight than the possible social understanding the game can bring to the table? Obviously, that is a question of morality, so there IS no answer to it, but personally? The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. If the game can do some good or make a distinct social commentary, than it should be allowed, and if someone has a problem, then they shouldn't play it.

I think the problem here is that people don't even let the game get that far; because it's about Columbine, the particulars aren't important. Granted, I haven't played the game myself, but I won't make a judgment call on how far its gone until I do. A lot of people will, though, based on the subject matter, and not the game itself.

--Jack Kieser

[Jaswald]

I actually wanna play this game. I grew up in a catholic school so you know how much education we got of the things going on around us? 0. that's how much. all we got was the little new bulletins our social studies teacher got in the mail every week. and even those were made by scholastics or something.

No one's ever told me about columbine, and I wanna know. I'm going to play this game because as far as I care, it's the best medium for me to learn about it, since no one else is gonna tell me.

[BellTolls]

Wow, this is shocking. I don't think this game is funny or appropriate.

However, I see potential in making games based on recent news events. I really like the idea of "experiencing" the news.

Does anyone know of other "recent-news" related games?

[Strike911]

IF A BOOK FOLLOWS THE ACTIONS OF A KILLER IT'S OKAY. IT'S EXPLORING THE MOTIVES AND WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO BE THERE.

IF A MOVIE FOLLOWS THE ACTIONS OF A KILLER IT'S ALSO OKAY. It's art, we're visually seeing what happens and we're supposed to feel sympathy for the victims, even though the film might revolve around the killer.

HOWEVER, if a video game does something similar, yet unique to its form of media, then its not okay... what a weird two-faced society.

I think the issue here is that video games are often seen as just that, a "game," something to have fun with. These older citizens that haven't grown up and seen the gaming industry evolve haven't seen the power and emotional punching power that video games (interactive media) can provide. I think if you're looking at the game and saying, "YOU'RE KILLING PEOPLE! AND MAKING FUN OF COLUMBINE" then you're missing the point of the RPG. Again, why is it okay for us to see people being killing in plenty of historical movies, and read about them dying in books? That 9/11 film that came out didn't even get hit this much. I mean, hell, a year after the attack on Pearl Harbor we had films about it, but we didn't see them getting as much flak as this "game" has.

Really, I think this all has to do with the fact that people are hanging on to the idea that video games started as an interactive children's game, but now it's a little more than that and I think this is an important step towards legitimizing interactive media, perhaps on a closer scale to film.

Additionally, the cartoon-ish appearance can then be argued, but technically speaking, RPG Maker isn't capable of much more than that. Visually, if the game had a different style it wouldn't come off as trivial as it might seem to outside viewers and people that don't typically call themselves gamers.

I don't believe this game is trying to be crude or to shock people, I think the creator is merely trying to express the side of the story from the killer's point of view, ironically enough through a medium that is said to have "brainwashed them" to do so. It's ludicrous. It's as if acting like people didn't kill people before video games came along. Give me a break. There were just as many (if not more) terrible things going on in societies long before video games ever came along. Ever heard of the holocaust? Oh a video game must have caused it... Oh Hitler, you card. I knew we could find a way to make you innocent in that whole mess by making your psychological issues someone's else's problem. Oh, happy day.

Does anyone know of other "recent-news" related games?

Look at all the war related video games that came out since the Iraq invasion. Look at them. Their is a clear jump in the amount of modern middle-eastern themed war games that have been in development. Especially terrorism related. There was a game that got a lot of flak because it had Osama bin Laden as the final enemy. You remember it right? It was a terrible game. There is a FPS that updates multiplayer missions based on news stories, can't remember the name. Hell, Postal II tries real hard. Of course, most of these games (if not all of them) are terrible. A lot of games have been influenced by terrorism and news events... look, you'll see references to them. Army of Two, by EA, is about private military companies, which in an interview I heard with one of the devs, is an attempt to show the regular pubilc about private military contracting going on by the US government. We've all seen Metal Gear Solid's preachy messages, don't get me wrong I love the Metal Gear series, but it has a huge anti-war message based on events from the past, including recent events; in MGS4's case (and my best speculation judging from the trailers), western influence in the middle east. Of course, there are tons of games that are doing this. Look at all the war games. Just look at them. Modern war games jumped in production, because that's what's on people's minds. As human beings we are drawn to want to watch conflict, its terrible but true. Video games are merely an extension of this previous trend. One might say that it's interactive; that's the difference. Is it? They say in films we are pushed to show empathy to the main characters, so if we see a murder taking place, in a way we too are taking place in that murder, hiding the body, etc.

Anyway, video games are just something else that's new, that septogenarians can beat into the ground and blame for all the problems they didn't have "back in the day." Oh please. Humanity has never been perfect little angels, so they need to stop being so arrogant. Slavery? Inhumane treatment? Segregation (this one might strike home for the said seventy year olds)? Geez, just a whole bunch of nonsensical finger pointing and I'm tired of it. Why can't you face the fact that some people are psychologically incapable of viewing ANY kind of media, because of the way their parents raised them. How about that? Of course, I don't think it's that violent media skews minds, its just that skewed minds tend to want to view violent media. It isn't the media's fault, its the lack of psychological will-power/brain-activity/morality that causes people to go on rampaging shooting sprees.

/wall-block of text

I actually wanna play this game. I grew up in a catholic school so you know how much education we got of the things going on around us? 0. that's how much. all we got was the little new bulletins our social studies teacher got in the mail every week. and even those were made by scholastics or something.

No one's ever told me about columbine, and I wanna know. I'm going to play this game because as far as I care, it's the best medium for me to learn about it, since no one else is gonna tell me.

If you really know nothing about Columbine, then I'd also suggest reading about it, and researching online about it. There's a wealth of information all over the internet, as well as books and documentaries at your local library. Heck, you can probably find some documentaries on YouTube if you look there.

and again for good measure... because once probably isn't enough...

/wall-block of text