Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

eden06 · 11-25-2006, 11:53 AM

Well, I have played the game, and have spoken to the creator, maybe you should too if you believe it's as low class as you say?

My big question is, have you played it? One can go through the game without killing a single kid so it's not as if that's the soul purpose. Hollywood makes movies about killing kids, the scream series was nothing but that, as were Zero Day, Elephant, and Biographical pieces about columbine itself such as the Zero Hour discovery channel production, in which the two killers Harris and Klebold came out looking like cultural icons, speaking of cultural icons, the two killers made the front page of Time magazine Twice. So what's the difference between these things and that game?

Money? The game was free, unlike the aforementioned productions.

Saying that one form of "freedom of speech" on a matter (IE extended news coverage, or Micheal Moores raping of the tragedy for the sake of money under the pretense of "gun control") Is correct and then saying that if a game even tries to approach the issue it is "abuse" of that freedom is completely debasing video games as a medium and video gamers who play them.

What says a movie can be about something but a game can't? The columbine game has a clear cut objective from the start, to make one think about the school shootings, they're impact on society, the plethora of causes for such incidents and there being no clear cut answer to who's to blame. Why can't video games be more than a medium for simple entertainment like everything else?

With the 9/11 film coming out and passing children died in that, does that count as tasteless? They took 3000 deaths and turned it into a shitty love story and then charged us to have to see it. Is that tasteless?

Saying that "Freedom of speech" has limits is saying that you don't really understand the concept of freedom.

Saying that Hollywood can release 2 movies, news channels can scapegoat person after video game and bands for ratings, numerous books and documentary's can be made for profit, but a videogame can't be released on a relevent yet uncomfortable issue says to me you don't think video games have value as either tools of social commentary or as a legitimate form of art.

Super Columbine Massacre RPG does not feature any of the victims of the massacre, and was none profit. It is no different than a cultural blueprint of that date, and the way it impacted the media, and the media impacted it.

"Until Americans put a stop to some of this stuff, people will do it just to see how far they can push it." I thought what defined America WAS freedom.

Although I don't agree with what you say, I would defend to the death your right to say it.

Eden06
Member of The Columbine Forums

11-25-2006, 11:53 AM	#26 (permalink)
eden06 Upright	Well, I have played the game, and have spoken to the creator, maybe you should too if you believe it's as low class as you say? My big question is, have you played it? One can go through the game without killing a single kid so it's not as if that's the soul purpose. Hollywood makes movies about killing kids, the scream series was nothing but that, as were Zero Day, Elephant, and Biographical pieces about columbine itself such as the Zero Hour discovery channel production, in which the two killers Harris and Klebold came out looking like cultural icons, speaking of cultural icons, the two killers made the front page of Time magazine Twice. So what's the difference between these things and that game? Money? The game was free, unlike the aforementioned productions. Saying that one form of "freedom of speech" on a matter (IE extended news coverage, or Micheal Moores raping of the tragedy for the sake of money under the pretense of "gun control") Is correct and then saying that if a game even tries to approach the issue it is "abuse" of that freedom is completely debasing video games as a medium and video gamers who play them. What says a movie can be about something but a game can't? The columbine game has a clear cut objective from the start, to make one think about the school shootings, they're impact on society, the plethora of causes for such incidents and there being no clear cut answer to who's to blame. Why can't video games be more than a medium for simple entertainment like everything else? With the 9/11 film coming out and passing children died in that, does that count as tasteless? They took 3000 deaths and turned it into a shitty love story and then charged us to have to see it. Is that tasteless? Saying that "Freedom of speech" has limits is saying that you don't really understand the concept of freedom. Saying that Hollywood can release 2 movies, news channels can scapegoat person after video game and bands for ratings, numerous books and documentary's can be made for profit, but a videogame can't be released on a relevent yet uncomfortable issue says to me you don't think video games have value as either tools of social commentary or as a legitimate form of art. Super Columbine Massacre RPG does not feature any of the victims of the massacre, and was none profit. It is no different than a cultural blueprint of that date, and the way it impacted the media, and the media impacted it. "Until Americans put a stop to some of this stuff, people will do it just to see how far they can push it." I thought what defined America WAS freedom. Although I don't agree with what you say, I would defend to the death your right to say it. Eden06 Member of The Columbine Forums Last edited by eden06; 11-25-2006 at 11:57 AM..