Can video games go too far?

Might be useful in a supervised setting, but I can imagine too many disturbed teens and adults finding the wrong answers while playing a game like this (Columbine massacre). Not to mention the feelings of the people involved in the actual event. So, I say no for general distribution.

I listened to an NPR interview yesterday about virtual immersion games to help PTSD sufferers. At one point a questioner asked about virtual immersion for rape survivors, but the answer was that there were limits to what they felt morally acceptable about building the immmersion and that was over the limit. It's worth listening to the segment to hear what they were discussing.

As an avid gamer, here's my opinion. These games appeal the the lowest common denominator and they make the entire gaming community look bad.

Personally I enjoy games not only for their entertainment value, but games that require a degree of thought, imagination, and innovation. I have no problem with sex and violence in games. But to put it plainly...games like the ones described in the article are just trash plain and simple. They are just mindless drivel meant for angsty emo teenagers and future serial killers.

I'm not a parent - but it's not up to society, the government, nor the media to control what your kids are playing. It's up to the parent. And until you parents out there are ready to take responsibility and stop trying to find someone else to blame...stop having kids.

I honestly don't see a problem. In the case of the Columbine game, you can not possibly understand a person until you've lived their life. If it showcased the mental anguish those kids were supposedly suffering from then it should be sending a message about how society is increasingly generating isolation to some people despite the headlong rush towards social networking.

As for Kill Bush game, again, what's the problem? Everyone has opinions and political ideals and they have ever right to express them.

It's all about personal choices. Regardless of how we influence others, the ultimate decision is that person's alone. No one has the right to tell you how to think and feel, it's contrary to human nature, and those people who are blindly obedient or force their will on others are the ones who are wrong.

Morality is highly subjective and almost always used to decry or defame something that displeases someone, however most of the people who play the morality card generally don't have a clue to that it all boils down to simple respect. Hypocrisy is the real crime in all of it since I know few of those people would ever stick their necks out for others. All they do is complain about others and usually if they do act they screw things up.

Besides, these things are part of our world. Nothing that is part of our world should be feared or shunned. It should be recognized, accepted, studied, and learned from. I for one can not judge whether it's right and wrong, and anyone who does is full of thierself.

War, for instance, is usually considered horrible, wrong, and evil. Well the last I checked our population growth was rampant. Now when a population grows it consumes more resources, and if those resources are not replenished then that population will run into a headlong wall where it will suddenly stagnate and result in the death of that population. In that instance wouldn't controlling the population growth be beneficial to the greater good? That is the rational decision rather than suffering from species extinction.

War, murder, famine, natural disaster, and disease are the only tools the world has to check humanity from over populating the world and killing it. War is not horrific, nor is it noble; its part of nature and the net results of it are usually beneficial to humanity.

I would rather be deluged by reality than hide behind a blanket of denial like a coward. I for one feel that, subjecting oneself constantly to such material its the only real way to mature. Its the only way we can choose for ourselves what we think is right and wrong and its the only way we'll progress as a species.

It's all about choice, and choice is the only thing we as humans have.

Anything can go 'too far' the problem being my too far isn't your too far and neither of our definitions match anybody else's. We just can have vague consensus. So my point is be very careful throwing around the idea of government banning as that is using a nuke to swat a fly.

The best recourse for stupid games that cross your personal morality line is to ignore them. If you have children then pay only enough attention to the game to ensure your child doesn't play it. If the child is old enough though it might be better to bring it up on purpose and help them see why you think it's immoral. Learn by example is the easiest way to learn.

They're called video games for a reason. They're games! Not many people I know would have the will, let alone the physical ability, to recreate the senerios shown in these games in real life. I have been a gamer since highschool when D&D came on the scene. That game was vilified for a long time (and still is in some segments of society), and all we did was roll dice and make marks on paper. All the action took place inside our heads. None of my friends ever tried to dress up in armor and slay people with a real sword.

Games allow us to step outside of our everyday life and experience events that we would never otherwise encounter. I, myself, enjoy unwinding with first person shooters and RPG's to release otherwise pent up stress and anger over the idiots and morons I encounter on a daily basis. Would I ever pick up a weapon and reenact this in real life? Doubtful. I'm to smart and to well grounded in reality for that.

I don't see games as anything significantly different than movies or books -- they allow one to immerse themselves in a different reality.

There are too many FPS games out there that involve blowing up your enemies without any real consequences. I look forward to the Holocaust game Luc Bernard is working on to see a different side of war. I might even want this game to teach my son about the true effects of war (after thoroughly playing it myself to experience the "message" it's supposed to deliver.)

The benefit of games over books and media is that the game provides an interaction that can help you better experience the environment that the game writers create. How else can you truly appreciate the helplessness of a Holocaust victim until you realize that no matter what you try, there's little you can do to improve your situation.

The government should not get involved. BUT any parent should really have a long discussion with their kids about the implications of such games. Yeah- it's a game. We don't have a video game of being able to fly 4 jet airliners around crashing into buildings. It's just to 'raw' and too sensitive to exploit deranged behavior and make a game out of it. Wrong, just plain wrong.

While I think the article could be an interesting topic for discussion, I feel like it doesn't do a good enough job of explaining how the "games" described are completely different from main stream games. As a 29 year old Software Engineer and long time hardcore gamer, it is painful to see the industry take so much political fire. I think articles like this provide ammo to the uninformed. While it appears to be well intentioned, a parent will read this article and be shocked at the sorts of "games" available but never quite get that these are not games you can buy in a store. They are not marketed to kids or anyone else. These "games" should be no more linked to mainstream video games like Halo than porn is to mainstream movies like Harry Potter. The article just doesn't do enough to show how distant of a relationship there is. Someone will read this and say "There are games like this? Wow, my children play games and I didn't know about this kind of stuff. Now I understand what the big deal is!"

I think games like GTA and Manhunt are perfect topics of discussion for how far the envelope can/should be pushed since they are mainstream but the "games" listed in the article are not related in any way.

There is some seriously dark and disturbing content on the internet but a disturbing picture doesn't call photography into question and a disturbing bit of video doesn't call cinema into question so why does a disturbing "game" call video games into question? In fact, you don't even see articles on the latest disturbing video or image items at all. Why is that? It is because that it is understood that there are a lot of dark people out there and you can't blame the medium for the content they create. So why is there even an article about these sorts of "games"?

Bravo Thomaslp. You expressed my thoughts and concerns about this article exactly. These games are more akin the art house independent films in that they are not representative of mainstream content nor as easily accessible. They are created by and for a very small niche community and are so off the radar for most "hard core" gamers that few even know they exist. This article does have merit for analyzing these games and their relative value but it does so in a way that impugns the mainstream as well. I would liken this too coverage of modern and performance art spectacles which paint the whole art community with the same brush as that which may have created a desecration of familiar religious or national icons. These things may be interesting but they don't represent the mainstream which should have been a focus of your article given that the majority of your readers have little understanding of what constitutes the mainstream in the gaming world.

The comments so far on this article are right on track. They're games, they mean nothing with respect to a mentally sound & mature person going out and committing mass murder or a crime because he / she played a certain game.

In addition to "there's way worse out there on the Internet," which is completely true, there will always be fringe games that are eventually dispatched to obscurity.

But the whole "video games lead to evil" is a tired argument that simply isn't true.

I fail to see the value of a game that promotes torture or recreates a high school mass murder but I am also a bit amused by the societal outcry against these games and the lack of such for movies such as the Hostel franchise which grossed over $64M with just the first two movies. Or Saw franchise, which has six films out so far. I mean those movies are basically violence porn and little different (other than an actual death) than a snuff film.

So you want to criticize people who create these seemingly worthless video games, and I am on board with that, but they are just part and parcel of the larger entertainment complex which gives us these torture films and we accept them because, well, film is art and games are not.

This is essentially a logical evolution of George Carlin. He said the seven dirty words and now they don't shock anyone anymore. Super Columbine Massacre RPG is blatant satire, and I applaud the creator for trying to show us how uptight we are.

If we censor these games, then must use the same criteria we use for books, newspapers, and movies. This criteria nearly all the time responds saying we don't censor. We may label (which games do much like the MPAA), and/or restrict sale to minor (which games and responsible retailers do).

The feelings of those portrayed or who happen to see offensive media is inconsequential. I am sure that Rev. Falwell nor his followers liked having the implication that his deflowering came at the hands of his mother in an outhouse publish far and wide, but the Supreme Court said no one could stop Larry Flynt from doing so.

These games are protected by the Constitution. I see no valid reason for an adult American citizen to have their rights revoked because Mr. and Mrs. Jones are too lazy to take on the work of monitoring what their children consume and instead want our government to do it for them.

This has nothing to do with monitoring your children. This has nothing to do with children at all. This is a profound issue of the human mind, especially in individuals who feel ostracized and alienated by society. Reading the creator's comments about the game, I see nothing but self-righteous BS. The game was not meant to touch on an issue or cause discussion but rather to bring attention to an attention-starved, emo, film student. Freedom of speech is a great thing in many ways but I do not see this as a First Amendment issue but rather a psychological issue. The creators should not be persecuted because of their liberal exercise of their right to freedom of speech but because their motives should not be present in a sane mind. They should be persecuted based on their generally childish unwillingness to fit to society's standards and maintain a degree of respect towards difficult issues, present in mature and sane individuals. As to the writers on this column defending them, I assure you that your song would be much different had your child been one killed in the shootings.

As far as my opinion and personal thoughts on this matter go, kill them all and let fate sort them out. It is almost about time for society to drop its clemency act and systematically and methodically ostracize, remove, and dispose of the stray hairs in its proverbial head of hair.

I like games, but I don't think JFK's assassination or Columbine sounds like they would make very good videogames. Are they in poor taste? Maybe. Probably. But I think there are other games that are generally more offensive than these, but they are more readily accepted. The ones that are outright outrageous and deplorable I'm not worried about, rather the more subtle ones.

Games like Army of Two, a popular mainstream game about two independent contractors (mercenaries, like Blackwater) in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. Depicting American diplomacy as these two heavily armed men shooting up third world countries for cash to buy bigger guns to go on to the next poor part of the world where these conflicts are actually currently happening... I just don't know how to feel about it.

The Columbine game seems to offer a more intimate perspective of the situation, which I feel can be a good thing, but would require mature audiences and hopefully some supervision. Others like new games about real, modern, relevant warfare seem to just distract us from what is really happening.

pk8407

I feel almost like you need to be wearing jack boots and wearing a swastika. That is what Hitler thought about the Jews, and others he deemed as "stray hairs".

When I was a kid we played cowboy and indian (i.e. red indian, the ones we killed off by the millions when the founding fathers stole America from them) and pretended to kill each other all day long. We also played cop and robber, also pretending to kill each other all day long. Oh, and the soldier games too...

Yet, despite years of violent fantasy games where I had mock weapons, actually sneaking up on my victim, we acted out all the steps of an assault - despite all that, I have never done anything violent in my whole life. I have never been in a fight, own a gun or committed any antisocial crime.

Nor have any of the other kids I grew up with, we all played these kinds of games and not one grew up to be a killer.

I doubt that a computerized version, without all that stalking about and actually practicing blowing each other up, could be as bad.

The people who worry about video games prove we have nothing to worry about. This is just more "political correct" brain police fantasy. We do not need to control everything in society. We do not need to monitor kids play so closely. We do not need to prevent kids from playing war, cowboy or cop!

In fact, I think that the more you repress these urges, the more kids will become fascinated and possibly obsessed with the whole subject.

Political Correctness is someone trying to control what we think and can do... Let kids play!

I can't honestly sit here and listen to you people talk like this is ok. To hell with every single one of you and I hope that you never have to feel the pain those families had to deal with when there kids were taken from them by sum nut jobs. People get picked on and it is a problem, but get over it or deal with it but sitting there saying it is ok because we don't understand them is absolutely bull@!$%#. They were nut jobs and decided the only way out was to take the lives of helpless children. I say screw them and screw whoever will defend them. Those two kids needed to grow up. Killing is not the answere especially for just being picked on, htye should have stood up to the bullies or just kicked their asses not go and kill them.

So for any of you who condone this game or have any sympathy for those two wack jobs need to see a doctor or for all our sakes leave the dam country and take your bull@!$%# ideology with you.

Freedom of Speech.

One of the key liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights, the Freedom of Speech is also one of the easiest to discard for those who don't have such protections. Note that it is not "Freedom of Speech I like", or "Freedom of Speech I agree with", but a blanket freedom of people to express whatever is on their minds.

Every time a new medium of expression comes around, some people will use it to express ideas that other people find distasteful - even repugnant. Yet that doesn't mean the speech should be any less protected. You have a right not to listen, or not to agree, but you have no right not to be offended. The fact is, the right to freedom of speech is even more directly tied to ideas that the majority of people DO find offensive.

Another article today talks about China's Internet censorship and suppression of dissent, and how it has tightened control even further as the Olympics approach. This is really the same issue in another context. Different subject, and different people being offended, but the result is the same. The only real difference is that that the Chinese government has the power over its people to impose its version of reality.

Be careful what you wish for: Anyone who has the power to give you everything you want must, by definition, have the power to take everything you have.

Those who believe themselves to be on the Moral High Ground will always find a scape goat for their own bias and lack of understanding. Their limited view of the world is seen only through eyes that are too afraid to step beyond what is comfortable.

Many years ago people reacted to ideas such as Blacks voting and equality for women with the same determined yet completely castrated blinded-eye views about the world we live in.

People fear what they don't understand, they always have in they always will... unless you choose to face your fear and try to understand it. These video games (from how they were described in the article) are trying to educate and offer perspective. They are trying to create a product in the exciting and ever growing new medium of Video Games that will reach their audience at a level that will make them ask questions, make them seek understanding, and face their fears.

Yes, sometimes we get a laugh at a dirty joke or have thoughts flash through our minds in anger that we may feel a little guilty about. As long as we can understand and accept that aspect of ourselves instead of trying to simply suppress it we can then learn from it. Because yes, sometimes people make stupid little video games that are meant to give that knee-jerk reaction, to be kind of fun yet make us feel a little guilty. Games like Postal worker.

The point is, all things in life need to be taken in moderation. Going off the deep end either way is never a good thing. Everything has to be looked out with perspective

Games like this one, Columbine, should not only be banned but the creator(s) should be jailed.

I am pleased that this article was so well written in terms of its representation of my game as well as the many others that have come before and since. Referring to the slide show of games with serious subject matter attached to the article, it is clear that this is no longer as taboo a concept as it was three years ago when SCMRPG! was released. Oddly enough, the good news is that there are many games deserving of recognition that are not in that slide show - a sign that this is no longer a narrow niche but rather a growing movement that no single article can catalog in full. Such growth is a really healthy indicator for games with an agenda.

If one looks into these games and their designers, it is also more clear that these game developers looking at serious subjects are NOT simply tech fetishists with macabre inner lives and sadistic fantasies; most of us are well-adjusted adults looking to engage in contemporary discourse in new ways. Some are professors or tech professionals. Others are experimental artists. We all have in common an interest in exploring contemporary issues in new, untested ways. In twenty years, we will look back on the relatively amateur efforts thus far as important testing ground for the socially-provocative games to come.

Whether about the shooting at Columbine, the WTC collapse on 9/11, the Holocaust, pedophilia in the priesthood, the assassination of JFK, or the genocide in Darfur, more games will continue to be made on these topics and no amount of public outcry or government posturing is going to suppress the interest to explore pressing social issues using interactive media. Who knows. Someday perhaps people might even be buying them off store shelves.

The reason these games are not being looked at as art or as a medium that can tackle harsh subjects is pure semantics.....they are called games. To take a subject like genocide or mass murder and qualify it as a game makes one think you are making light of it. Real life is not a game. The thing is, while games are leisure, so are movies, books, and music. Going to an art museum is leisure. Games are the same thing and SHOULD be held to the same standards as movies and the like but they won't. Real life, is not fair.......just like Battletoads. Call something a game and people will treat it like a game.

So let me get this strait... its OK to make a documentary that exploits the Columbine shootings for monetary gain, but make a game about it and its suddenly going to far? Ha. Whats it matter if were killing Nazi's, aliens, JFK, or innocent civilians as long as its being done in a virtual world? Video games are a great way to vent anger and relax, but also to experience things from other peoples eyes. Be it an American soldier landing in Normandy France during D-Day, or as Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22, 1963 when he shot JFK.

I'm an avid fan of JFK Reloaded... once and a while when I get board I'll fire it up and try to re-create the shooting of JFK with 100% accuracy (never been able to). And sure, when I get board at that I'll start messing with it and see what funny stuff I can do by shooting other things and people in the game... does that mean I'm going to go and try shooting people out a window one day? Absolutely not. Its plain and simply a game, and anyone who does not have a pre-existing mental issue can easily tell the difference. If a game causes you to go out and commit a crime, you have a mental problem, and something else would have set you off eventually.

Oh and I loved this part of the article

Deano from South Dakota, went even further: "I think the government should secretly monitor this torture site and begin collecting data on the users who spend the most time on it. Maybe it would become a useful tool for future and present sociopaths. Aside from that, this game has no value whatsoever."

Way to be Deano... not only are you trashing the right to free speech, you think it would be a great idea to take away the right to privacy too. And you think video gamers are the scociopaths? Right. You do know its a proven fact, video gamers are LESS LIKELY go commit violent crimes don't you? Obviouslly not, because you made moronic statements without actually knowing the facts.

Millions of people play violent video games every day, and only a hand full of people a year will go on a shooting rampage, and most of those (like the Virginia Tech shooter) never even played video games, despite what Jack Thompson might say on a whim. And of the ones that have... I have never heard of a mass shooting that was due to playing a violent game. So while some radicals will say violent games cause violence... the actual facts do not support this, and in fact support the compleat opposite.

So please, until there is some actual proof games cause violent crimes and mass killings (which there never will be because they don't)... stop trying to step on out first amendment rights!!

Thanks for posting Danny. There is certainly no question that this type of material has every right to be created and I'd even argue that it is important to create it even if it serves no other purpose than reaffirming our constitutional rights.

As far as the article goes. My questions are based on how closely associated mainstream gaming is and should be to this type of content (See my earlier post).

I do personally have hard time figuring out how playing these games will give me a better understanding of these events. Particularly, do I want to become more enlightened on the topic of these terrible events by role playing the perpetrators? I could see the benefit if I was playing the part of a survivor of one of the events but not the perpetrators. Without gaining any insight (which I believe is your claim as to why people should play it) then it seems purely inflammatory.

I can appreciate the effort involved (as a Software Engineer) and believe it was wrong for it to have been rejected by Slamdance but it is my personal belief (and nothing more) that claiming that it can provide insight and enlightenment is bogus. That isn't really a problem since you take the flak and nobody else. The issues start when it then somehow gets tied into mainstream video games (not your fault). Then it brings down the whole medium that is already under intense fire. Video games are having a hard enough time. As us gamers age, we want more mature content and politicians have a hard time allowing "mature" and "game" in the same sentence. That is a tough enough battle and these types of games are just fanning the flames.

I don't mind these games, they should exist, some like SCMRPG! are of high production quality, but they should not be associated with mainstream video games as this article , probably unintentionally, does.