Too Soon For A Columbine Videogame? 319
neutralino writes "Rocky Mountain News has a story about a computer game based on the Columbine massacre. From the article: 'Called Super Columbine Massacre RPG, the game mixes cartoonish scenes with photographs of Harris and Klebold, pictures taken from newspapers and television stations and excerpts from their writings... [The game's creator] said he wanted to create something profoundly unique and confrontational that would promote a real dialogue on the subject of school shootings.'"
Are you kidding??? (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, someone is going to bring it up eventually, so I might as well be helpful and give everyone the link to the website that has the actual game...
http://www.columbinegame.com/ [columbinegame.com]
By the way, it appears that the game was designed using a program called "RPG Maker 2000" [chello.at]
Hopefully their website charges them for bandwidth, and once they get Slashdotted the server hosting bill will bankrupt the authors...
Secondly, I think that most people would feel some concern about copycats, and being that I haven't played the game myself, I don't know whether the perspective in the game glorifies the actions of Harris and Klebold. If it does, this can be pretty dangerous for some kids... Some of the comments in the news story tend to suggest that they are glorifying the murders. For example, the article stated that when someone is killed in the game, a dialogue box pops up stating "Another victory for the Trench Coat Mafia".
I would be against any effort to impose government censorship on this kind of thing, but the authors should have really thought about whether this was a good idea.
If you are going to download this game, you may want to do it soon. The article indicated that some of the content within the game may be in violation of a copyright.
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Should the game be banned?
No.
Should anybody buy it?
No.
Should every living person on the face of the earth tell the company that published this game that this is a bad idea!
Yes.
Freedom of speech means you can have the right to say anything and not go to jail.
It doesn't mean that every person on the planet doesn't have the right to hate your guts for saying it.
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)
No. Ignoring and going about our lives is the better solution.
What irks me about society is that it makes problems of non-problems.
Will "Columbine The Game" make anyone go out and do a copy cat? Only if they were going to go postal anyways.
These are one of those situations where making a fuss will just get it more attention.
Secondly, everyone just needs to get over it and get on with their lives. Digg had a story a week or two ago about one of the Columnbine victims who was paralyzed giving a subjective review of the game. That is an extreme thing that happened to him and logically reviewed the game without any sensitivity of his own plight.
From the interview [kotaku.com]:
That guy is stronger than any of us.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
You consider video games to be "simulators"? (Score:3, Insightful)
No offense but if you consider games like Call of Duty, Medal of Honor or Vietcong to be WW2 and Vietnam "simulators" you've got a very rosy view of war.
I have yet to play a WW2 game where you fight against Vichy French troops, to libera
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
As pertains to your example of the 911 game, do you mean in the same way you can take GTAIII SA and crash planes into buildings or people, or go into any crowd and level them with a gun because it's fun? I'm all for making the author of this game realize that it will never be time to remember Columbine or any other shooting with some sort of game. I also understand that GTA doesn't simulate particular situations, but the ides can be th
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
I don't play GTA in any form, I didn't like the idea. I voted with my $, but lots of people voted the other way, that is life. However, GTA doesn't say the goal of the game is to fly 757s in the the WTC. The game is to be a criminal. To me there is a subtle, but important, difference.
I was just commenting on what I thought was an interesting issue for us, I d
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
The subtle difference between killing 1000 people at once, and walking up to each individually and shooting them in the face/stabbing them/beating them to death?
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)
WWII makes a good setting for a game for a number of reasons.
It fits a basic good v. bad story model, as it's hard for there to be much of a grey area when one side is shoving people into furnaces and gas chambers.
The combat was very mobile and the weapons are interesting--no boring trench warfare (I imagine a WWI game as playing more like Oregon Trail than an FPS; "Billy has trenchfoot!") and no fire-then-reload-for-a-minute (the ONLY reason a Revolutionary War FPS hasn't come out, and the community total conversion mods that have tried it were never very popular).
There's machinery like tanks and aircraft, but it's not fire-and-forget yet. You still have to see the enemy, dogfight, etc. Fast-paced and up-close action.
Luckily, the WWII setting also makes for some great experiences for the player. One can experience just a little bit of the horror of infantry combat in the mechanized age. It's hard to get across some of the horrors of other wars in the medium of the video game--again, trench warfare would be silly (It's the WWI choose-your-own-adventure game! *you are being shelled AGAIN. Do you a) wait it out or b) go 'over the top' and get mowed down by a machine gun?*), while much of the horror of wars like Vietnam weren't the *action*, but rather the way that day upon day of tension might play out after a close call that lasted maybe a minute.
I really do feel like a have a better handle on what that war was like after playing several WWII games. I'm NOT trying to compare it to the real thing at all, but I know that the first time I played the crossing-the-river scene in Call of Duty and "our side" (the Russians) called in a massive artillery strike less than 100 yards from where I was sitting, I was physically shaken afterwards. It's 1/2 of 1% of what the real thing is like, but it's more than you'd get anywhere else (outside of actual war, I mean). It gives a person a new respect for what a bunch of ordinary people went through over there, and what they accomplished in spite of it all.
Just expanding on what you said, not disagreeing--or at least, I don't think I am.
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2, Flamebait)
This question is the same one that came up when the recent 9/11 movie was released. How soon is too soon?
(I'm presuming that older wars you have no issue with; the Civil War has been featured in more than a few games.)
The game is Windows-only, or I'd have tried it and been able to give a more educated position.
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
I'd love to see a 'Duck Hunt' type game where you pop terrorists in the head when they pop up. We can call it Whac-A-Terrorist or whatever. Personally in games where I get the most uncomfor
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
On the other hand, I'm not american, so perhaps it just doesn't concern me that much.
What I do find somewhat uncomfortable is that you're always the "good guys" in America's Army, the enemy is always the terrorists no matter which side you're on.
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Compared to WWII, all those other wars (plus Columbine and 2001/9/11 for that matter) were about as tragic as a guy stubbing his toe. No disrespect intended for the veterens of these events, but compared to 62 Million deaths from combat, bombing, starving, nuking and mass genocide, every other nasty event in the four thousand odd years of written history of violence seems like a jolly piece of fun.
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2, Insightful)
Other than WW 2 simulations I really don't like the idea of making a game based off of a real tragedy.
WW2 games are OK? I'll start work on SimAuschwitz(tm) tonight!
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
Nasty, but some how tempting.
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
Rob
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:3, Insightful)
But World War II killed a lot more people than Columbine. And there are WWII games falling out of every tree lately. No one is talking about how horrible it is to glorify all that violence (well, a few people, but they're in the minority). Why is Columbine more offensive? Is it really just a matter of time?
Personally, I have no problems with this game
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
I have.
I don't know whether the perspective in the game glorifies the actions of Harris and Klebold.
It doesn't.
The game tries to put the player into the place of Klebold and Harris. It's not exactly a "great" game, but I've definately played worse.
If you are going to download this game, you may want to do it soon. The article indicated that some of the content within the game may be in violation of a copyright.
I and thousands of others have it. This game will not
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
Re:Are you kidding??? (Score:2)
The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because video games as an entertainment/art form are in their infancy doesn't mean they can't grow up and portray the same subjects that the more established arts do.
Re:The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:2, Insightful)
Well let's see, have we had any games about vietnam? Three million dead compares pretty well with six million as far as I'm concerned. I guess I'm burning karma like it's going out of style here, but this hypocrisy has sort of got me going a little.
Re:The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:2, Interesting)
As far as 3 vs 6 million - About 40 million non combatents died in WW2. You generally don't hear about 34 million of the civilians or the 25 million soldiers who died. But everyone knows the six million figure. Why is that?
Re:The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:2)
(this is meant as a joke)
Re:The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The answer to both questions is the same. (Score:2)
Never is too soon. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:2)
You don't watch too much TV do you? :)
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:2)
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:2, Insightful)
First of all, I'll think you'll find the US was not officially at war with anybody, it was all "advisors to the south vietnam government etc". Secondly, killing kids is killing kids, doesn't matter if it's in a war or not. And last but not least, 3 million people is a lot more than 20 odd people in a school. Columbine sucked, but let's try to keep things in perspective, ok?
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:3, Insightful)
A war, declared or otherwise, is far worse.
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:2)
Re:Never is too soon. (Score:2, Insightful)
Really? Ever hear of My Lai? [vietnamwar.com]
Wow (Score:2)
I smell BS (Score:5, Insightful)
I think what he wanted to do was generate some free promotion for himself, and he figured that school shootings would be a great way to get people to take a look at him. Instant noteriety.
Re:I smell BS (Score:2)
You're probably right. (Score:2)
A "Columbine" tactical game
Re:I smell BS (Score:2)
There's definitely some BS in the form of PR: the topic is very sensitive for a lot of people and anyone seriously discussing the matter should be careful not to mis-speak. Given that, there are some statements within the game that sound callous so I assume that the designer is performing an attempt at damage control.
As for the question of why even release this game...
It's quite probable that he was
Jack? Jack Thompson? You there? (Score:2)
Re:Jack? Jack Thompson? You there? (Score:2)
Re:Jack? Jack Thompson? You there? (Score:2)
Supporting someone who is PURE FUCKING EVIL on the one occasion upon which you happen to agree with them is self-defeating, and very very stupid. You have all the moral backbone of a jellyfish that sells crack cocaine to elementary school children.
Games are either a legitimate artform capable of addressing serious issues in our society, or they aren't. You can't have it both ways. If you think they are, then being willing to agree with someone who tried to ban this game makes you a hypocrite. If you thi
Re:Jack? Jack Thompson? You there? (Score:2)
I for one, wouldn't support Jack Thompson, even on this.
Is it too soon for these games? (Score:2)
Master. You are running a plantation before in the old south. You must get as much work out of your slaves and through selective breeding improve the quality of your stock?
The answer is YES it is too soon!!!!
I think right after our sun goes red giant would be a just about enough time.
Not about "soon" (Score:2)
For example, even though it's been 2000 years, and I'm not a Christian, I would find a "Crucify Jesus" game tasteless.
Re:Is it too soon for these games? (Score:2)
While you may be joking. I think this game would go over well with muslims in the middle east, particualrly Iran [bbc.co.uk]. Even here in the western hemisphere, there are countries [wiesenthal.com] where this would be quite popular. I'd be very surprised if it hasnt been made yet.
"Master. You are running a plantation before in the old south. You must get as much work out of your slaves and thr
Re:Is it too soon for these games? (Score:3, Interesting)
If we're going to address painful issues
Too soon? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's in the same boat as that "suicide bomber" flash game and the JFK game. The only thing that's interesting about any of these things is that the internet allows most anyone to create something and publish it. That's not a function of the games, but the ability for the creator to distribute. It's no different from someone's manifesto making it online, compared to the earlier method of sitting in a shoebox under the bed.
No need (Score:2)
But, free speech rights trump my personal sense of morality, dignity, whatever; so if they
want to make it, more power to 'em. I won't be buying it though, and I hope nobody else
does either.
He also has no balls (Score:3, Insightful)
That's horseshit, and if that's what he claims, then he's got no sack.
Columbine Victim Played It (Score:2, Interesting)
The kotaku article will give you way more insight than any MSM report on the game (most of which won't even bother to d/l the thing).
Mod parent up (Score:2)
Time to play the Devil's Advocate (Score:5, Insightful)
Since each and every one of the comments posted as of this moment is against the idea, I thought that someone should defend the author. At the moment, that someone is me.
First of all, please put aside the idea that there is such thing as a universal sense of taste that this guy is violating. There is no such thing. For example someone might tell you that a joke about rape is never funny, while George Carlin has a joke he provides as a counterexample that gets good laughs: "I'll prove to you that rape is funny. Picture porky pig raping elmer fudd. Why do you think they call him porky?"
By the same token, I remember laughing about the joke about NASA meaning "need another seven astronauts". I was a kid at the time, and I know that doesn't necessarily prove anything because kids lack refinement, but I guess what I'm saying is that refinement is not necessarily a virtue.
Human often deal with difficult situations with humor. Have you ever been in such dire straits (whether physically or emotionally) that it made you laugh, albeit hysterically? Laughter can be a coping mechanism. Of course, from the screen shots, it doesn't appear that they were shooting for humor (pardon the pun, or not. It was unintentional.
The claim is that this game was intended to provoke thought and dialogue. The screenshots seem to back that up, although my primary thought was wondering if the author really believed that access to guns was the problem, since if you believe that, you're a bozo. Any asshole can steal a gun, and there are other weapons available... But let's look at this story. Even without people playing the game, the very issue is causing serious dialogue. This comment is proof.
Is it acceptable to write a book or make a movie about the events of Columbine, discussing the ramifications? If so, then making a video game is every bit as legitimate. It's just another kind of artwork.
Those of you who are not bothered by books and movies about it existing, yet are still claiming that the video game is inappropriate, should go drive off a cliff with any progeny of yours in the vehicle at the same time. You'll do the rest of us a favor by helping to clean the gene pool.
Re:Time to play the Devil's Advocate (Score:2)
Jeez. That's a little extreme.
I think there is a legitimate distinction between video games and books/movies. Books and movies can be documentary or nonfiction in nature, whose purpose is to educate instead of entertain
Re:Time to play the Devil's Advocate (Score:2)
Maybe I've had too much mountain dew :P
Me too. Video games are interactive. However, that's it.
That's a bunch of crap and if you had put more than two seconds of thought into this you would have realized it. There have been video games all along that try to impart a message. It may actua
Re:Time to play the Devil's Advocate (Score:2)
I would be no more upset by such a game than I would be by the news report and newspaper articles on the same subject, which would be sensationalistic and more concerned with selling media than telling the truth or performing a public service. This guy is giving away his work for free, so he may be attempting to gain notoriety through this, but at least he's not trying to make money.
Also, I might be upset, but it wouldn't change the fact that such expression is protected by the first amendment to the co
Re:Time to play the Devil's Advocate (Score:2)
I don't consider the Majority's opinion to be sufficient reason to do or not do anything. I don't believe in following mob rule.
In fact the only criteria I think is worth mentioning is whether or not your actions cause more harm than good.
Nobody commenting on this issue (including me so far) has even played the game. Most of 'em haven't even viewed the screen
Re:Time to play the Devil's Advocate (Score:4, Insightful)
How? If the game is presented in the same tone as the movie, which clearly seeks to give the viewer empathy for Mr. Kinte, then what's the difference? If anything, it should be a stronger example of negative conditioning because the acts relate more closely to the viewer (or in this case, player.)
Presentation is as material as content. While they do not glorify the events of Columbine, they do sensationalize them by using evocative and typically inaccurate adjectives, and by using dramatic music, lighting, and so forth. Anything put on video professionally is "punched up" to make it more interesting because video production is expensive.
The evening news is more about entertainment than it is about recounting the facts, regardless of what channel you're watching.
Video games are done from the perspective of the player's character and give their internal conflicts all the time. Hell, even Duke 3D has the main character talking to himself, giving you some idea of his [amazingly shallow] internal processes.
I don't know what makes you say this. Have you played the game? Maybe it's filled with insight into their lives. Well, actually I doubt that, but it's still possible... The right game would show us that. It would also show us how they became the way they are but it would be a bit tedious playing a game in which you are consistently abused by their parents, fellow students, and teachers, which is pretty much mandatory for kids to come out this way. Remember, raising kids is the job of the parents, this is definitely the fault of their parents :P
They are only superficially different. Sure, games are more interactive, but you are not completely passive when watching a movie, you're just not making decisions. Someday, of course, there may not be any non-interactive entertainment - would you rather watch a movie, or be in the movie? Once upon a time pictures didn't move...
The only difference between a video game and a movie is how real it can look (a movie will probably always be able to look better than a game, because you can prerender) and whether or not you're making decisions. Granted, that last is a significant difference, but not significant enough to change whether a video game is art or not (insofar as the concept is valid at all, video games are art) or whether it can address the same issues as a movie (which of course it can.)
Re:Time to play the Devil's Advocate (Score:2)
That's an excellent point that I didn't even consider. Compare this to Civil War reenactments. CWR events are attended by literally thousands of people across the nation, in spite of the fact that that was a war that doesn't even have a winner. Unfortunately, I'm frankly not sure why people do that :)
Even so, this is no less rational than reenacting the civil war... though I'm not sure that's much of a defense.
See what a survivor says about the game. (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think the idea behind the game was to trivialize the shootings, but to comment on them. In other words, it's not trying to be entertainment, it's trying to be art.
Re:See what a survivor says about the game. (Score:2)
Here is the interview with the survivor [kotaku.com].
Here is the interview with the creator of the game [rockymountainnews.com].
it's a tragedy... (Score:2)
'Can you bomb Hiroshima and end the war?'
That's not fun unless you're sick.
Re:it's a tragedy... (Score:2)
Or unless you believe, as many do, that it was the only way to end the war.
I'm not saying I believe that (I don't really know enough to form an educated opinion on this issue, so I don't believe anything in particular, but do accept that it's possible for it to be true, or not) but many people do. Your opinion is not universal. Neither is anyone else's.
Re:it's a tragedy... (Score:2)
I don't think you realize how openminded that is. Not that I deserve a medal for using my brain or anything, but most people cling stubbornly to their position, and are not open to the idea that it could be the wrong one at all. They form an opinion before they have a tenth the facts they need to do so in an informed manner, which I think is okay as long as you're not married to your ideas.
Re:it's a tragedy... (Score:2)
same story as always (Score:2)
Also, there will be the same idiots no matter how much time has passed.
People who are disgusted by the idea of a game about mass murder probably won't buy it!
People who are alright with it will buy it, obviously.
Wouldn't it be nice if some kid who wanted
No (Score:2)
so I don't think it's a good idea to create a lot of publicity for it when there's a real possibility for them to ban (or restrict to require background check) "insensitive", "hate", or "violent" games.
Still, I wouldn't play it. Mainly because it's an RPG, and I find them boring. An FPS, maybe, but I don't see how could they make it long enough to be interesting. Maybe create some alternative reality where they go on a worldwide rampage tour...
Assassin (Score:3, Interesting)
Too soon? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Oh, was this not a poll?
TFA quote says it all: (Score:2)
In other words, he's just a troll. We'd recognize him instantly if he posted here. (And mod his losing butt into the ground.)
Too bad internet gaming doesn't have /. moderation.
Hookers (Score:3, Insightful)
Horrifying! (Score:2)
(how to miss the point, #47)
The best part of this game (Score:3, Interesting)
For the record, I'm intrigued by the idea of a Holocaust simulator. As long as you don't glorify the proceedings, it would be a great way to teach people about the banality of evil.
Rob
I don't know if it's BS or not (Score:2)
Columbine Survivor Talks About Columbine RPG (Score:4, Interesting)
" What did you think of it?
It probably sounds a bit odd for someone like me to say, but I appreciate the fact at least to some degree that something like this was made. I think that at least it gets people talikng about Columbine in a unique perspective, which is probably a good thing. But that being said there are a lot of things that are har to play or watch. And it seems to partially glamorize what happened. It shows a stark-contrast between fantasy and real life in an interesting way."
There is more of the interview at this site:
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/feature/columbine-su
Has it been 23 years? (Score:3, Funny)
Dumb, but go ahead (Score:2)
What happened at Columbine was a sad tragedy, though mostly a symptom of the underlying problems with our society. However, no matter how sad an occurance, I still can't see why we would need censorship about it. If the author of this game really wants to make such a game, he is free to do so. If someone wants to stand up and call the two kids, who commited these acts, heroes, so be it. Now, there may be some backlash, e.g. ever
Useless junk (Score:2)
So basicly this is a news story about some slag for 4chan or something awful making a crappy little game on free software. If this is news then I demand Slashdot covers a game a bully made of me 5-6 years a
Game's purpose (Score:2)
Reactionist (Score:4, Interesting)
Why on earth would I be interested in those? Because its fascinating in a very morbid way. Hell....I'm Jewish, almost lost relatives in 9/11, and went through many of the torturous highschool situations that the columbine kids did. I would never do any of these things, but I think games based on them can be an interesting way of exploring the emotions involved in the events....on BOTH sides.
Everybody knows how horrible it must have felt for the families of victims...but I have to say I'd be interested in getting into the heads of the people who actually committed these atrocities.
It reminds me of a class I took in highschool called Nazi Mind. The class was a psychology class looking not at the victims of WWII, but of the Nazis, and what could lead people to do the horrible things they did. BTW over half the class was Jewish. The first day we were asked what we thought of the Nazis and people gave their standard responses about how they were evil and they should die. Then at the last day they repeated the question and most people said they understood why some of them did what they did and that they themselves might do the same thing.
Yeah....this game might touch a lot of nerves and might cause some emotional stress for the families of victims, but I say more power to the creator for making people talk about this. Could the game be a bit more tasteful? Perhaps. But would we be discussing it as much then?
Its funny...for my final project in a history class I did a presentation on why kids need to learn to respect each other to prevent something like Columbine from happening. I made 3 people in the class cry and one had to leave she was so upset because of how sad my presentation was. At the end of the class we had a discussion and one of the "popular jocks" said he just didn't get why they did what they did...even after I had explained everything. His girlfriend called him a heartless loser and proceeded to explain how years of tormet can drive a person to do that sort of thing. Then basically every other person in the class chimed in. The guy, to his credit then realized the truth of it and apologized for his comment and talked a bit about why he had been one of the people in the past tormenting "geeks" etc. So in essence, he was "converted".
And of course for all of this I got brought down to the school psychologist because they were concerned about the report I gave...even though I had gotten approval on the topic before I had even started on it, had said nothing but positive things etc. Yeah, I hit the roof when that happened....
Attention whores (Score:2)
By featuring them on Slashdot we're only giving them more of that precious attention, IMHO.
Family Guy reruns. (Score:2)
Dont like it, leave it alone (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes, it is too soon, but this is America (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Always too soon (Score:2)
Re:Always too soon (Score:2)
This idea is as lame as FDR's legs.
Re:Always too soon (Score:2)
Re:March out the anti-gunners .. (Score:2)
They cover each others "back", and if you attack one you will end up attacking both.
So, you're saying that in the game Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold are metaphors for the First and Second Amendments?
Re:March out the anti-gunners .. (Score:2)
Um
Re:March out the anti-gunners .. (Score:2)
Re:March out the anti-gunners .. (Score:2)
Only in terms of amendments - NOT in terms of inalienable human rights. By attacking freedom of speech, one ultimately attacks the right to keep and bear arms. And by attacking the right to keep and bear arms, one ultimately attacks freedom of speech. This is expandable to ALL natural rights - attack any one, you will end up attacking them all.
Re:Well... Actually (Score:2)
The meaning is what matters, and I think this guy has about as much meaning in releasing this game as does the US honoring it's foreign [SIC] policy.
What really gets me a
Too Soon (Score:4, Insightful)
For some reason, people have this idea that they have the right to never have their feelings hurt. Well fuck them. If being offended by stuff is the worst thing that ever happens to you, then you've lived a charmed life.
I swear, when a people are so spoiled and safe that they can get upset about a VIDEOGAME, it's time for war. Spending a few hours every night in a shelter waiting for the tanks to stop shelling your neighbourhood is just the kind of thing people need to remind of how enormously trivial a videogame is. Seeing your neighbours being taken away to deathcamps is good too. I suppose going to a deathcamp yourself might serve as a reminder, but you would never really get a chance to implement that knowledge...
To summarize: it's just a videogame. Whoopitty shit. Find something serious to care about, like the fact that the USA is adopting fascism, or that Europe has become a power-keg for racially/religiously/economically driven violence. Those things matter. Videogames based on what was possibly the smallest massacre in human history do not.
Re:Too Soon (Score:2)
I forget what it's name is, but I think the idea for that Quentin Tarintino movie about torture is one of the worst ideas for a movie in history. It makes me kind of sick to know pe
Re:Dunno about you... (Score:2)