More Weigh-Ins On Super Columbine Massacre RPG:
More Super Columbine Massacre RPG fallout:

Greg Costikyan offers a rather different opinion from mine on the game. I disagree with him on a few points, but I respect his opinion. His contention is that SCMRPG is art, and I can agree with him there... just as I'd say the drawings of my 12-year-old daughter are art. Maybe not (yet) good art, but art. I feel that a lot of the value that he attributes to the game are elements that he brought with him, and are not inherent with the game itself.

Of course, that's the value of any kind of art --- it can act as a mirror to reflect one's own soul. But I'm also reminded of an old "Doctor Who" episode in which the TARDIS was left in an art gallery (thanks to Milieu.Zero for the YouTube link). In a cameo, John Cleese and a woman are commenting on the incredible artistic expression of the old police box, when the Doctor (and party) rushes into it and it vanishes. Cleese and the woman are unphased, and after a few moments the woman states, "Exquisite! Absolutely exquisite!"

It's kind of an old joke about art, that sometimes what we see and value are really just things we ourselves attribute to the work. Authors interviewed and confronted with such things often just shrug and admit they didn't consciously put this in there, but they also admit that such things may have been subconsciously part of their story. Author Stephen King only realized after his book was published that it was really his own cry for help, a metaphor for his drug addiction.

But where Costikyan sees the fantasy elements as something of a critique on game conventions, I see it as a lack of focus that weakens the proclaimed message of the game. And the Hell levels pretty much kick the legs out of any credability the game had. Even Costikyan agrees that if there are criticisms to be leveled at the game, this portion is the most worthy. My contention is simply that the game is a poor representative of how a "serious" game dealing with a controversial issue such as this should be done.

I'm not saying that Danny Ledonne shouldn't have tried (again, assuming his professed goal was truly his intent from the beginning). Again, I try and be supportive of indie gamemakers, especially those attempting to tackle more "grown up" subjects. But I think it was too tricky of a beast to handle for a first-time effort. It was just poorly done. It's really not the game I'd like to see put on a pedestal and granted the spotlight as a demonstration of how "serious" games can address sensitive topics.

Some other interesting developments and opinions have come up in the last 48 hours or so:

Ian Bogost and N'gai Croal (who hasn't played the game) have weighed in with opinion that the Slamdance opinion was cowardice, and the unwillingness of president Peter Baxter to accept games as a medium for anything more than "kid's stuff." In Bogost's opinion,

"In short, Baxter pulled the game because he was afraid of what would happen if he didn't. He pulled the game because he didn't want difficult, yet groundbreaking videogame-based expression to get in the way of his film festival. Baxter's actions reveal that videogames, in his mind, simply do not deserve the experimental, independent venue he provides for film."

This may be true. Bogost is a founding partner of Pursuasive Games, the guys that brought us the "serious parody" game, Airport Security. He's been a defender of Super Columbine Massacre RPG for a while, and a fierce contender that "interactive entertainment" can be a powerful medium of not just entertainment, but also of the communication of ideas.

I feel the same way.

I just feel that Slamdance backed the wrong horse in their exuberance to stir up some controversy. I'm not very comfortable with it being the poster child for how games can deal with important social issues.

UPDATE:
The game Braid was removed in protest to Slamdance's decision to drop SCMRPG. The creator, Jonathan Blow, admitted that while he personally did not like SCMRPG either, and while he supports the sponsor's decisions to not fund something they find morally reprehensible, he is protesting out of principle. As he writes:

"If left unchallenged, the expulsion of the Columbine game sets a precedent in the wrong direction. Dropping Braid out of the competition, while not a huge act, is the strongest protest I have the power to make."

Way to go, Jonathan!


(Vaguely) Related Weeping, Wailing, and Gnashing of Teeth:
* Super Columbine Massacre RPG Too Hot For Slamdance
* Do Games Matter?
* Indie Game To Get Blamed For Shooting Spree
* Why Are There So Many Violent Videogames?
.

Labels: Politics, Roleplaying Games

- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 10:04 AM (Permalink)