Inside the Sick Mind of a School Shooter Mod

[Scorched_Cascade]

Oh and another thing if you're (the creator) arguing that this game is entertaining to games who enjoy "taking harmless NPCs by suprise" you might want to check out Naughty Bear. That game is fun even though it is sick and twisted because it takes the extreme violence and applies it to overgrown teddy bears; keeping the shock value but loosing the offensiveness and insensitivity.

Everybody wins, sadists get to bear trap people and no-one gets offended (save for teddy bear enthusiasts?).

 

[Quaidis]

I wonder what they'll come up with next. Maybe an M rated, graphic baby-raping Pedophile simulator. It isn't about giving Pedophiles a means of practice for real life horrors, it's all for fun and points! Why not? We haven't done it yet. And it's not like real life victims will matter; they just will never understand that a game is a game.

 

[Alluos]

This guy has some merit, but not in where he explains his choice in context.

He has the right to make the game, and everyone else has -every right- to tell him not to.

The thing is, that whole "release your murderous urges with this mod" mentality just doesn't work, it's why playing cooking mama does not fulfill an urge to say, cook, or why an FPS set in a war-zone doesn't fulfill your urge to serve your country.

 

[Jarcin]

Reading over this reminded me of the thread a little while ago about "why children are wrong to kill in video games". Even though he did this with the intent of killing defenseless children, he could have if desired skinned them to be aliens that the "commanders told you to kill because they could be a threat". Still defenseless but not human, much less children. I don't like the idea of this game, I really don't, but I will say this:

-I give him credit for making it, as it took a lot of guts to make something, be proud of it, and face the controversy he KNEW would come
-If I had Half Life on my computer, chances are I would get this and try it. I'm not insane, I have no desire to shoot people up in real life, but I don't judge movies I haven't seen, books I haven't read, and games I haven't played. If I feel sick after playing it, then I'll never do it again. If I had fun, well then I'll play it when I'm bored.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well this guy is simply a sociopath, and I'm sure all those like him will enjoy it immensely.

 

[twistedmic]

There are some big differences between GTA4 and the recent COD games (4, WaW, MW2 and Black Ops ) and this school shooter mod. The main one being the message behind the games. In GTA4 the entire game showed the down side of a life of crime and violence, just look how Derrick, Elizabeta, Dwayne and even Nico turned out at the end. GTA4 never glorified the violence and destruction that you wrought. Not to me at least.
And the COD games, while graphic and violent, show just how horrible war can be. Not to mention the anti-war/ anti-violence quotes and messages shown during loading screens and after you die.
Another major difference is that the main goal of those games is not to murder countless helpless individuals.
GTA4 can be boiled down to a revenge story, and the goal of the game was to work your way up through the ranks of the criminal underworld (to a certain extent) in order to find the man you were looking for. The main goal in the Call of Duty games was to prevent a far worse war/conflict from erupting , like a global nuclear holocaust.
And finally, most of the people you could kill in those games could fight back. In the GTA games random citizens would pull out a gun or knife and attack you if they saw you committing crimes, and in the COD games nearly every single person you came across was heavily armed.

 

[HappyDD]

I gotta say, this guy has some good points, particularly the follow-the-leader style arguments I see on some forums when gamers leap to the defense of things they hold dear (which strangely includes "the industry".)

 

[Communist partisan]

It seriously sounds like.... fun, I have waiting for this moment for ages, being able to kill kids, in game of course and I find the hole point very amusing, I want this... now.

And why does everybody think they crossed the line?

 

[Jarvaelison]

Reading the interview the developer makes it clear that he has strong convictions about what a video game is and how people should treat video games. The unfortunate truth though is that he generalizes video games, treating the entirety of the medium as "bang-bang shoot 'em ups" and "murder simulators" and then generalizing that gamers as a whole all enjoy this genre of video games and only this genre. Yes some video games fall under this category, like Bulletstorm, and yes some gamers are indeed the exact type that believe video games shouldn't be deep or insightful but not all games or gamers are like this. It is truly unfortunate that someone of this mentality has the means of developing video games because it fuels the stigma already attached to what is fast becoming a minority among the gaming community. I do hope that the developers blatant disregard for the gaming community is clear to any critics who tout this game as an example of what "all games/gamers are like".

TL;DR - Developer makes it clear how biased and hopelessly close-minded he really is. His argument is fundamentally flawed. Forget this game; let it fade into obscurity before it becomes infamous.

 

[Stammer]

This is probably one of the worst things I've ever seen. I could probably comment on almost every sentence he said in his interview but I'm going to single one out because it bothers me just how wrong it is...

We will not take down the mod just because one person can relate to the premise personally. That would be like pulling Call of Duty off shelves because the families of soldiers might complain that their loved ones died in battle, "just like in the game."

NO! That's DIFFERENT! When your son dies in the war, that's because he signed up in the army. When he went overseas, you accept the fact that there's a fairly high chance that he could end up being killed. When he died, you know he died while doing his job. It's unfortunate, but it's something you take the risk for.

You don't go to school thinking that every day you have a chance to die. You go to school to get an education, to better the world in a totally different way than fighting in a war. One situation has guns everywhere and one doesn't.

In fact, it's different enough based solely on the fact that it's essentially a traitor. Being killed by an enemy that you are fighting is a lot different from being killed by a person you know, a person that is close to you, a person you might have called "friend". If it turns out that your son was killed voluntarily by a member of his own army unit, it would probably be just as bad as being killed by a member of his own student body.

 

[hutchy27]

Reading the interview the developer makes it clear that he has strong convictions about what a video game is and how people should treat video games. The unfortunate truth though is that he generalizes video games, treating the entirety of the medium as "bang-bang shoot 'em ups" and "murder simulators" and then generalizing that gamers as a whole all enjoy this genre of video games and only this genre. Yes some video games fall under this category, like Bulletstorm, and yes some gamers are indeed the exact type that believe video games shouldn't be deep or insightful but not all games or gamers are like this. It is truly unfortunate that someone of this mentality has the means of developing video games because it fuels the stigma already attached to what is fast becoming a minority among the gaming community. I do hope that the developers blatant disregard for the gaming community is clear to any critics who tout this game as an example of what "all games/gamers are like".

TL;DR - Developer makes it clear how biased and hopelessly close-minded he really is. His argument is fundamentally flawed. Forget this game; let it fade into obscurity before it becomes infamous.

I agree with you, this developer is very close-minded thinking everybody just wants to plays game for mindless violence and to kill children. I much rather have a good story then the ability to kill defenseless children and games have been getting enough bull from the government and media and this will not help in the slightest.

 

[infabread]

In Call of Duty we went round shooting innocent civilians and just because they were Russian civilians you dont care, i bet you jumped with joy when your bullets ripped into their well dressed flesh as they fled up stairs crying for their loved ones. Just because something hits a little close to home doesnt mean you can suddenly get all deeply and morally offended.

Its a game, end of the line. If you get offended then you cant see that.

 

[rayen020]

.....I'm afraid to comment. There seem to be two camps here and trying to sit in the middle is to invite flames from both sides. If he wants to make it that is his right, if people want to play it, if they are mature enough they can do so as well. Thats freedom thats america.

However that said i don't think this is something that should be publicized. Regardless of intents and purposes i feel that this is going to harm the more people see it. Within the gaming community we will either shrug it off or dismiss it as a misguided attempt to win popularity through controversy (which it is[also see EA]). however outside the gaming community will hear of this and point to it as a corrupting influence (god help us if there is a school shooting). As said this isn't a step foward for games it's a step back, and it doesn't bring anything new to the table to make up for it.

 

[LorienvArden]

I just felt like signing up after a friend linked me to this article.

My first impression was "They couldn't be THAT stupid!"
Then came "They are - and they enjoy it ??"

Needless to say, I am not eager to see such a game / mod.

After reading it through several times, I come to believe that this might be a case of trolling FOR harsher legislation against videogames.

If you think about it, it makes sense in a matchpump strategy. Create something so vile and shocking that gets downloaded often enough to appeal for harsher regulations of the media.

I might give the creator of the mod to much credit for thinking this though that far, but if thats the case, I'ld see this even more offensive then it allready is.

I couldn't read the whole thread, but the typical debate of "but he is entitled to say what he wants!" seems to have come up again here several times.

- The liberty of speech is a right, not a duty. You can say anything you want and are entitled to express yourself however you feel like. Nobody should be able to take that away from anyone.
But with every liberty comes a responsibility. If you claim your right to express yourself, you need to take responsibility for whatever you cause. If he cannot stand up for it when he is called to court because an unstable teenager with a gun finally found the courage to kill through this game - then he should have thought about how exactly he exercised his rights.

You can't put something like this game out there and then say "but its only a game - I didn't make him do it!"

 

[infabread]

There is a hell of alot of games out there with a good story, but very little for the ones who want to kill defenseless children, he has seen a gap in the market, a niche audience and good on him for having some balls and filling it. (no offense)

 

[JakobBloch]

This guy has a pretty narrow view of games and media in general. He also sets himself up as a bit of a judge of gamers and gaming in general. A small conspiratorial part of my mind is shrieking at me that he is trying to dicredit games as a ligitimate medium (interestingly dismissig both books and movies at the same time).

Lets take his points one at the time. A game is not the pure destilled priciples of the fun it provides. That would be like say that eating a piece if bread is the same as eating the ingrediants that made up the bread or that you might as well eat meat raw. Games are not just fun or entertaining. While making a game just for the fun of it is perfectly fine there is no reason to claim that to be the only way to do it. Claming so severly limits the creativity you can bring to the table not to mention devaluing the potential of the human mind itself.

Now on to his views on gamers. Making the claimes he does about gamers is both narrowminded and stupid. That is like saying all french people are snotty and stuck up or that all americans are fat. That only describes a portion of the demographic and not the whole. All groups have idiots. The reason why idiot gamers are so visible is because of the internet. Gamers as a people are generally fairly fluent in the use of the internet and the internet represent the easiest way to make you displeasure felt in the modern era.

Games are a ligitimate medium. It has unique and intersting ways of spreading information and every year brings new and interesting ways to use it. The key of games is interactivity. In this lies a great possibility to instill emotion and thought. Extra Cradits made a great point about this in one of their movies. With interactivity we have the oppertunity to portray ideas and events like few other mediums can. Be expanding your options or more powerfully restrict them we can convey so much it even hurst. Climbing out of a crashed helicopter comes to mind as a perfect illustration of this.

Lastly. If you want to make a shooter about killing as many innocent and helpless beings, why choose school shootings? Why not something more beneign? Like sheep. If the only thing you want to do is shoot the innoscent and surprise them, you don't need classrooms.

 

[Joshic Shin]

Alright, it looks like most of the talking has died down here, but I would like to make a few points.

1. He has a RIGHT to make this game, so stop complaining!

This is what I like to call technically true, but also not always. For instance, you can right now go to a synagouge and say that you think the holocaust never happened, Jews steal people's money, and any other number of terrible things. That is your right, but we as a society have made rules saying it isn't right.

For example, Westboro Baptist Church has the right to protest, but society as a whole has come down hard on them. That is why people counter protest them. The argument of "He has a right to make this game so STFU!" is flawed. It is saying that since he has the right he is free to do whatever he wants. That isn't true, because we on the side thinking this game is bad can air our issues with it being made.

2. Other games are like it, this just has different models/context!

Context, my friend, matters. Let me use a very easy example, pornography. RapeLay became famous because it allowed you to rape young women and enslave them, but that doesn't make it too bad compared to some other games. What set it above the rest was that you could rape obviously too young children, crossing into child porn. Though it was not actual child pornography it was still attempting to imitate the look.

What more, what if the "model" used for the game had been made to be even younger looking. Would that not change what type of pornography and whether or not it was right to be made? The model you uses, the context you put it in, changes everything. Context and the models can change a simple porn game into a child rape game. There is a world of difference despite the same game mechanics.

3. This won't hurt the game industry, it's just a mod.

Remember the Hot Coffee mod? Remember how you had to hack to get that one to work? Remember how Oblivion had nipples if you looked hard and modded the game? Remember how these two caused national controversies?

And do you remember how these incidents fueled California's violent video game law?

I understand your point, this is just a mod and won't be played by a large majority of gamers, and will most likely be played by a few thousand. That won't change the fact though that this will become an issue. Small things can become big, just look at the Oblivion fiasco. Sims even had to quell some issues when people released mods that showed the naughty bits. This makes the gaming community as a whole worse by being made.

Lastly though, I want to point something out. No one is honestly saying this man should be forced to not make this game. As I have said before, it is a right of his to make it. What this is is people saying, "You are crossing a line, stop." Much hate speech from Glenn Beck on Jews, Westboro on gays, and Nazi's marching through a Jewish community in Chicago we can not stop people from doing stupid hurtful things. We can however implore them stop doing those things and to join us back in proper civilization.

 

[samwise970]

He's got the freedom to make this and to say that, but what a fucking asshole.

 

[Sandytimeman]

wow this game developer is basically the exact opposite of Extra Credits crew. I tend more to side more with the games are art crowd. I do understand games as games and mindless killing fun of course. And strangely enough its his views on games that upset me more then his game did, its just a Crime based shooter...whoopie. Except if I really want some fun shooting, I'll just fire up the old Dos-box and play some Doom.

 

[Joshic Shin]

There is a hell of alot of games out there with a good story, but very little for the ones who want to kill defenseless children, he has seen a gap in the market, a niche audience and good on him for having some balls and filling it. (no offense)

I really hope that is sarcasm...I'm really afraid that you aren't being sarcastic. Because that would mean you think a market needs to be filled for child murdering. That is capitalism to quite an extreme.