Ryan Lambourn's Slaying Of Sandy Hook Draws Condemnation

[sweetylnumb]

Bunch of unimaginative conservative dullards. Its very clearly meant to convey a message and isn't "glorifying" anything. Also why is a game about something terrible worse than a movie or a book about it.

 

[Micalas]

"I'm just horrified. I just don't understand, frankly, why anyone would think that the horrible tragedy that took place here in Sandy Hook would have any entertainment value," Newtown First Selectman Pat Llordra told CTPost.com. She said she's turned matter over the the local police and FBI for investigation.

This is probabaly the most ridiculous part of the story. Investigation for what? Exactly what crime was the creator involved in?

 

[RafaelNegrus]

-snip-

And in pointing this out, you've highlighted my core problem: this shouldn't be a game.

1) I'm not necessarily saying that politics can't be discussed after an incident, merely that I think it's disgusting to use a tragedy as a political soapbox. Using a video game to make this statement only adds fuel to the fires of people who claimed that video games were the reason that he committed the shooting in the first place, because people won't educate themselves and will just see "sick gamers make shootings into games", which is all the evidence they need to start slapping down restrictions.

2) This "game" has been described by many as "not fun", which is the primary reason I play games and the entire reason that we call them "video games" to begin with. They are created for the purpose of entertainment. Certainly, games are capable of more than just "fun", they can tell stories and make interactive artistry and all sorts of other things. But the core of what makes a video game is the "game" part. Games are supposed to be fun, so when you're using the medium just to make a political statement and are going to great lengths to take the element of fun OUT, that should tell you that perhaps a video game is the wrong medium for delivering the message in the first place. It's like creating a novel by pasting together a bunch of pictures....the pictures may be damned impressive, but it seems relatively obvious that you weren't actually trying to make a "novel" in any traditional sense and are employing the wrong medium to express your narrative.

And before this becomes someone else's Out-Of-Context quote, NO, I'm not saying I expect my child killing game to be super fun. But when the very first descriptor of your "game" from most players is that it's not "fun", it begs the question of why use video games as a medium when "fun" is their specified purpose to begin with. Why not a video or other form of media that can be just as easily distributed and is probably less work to make?

1)a) You have a point, but I think we reach that level of acceptability by just making those kind of games and being criticized. Otherwise, what are we going to do? Wait until a generation raised on Call of Duty comes to power, while their entire impression of the medium will be the extremely violent stereotype that we have to put to rest?

b) Also, I am of the mind that anytime the major message of the work boils down to a phrase involving should or shouldn't (i.e. people should lock up their guns, we should implement more gun control laws) then it becomes political. Politics is the process by which we decide how society should operate, and as such is basically just how we think people should live their lives. To take the politics out of it is to take any chance at garnering meaning out of it.

2) Books originally only had a purpose of titillation, television was initially only for cheap entertainment, cartoons only intended to precede actual films and so on. Mediums add more functions as they mature, and that's okay. That doesn't mean fun games won't get made, but I think we should recognize that fun is not what separates games from every other medium. The biggest difference is actually the role of the player. The fact that you interact with it and are not simply told it is what sets games apart, and as such makes them incredibly powerful. Honestly, I think this could only be done as a game, and that any other form of presentation would make it feel too heavy, too didactic. This way gives it more nuance, and leaves the audience with a far different reaction. Because we can't distance ourselves the same way due to the fact that we are playing, not just observing.

If it was made as a movie then it would just be HIS message, but instead we get to have some say. It is entirely possible to get the message that the kid is just messed up. The style clearly indicates that he is insane, and we are forced to do every action, not provided a rationale for why he might do something so grisly and then choose that path as opposed to something else. You can also get a gun control message out of it, that this is a terrible situation when people have so much destructive power and that power should be limited. One could also read in the message that police response times need to be better, especially for schools.

However, once again, you need to play it to get these messages and possibly many others. It only takes 33 minutes to play through all three modes, which you've undoubtedly spent more time on here responding to people's opinions on a piece that you yourself have not experienced.

So I would check it out, because none of this is the issue itself, only our opinions of it. So right now you have only developed an opinion of people's opinions of the game, which is a very different thing.

 

[Arcane Azmadi]

Uh, wow. I'm floored. I thought this game creator was just another sick trolling douchebag, poking fun at horrific real world events solely for the sadistic thrill of upsetting innocent people, but his defence really surprised me. At first I thought "oh, he's just talking bullshit to try and excuse his inexcusable behavior" but then I saw this bit:

after having completed the game in the "Historical" mode, others open up, including a "Gun Control" mode in which the player must remove the AR-15 from a locked gun safe - and cannot.

And I thought: "Score."

If you need further proof that he's on the right track, he apparently pissed off the NRA. Anything that pisses off the NRA has to be a good thing. Cockmongling douchebags that they are.

 

[geldonyetich]

You know those little kids who just want attention so badly that they'll misbehave if it means they'll get some?

I'd lump Ryan Lambourn in with having not outgrown that habit.